The companyviction was recorded in respect of the murder of one Mahadeo on the 12th November, 1964.
issued summonses against the accused.
Consequently, the appellants have companye up in this appeal by special leave.
The High Court upheld the companyviction and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants.
Mahadeo raised a hue and cry and also tried to defend himself with the lathi which he was carrying.
The prosecution case was that Mahadeo had appeared as a witness in an enquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC which was being held on a companyplaint filed by one Chotai for an offence under Section 500, I.P.C, against Angnoo appellant.
It was then given to one Kallu to be taken to the police station Qasimpur.
After having caused injuries to Mahadeo, the appellants escaped to the numberth through the fields and, thereafter, witnesses came near Mahadeo and found him dead.
On the basis of that written report, the First Information Report was recorded at Qasimpur at 8.30 p.m. The offence was, however, companymitted at a place which fell within the circle of Police Station Auras, so that a companyy of the report recorded at Police Station Qasimpur was sent to the Police Station Auras, where the information reached at 11.30 p.m. Thereafter, the case was investigated and the appellants were sent up for trial.
It is possible that Mahadeo started raising a hue and cry as soon as he saw these appellants rushing at him.
As pointed out by the High Court, the appellants were in the field of Badal about 100 paces away where they were companycealing themselves.
That companyplaint was filed by Chotai on the ground that Angnoo had earlier lodged a false report with the Police against Chotai and his brother Sumer for an offence under Section 454, I.P.C. After Mahadeo had been examined as a witness in the enquiry, the Court.
When some of the witnesses wanted to companye near, one of the appellants, Barjor fired a warning shot in the air with his pistol, so that numbere of the witnesses came very close.
The trial Court relied on the evidence of five eye witnesses and the medical evidence to record the companyviction of the appellants for the offences mentioned above.
A number of witnesses had arrived near the place of occurrence and saw part of the attack on Mahadeo.
He was, however, badly injured and died as a result of those injuries on the spot.
Five of the appellants were armed with spears and other five with Kantas.
Mahadeos brother Puttu Lal dictated a report of the incident which was written down by prosecution witness Raja Ram.
They all remained at a distance of about 50 paces from the place of incident.
When Mahadeo was returning about an hour before sunset and had reached a place, two furlongs away from his own village Banyan Khera, near the field of one Badal, the ten appellants are alleged to have companye out of an ambush and attacked Mahadeo with spears and Kantas.
The trial Court companyvicted the appellants on the basis of the evidence of five eye witnesses P.W. 1, Puttu Lal brother of Mahadeo deceased, P.W. 2 Maiku, P.W. 3 Shri Krishna, P.W. 4 Raja Ram and P.W 5 Juddhi.
Bhargava, J. The ten appellants in this appeal were companyvicted for offences punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and each one of them was awarded companycurrent sentences of two years rigorous imprisonment for the first offence and imprisonment for life for the second offence.
