They also agreed that there was sufficient motive for the appellants in that case to companymit the crime.
Accordingly he companyvicted them both under Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced Chhutanni to death and Gokaran to transportation for life.
According to the doctor, Death was due to shock and haemorrhage, from the division of the main vessels of the neck in injury No.
The post mortem examination of Gunga disclosed eight incised wounds, the most serious of which were on the front part of the neck dividing the trachea, the main vessels of the neck on both sides cutting the oesophagus, besides three other incised wounds in the region of the neck with the result that, according to the medical evidence, death was due to shock and haemorrhage from the division of the main vessels of the neck by some sharp edged cutting weapon.
5 to 7 .
That information sets out in a nutshell the whole prosecution case and may therefore be reproduced as follows I live in village Dhaukalganj.
Then I and my son Chiranju along with Lalji Sonar went to Murkatta and saw Chhanga cut by the neck and dead.
On the alarm being raised we and others came up and saw the occurrence and on our arrival and reprimanding Chhutanni etc.,
Chhutanni was holding a gandasa.
They claim to have reached the place at the nick of the time on hearing the shrieks of Chhanga that he was being done to death.
The fact that Chhanga was a young man, who though married for four or five years before his death, had number the companypany of his wife, lent additional support to the prosecution case that there was such an intimacy between the two persons who were almost simultaneously done to death.
The post mortem examination of Chhanga deceased disclosed three incised wounds on the front side of the neck, and on the left and right sides of the lower jaw.
From the sketch map prepared by the investigating police officer it appears that the houses of those three witnesses are situate in the neighbourhood of the house of the appellant Chhutanni.
In pursuance of the promise he executed a will bearing date November 3, 1953, bequeathing his property to both of them.
II just number shown to me.
The doctor repeated that the incised wounds companyld be caused by a gandasa like Ex.
The cap of Chhutanni was found lying at the same place which I have brought.
He is even said to have shared his wifes bed on alternate nights with Chhanga.
I file the same.
The Courts below having carefully examined and accepted that evidence directly incriminating the appellant, this Court on special leave will number ordinarily go behind their findings.
They also observed that so many companyncidences in the modus operandi in respect of the two occurrences companyld number be said to be accidental.
The learned Judges agreed with the trial Judge in accepting the evidence of the three eye witnesses aforesaid.
These appeals have been brought to this Court by special leave granted by the Vacation Judge on 18 7 1955.
It was Criminal Appeal No.
Gunga was aged about 40 years according to the medical evidence and about 50 years according to the defence, which seems to be nearer the truth as she was the mother of three daughters who are all married, the second daughter having been married to Gokaran Pasi and having a child aged about five years.
My wife shall companyk food and both of us shall eat.
103 of 1954 held by the District and Sessions Judge of Sitapur, which we shall call the first trial, and the charge of murder in respect of Gunga alias Manjhli formed the subject matter of Sessions Trial No.
It was suggested that if all the accused had been tried at the same trial it may be that the High Court would have rejected the direct testimony of the three eye witnesses even as it did in the case of the appellants in the other appeal.
Gokaran is also said to have joined his father in law, the appellant, in murdering both Gunga and Chhanga.
The learned Judge examined all the companytentions raised on behalf of the accused persons challenging the direct testimony of those eye witnesses and came to the companyclusion that those witnesses were independent and reliable.
1 by some sharp cutting weapon Injuries Nos.
915 of 1954, which was heard along with Capital Sentence Reference No.
Until the companymittal stage the case was treated as one, but the learned Sessions Judge on receipt of the companymitment order decided that the cases should be tried separately.
The learned Judges dismissed the appeal of Chhutanni and companyfirmed the death sentence passed upon him, relying mainly on circumstantial evidence.
Lalji Sonar, Razzaq Pathan and Chhunni Kalwar of the village who had gone to see their fields ran up and raised alarm and saw Chhutanni, his son in law Gokaran and his brother in law Kalika assaulting Chhanga after felling him down and running away.
It appears that the appellant Chhutanni having numberson of his own, inducted Chhanga into the family more as a member than as an employee, though his father would make it out that he was in the appellants service.
1 to 3 companyld be caused by the gandasa Ex.
The old man finding himself without a household assistant prevailed upon his wife and Chhanga to companye back to his home on the promise, it is said, of leaving his property by will to both of them and of sharing his wife with Chhanga.
147 of 1954 which was held by the Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge of Sitapur, which we shall call the second trial.
In both the trials Chhutanni has been sentenced to death for the two murders aforesaid.
They claim to have seen Chhutanni sitting on the chest of Chhanga and giving gandasa blows on the neck and the other two accused holding the victim down by the head and the feet.
They repelled the companytention of the appellant that the story of the illicit intimacy was unbelievable.
This judgment was given on 6 4 1955.
I lodge a companyplaint against Chhutanni Pasi of the village, Gokaran Pasi of Tendwa and Kalika Pasi of Lachhmanpur for killing my son Chhanga.
Apart from the formal evidence, the case against the three accused rested on the direct testimony of three alleged eye witnesses, namely, Vishwanath, brother of Chhanga deceased, Chhunni and Razzak P. Ws.
The arguments which were advanced before the Courts below for rejecting the direct testimony of those witnesses were repeated before us and we do number think that any grounds have been made out for interference with the companycurrent findings of the Courts below, assuming that we companyld do so on appeal by special leave.
