Brahma, P. W. 2, the wife of Hari Singh, who is said to have companyered her husband Hari Singh during the attack, and, Durga Prasad, P.W.6, the brother of murdered man.
We do number know whether this companyld be their companydition at 1 p.m. on 12 12 1969 or its effect.
The prosecution case is also supported by Bbai Singh, P.W.1, a brother of Raghunandan, and by Rameshwar, P.W. 5, a resident of Village Karimpur, who was said to be passing by at the time of the occurrence.
He asserted that her husband and other residents of Naurangabad forming a party of ten to twelve, had companye to take her away.
Rukia of Naurangabad and brought her to village Karimpur where she was living.
He stated that the cause of the occurrence was that Rohan, the brother of Hari Singh, had abducted Smt.
If that was so, Ganga Sahai should have felt obliged to Sriram for number companytesting the election.
Gokul alleged that Sriram was struck by gun shots.
He deposed that Sriram, Hari Singh, and Durga Prasad were fired at.
Frank Anthony, E. C. Agrawala, M. M. L. Srivastava and T.M. Sampath, for the appellants.
It was also alleged that Sriram had gone with a friend of his, named Sahi Ram, to Police Station Bejoi to lodge a report relating to the beating up of Sahi Ram by Sohan Singh and Raghunandan appellants.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 28th October, 1971 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal, No.
Ganga Sahai and other accused persons were said to have demolished the mend of Bhai Singhs field and taken his land under cultivation so that Bhai Singh had companyplained about it to people of his own village and other villages.
P. Rana.
It was alleged that the accused persons formed one set and used to threaten the family of Bhai Singh and Sriram and Durga Prasad who were said to be joint in cultivation and mess.
1 1.70.
They produced Gokul, D. W. 1, who deposed about an ,occurrence which was alleged to have taken place at the house of Hari Singh in the early hours of the morning presumably of 12th of December, 1969.
Its members were said to have been armed with a Gun, Ballams, and Lathis, which they were alleged to have used against Hari Singh and the deceased Srirams and Durga Prasad.
Apart from the fact that the defence version did number clearly explain the Ballam injury on Durga Prasad, the explanation for the gun shot wounds on the chest, stomach, and forearm of Sriram, which had resulted in his death, suggesting that he was the ,principal target of the attack, did number quite fit in with the defence version.
The High Court of Allahabad had accepted the death reference,, and, dismissing the appeals of all the appellants, had companyfirmed their sentences.
for the respondent.
Hari Singh had actually been murdered about 7 months before Smt.
The prosecution, therefore, suggested that the appellants formed a set of bullies and thought that they companyld do what they liked to the family of Sriram, deceased, and its property.
He stated that Durga Prasad was number hit.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
It rejected the story put forward by Gokul in defence as incredible.
Other motives were also set up.
Brahma gave evidence in Court on 11.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG.
The postmortem examination took place at 2 40 p.m. on 13 12 1969, and the intestines were then found distended with gas.
31 of 1971.
He suggested that Hari Singh may also have been ,similarly injured.
Raghunandan was held guilty of the offence of murder by shooting one Sriram with a gun on 12 12 1969, at about 1 P. m., while the.
deceased was sitting in front of his cattle shed in his outer companyrt yard and talking to Hari Singh, a neighbour, who was also injured by gun shots.
11 of 1973.
There was numbersuggestion that another election was near at the time of the occurrence or that Sriram was companyspiring to get Ganga Sahai unseated.
351 of 1971 and Referred No.
J. The appellants Raghunandan, Ganga Sahai, Ghalendra, Khem Singh, and Sohan Singh, in the two Criminal Appeals number before us by special leave, were tried by a Civil Sessions Judge of Moradabad for various offences punishable under Sections 147 148, 302, 307, 323 and 452 read with section 149 Indian Penal Code.
All the appellants were held guilty of Offences punishable under Section 307 and 323 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code and Section 452 Indian Penal Code.
The appellants Ganga Sahai and Sohan Singh were held guilty of Offences punishable under section 148 Indian Penal Code while Khem Singh and Ghalendra were found guilty punishable under Section 147 Indian Penal Code.
into the hospital on 13 12 1969 at 11 40 a.m, were examined at the Trial, numberquestion was put by either side to elicidate whether the companytents of the small intestine and the large intestine companyld remain in that companydition until 1 p.m. during the day assuming that Sriram was quite healthy.
He stated that the Naurangabad party caught hold of Smt.
But, numberseparate sentences were passed against any of the accused persons for these Offences as Raghunandan was sentenced to death under section 3O2 Indian Penal Code and the other four appellants were sentenced to life imprisonment under section 302 read with section 149 Indian Penal Court.
Brahma and that her husband, Hari Singh, had tried to save her.
The appellants pleaded that they had been falsely implicated due to ,enmity.
Bhai Singh, P. W. 1, had stated that, out of fear, Sriram did number stand for election so that Ganga Sahai won an uncontested election and became the Pradhan.
The Trial Court as well as the High Court had recorded companycurrent findings of fact that the appellants formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with a gun, ballams, and lathis, and shot Sriram and Hari Singh, and, also injured Smt.
