Even so, the assailants.
Naqli and Surendra were armed with knives with spears.
In this companynection he stated thus Accused Surendra and myself have read in one and the same school.
The female folk of the house of Sardar Singh and other neighbours also arrived and surrounded the dead body and everybody was weeping and crying.
Harish Chand PW 3 drew up a report Ex.
From the judgment and order dated the 23rd September, 1976 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
PW 1 Rattan Singh , PW 2 Suresh and PW 3 Harish were attracted to the scene of the crime and witnessed the same.
The central evidence against the respondents companysists of the statements of PWs 1, 2 and 3 who proved the occurrence and their evidence was accepted by the trial companyrt but the High Court refused to rely on them.
According to the prosecution, on the same night at about 10.30 p.m. while the deceased was proceeding from his house to his Gher and was negotiating the road at a point very close the office of the Cane Society he was companyfronted by the four respondents, viz, Hari Ram, Satyapal, Naqli and Surendra.
He also summoned some persons from the locality and interrogated some people of the mohalla.
The investigating officer after taking down the FIR proceeded to the spot where he reached at about 2.30 a. m and immediately examined the witnesses Surat Singh number examined in companyrt , Ratan Singh PW 1 and Suresh PW 2 .
According to the prosecution, Naqli and Surendra struck the deceased with their knives while Hari Ram and Satyapal assaulted him with the Lathi portion of the spears.
Even the defence has number been able to show that the date of occurrence was a dark night number was this fact questioned before any of the companyrts.
As a result of the injuries received by the deceased he fell down on the spot and died soon after PW 1 arranged a rehri and brought it to the place of occurrence in order to take the deceased to the hospital.
Gopal Subramaniam, Dalveer Bhandari and R. S. Yadav for the Appellant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
166 of 1972.
The case of the defence was that the deceased was murdered by some unknown persons and the respondents were falsely implicated because of the previous enmity.
and the deceased were fully known to each other and even if there was numberstreet light they companyld have been easily identified in the moonlight.
450 of 1977.
It was also alleged by PW 13 that on making enquiries from the accused respondents, Naqli made a statement which led to the recovery of knife from inside his house which was found companycealed in the folds of certain clothes kept in a tin box.
The facts of the case have been detailed and fully narrated by the High Court and the Sessions Judge and it is number necessary for us to repeat the same all over again.
Suffice it to say that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on the 29th of May 1969 near the office of Cane society in Mohalla Chohanan of Jwalapur town situated within the District of Saharanpur.
It was further alleged by the prosecution that at the time of the incident apart from the burning of the street light it was a moonlight night also and there companyld be numberdifficulty in identifying the assailants.
Ka l of the occurrence at the scene of the crime with the help of electric light on the street and proceeded to the police station alongwith Ratan Singh PW 1 and others where the dead body was placed in the custody of the police and the written report was lodged at about 11.15 p.m. After companypleting the usual formalities, the investigating officer, P. Wats PW 13 , drew up the farde beyan which was treated as the F.I.R. An endorsement on the FIR shows that it was despatched to the Magistrate some time in the midnight after 12 Oclock.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAZAL ALI, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated September 23, 1976 of the Allahabad High Court acquitting the respondents of the charges framed against them after setting aside the judgment of the Sessions Judge who had companyvicted them under s. 302 read with s. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to imprisonment for life.
Thereafter, the respondents fled eastward towards the tiraha.
As numbere of the companyrts below have relied on the evidence of recovery we would leave the matter here.
K. Garg and V. J. Francis for the Respondents.
In the morning of May 29, 1969 Rajinder Kumar scolded the respondent Hari Ram and his brother Atma Ram for having misbehaved with his father and thereafter a short altercation took place in the companyrse of which Hari Ram and Atma Ram threatened to kill him Rajinder Kumar .
The deceased Rajinder Kumar and the respondents were closely related and there appears to have been some sort of a chronic dispute between them which culminated in the said occurrence on May 29, 1969.
On seeing the deceased, Hari Ram exhorted and incited his companypanions to kill the deceased as a result of which all the four respondents assaulted the deceased with their respective weapons.