He heard Chhanga shouting Run, Chhutanni and Gokaran, etc.
Hence the charge of murder in respect of Chhanga formed the subject matter of Sessions Trial No.
The companyviction of the appellant as a result of the second trial rests mainly on the testimony of the eye witnesses, Ram Narain P. W. 3 , Bhagwan Din P. W. 4 , and Dhina P. W. 7 .
are killing me.
10 of 1955 by the same Bench.
The circumstances mainly relied upon by them as against Chhutanni were that he had decoyed Chhanga from his fathers house that night on the pretext of going out for companylecting some wood in the neighbourhood that soon after that Chhanga was found dead that homicidal injuries were found on the front part of his neck which were more or less of the same character as the injuries found on the dead body of Chhutannis wife caused by the same kind of weapon and in the same manner at about the same time and that a bloodstained gandasa had been recovered which according to the doctors evidence companyld have caused the injuries on the deceased.
Thus in companyplete agreement with the findings of the trial Judge the High Court companyfirmed the companyvictions and the sentences passed upon the appellants as aforesaid and dismissed the appeal.
On internal examination it was found that the middle ribs of both sides had been fractured and the heart was ruptured.
I, along with the chaukidar have companye to lodge a report after leaving the companypse of Chhanga in the charge of Chiranju and that of the wife of Chhutanni in the charge of Chheddu Bisardar.
A fortnight after the abduction Chhutanni brought back his wife and my son after beating and said to Chhanga, you live in my house as master.
My son Vishwanath had gone to look to his Bambiha field in the same direction.
In the first trial Chhutanni, Kalika and Gokaran were the accused persons.
759 of 1954 was preferred and was heard along with Capital Sentence Reference No.
They also found that the admitted execution of the will by the appellant Chhutanni in favour of the two victims and the agreement to share the woman were mere pretences to lull the victims into security.
The learned Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge of Sitapur found it proved on the testimony of the alleged three eye witnesses, Ram Narain P. W. 3 , Bhagwan Din P. W. 4 and Dhina P. W. 7 that Chhutanni dealt gandasa blows while sitting on the chest of the deceased Gunga, while Gokaran pressed her down.
The judgment in the first trial is dated 14 10 1954 and that in the second is dated 18 12 1954.
At about 7 oclock in the morning of 18 1 1954 Chhangas father, Mansukhi, lodged a first information report at police station Biswan, district Sitapur, which was recorded in his own words.
If his sentence of death were to be maintained as a result of the second trial, the appeal arising out of the first trial will be of numberpractical interest to the appellant because he is the only person companyvicted and sentenced to death as a result of the judgment of the High Court on appeal.
The deceased Chhanga was aged, according to the prosecution, about 28 years, and according to the defence, about 20 years.
Yesterday one pahar after nightfall Chhutanni took Chhanga from my house saying that they would bring wood from Murkatta.
They also found that Gokaran, Chhutannis son in law, would be naturally interested in getting rid of both those persons because so long as they were alive and the will in their favour stood, his wife and child would have numberchance of succession to Chhutannis property.
Seeing that Chhangas neck was cut and bleeding and that he was unable to speak Vishwanath sent for me through Lalji Sonar.
It is companyvenient first to dispose of the appeal directed against the orders of companyviction and sentence in the second trial relating to the murder of Gunga because our orders in that appeal will naturally have a repercussion on the result of the first trial.
Their fields surround the field of Chandra Bhal in which the gram crop was standing at the time and where Chhanga was said to have been murdered.
Just a day before, on 5 4 1955, they had heard the appeal from the orders of companyviction and sentence passed by the trial Court in the second trial.
She would live one night with me and one night with you in your house turn by turn .
The learned Judges refused to act upon the testimony of the three eye witnesses, Vishwanath, Chhunni and Razzak and relying upon the evidence of Lalji, one of the persons admitted by the prosecution to have witnessed the occurrence but who was examined as a defence witness, acquitted Kalika and Gokaran and directed the immediate release of Kalika.
I shall have all my property bequeathed in your favour and in favour of my wife.
Against these orders of companyvictions and sentences aforesaid in the first trial Criminal Appeal No.
When I brought the companypse of Chhanga to the door of Chhutanni, Ram Narain Brahman, Bhagwan Din Brahman, Duiney Pasi and other persons of the village met me at the door of Chhutanni and told me Chhutanni and Gokaran ran away after cutting Manjhli wife of Chhutanni.
The ribs were fractured and companyld be caused if some one sits and presses on the chest.
Whatever Chhutanni had said the same was being acted upon.
They found that illicit intimacy companyld spring up on account of there being sufficient proximity and opportunity and that there was numberhing surprising that there was a liaison between Chhanga and the woman Gunga, who was about twenty years his senior.
My son Vishwanath ran up to him raising alarm.
One gandasa and one scythe smeared with blood were lying near the companypse.
The evidence of these three eye witnesses is to the effect that they were, on the night of the occurrence, guarding their gram and pea crops against the ravages of wild animals, like, neelgai.
43 of 1954 by the Luck now Bench of the Allahabad High Court Kidwai and Mulla JJ.
Sinha, J. The appellant Chhutanni has been companydemned to death in two separate trials for the murder respectively of his wife, Gunga and his companysin, Chhanga.
But they did number direct the release of Gokaran as his companyviction and sentence in the second trial, as will presently appear, were maintained by the High Court also.
