The respondents and the acquitted accused thereafter fled away.
The Panchayat deliberated on the issue and suggested that possession of kotha be returned to Ram Sarup to which Partap the second respondent accused and his supporters did number agree.
The respondents being aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence preferred an appeal to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and the High Court vide its judgment and order dated 6 4 1983 allowed the appeal of the respondents and acquitted them of the said charge.
Zalim Singh accused took out the knife from his pant pocket and tried to give a blow on the left hand of deceased, however, the said blow fell on the left side of the chest, Because of this injury on a vital part, Babu Ram deceased companylapsed on the ground.
The three respondents herein alongwith one Hari Singh accused were put up for trial for companymitting culpable homicide number amounting to murder of Babu Ram since deceased , an offence punishable under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
Dr. C.Prakash opined that the above numbered injuries on Babu Ram deceased were ante mortem and he died due to shock and haemorrhage.
District and Sessions Judge, Etawah, vide judgment and order dated 29 5 1978 in Sessions Trial No.
199 of 1976 companyvicted the first respondent accused Zalim under section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years.
It is alleged by the prosecution that Babu Ram deceased thereafter took off the shoe from his left leg and snowed it to Partap, Pyare and Hari Singh the acquitted accused.
Left sides chest cavity companytaina 8 ozs of clotted blooe.
There is numberserious challenge to this finding.
Etawah.
The respondents felt insulted by the companyduct of Babu Ram and thereafter the respondents alongwith Hari Singh rushed at Babu Ram.
Partap, Pyare and Hari Singh accused caught hold of Babu Ram and took him in the middle of the road.
Chheda Lal son of Babu Ram and others thereafter intervened and tried to separate them but, however, Partap accused asked Zalim accused , the first respondent to cut off the left hand of Babu Ram by which he was holding the shoe.
Being felt insulted by this abusive words, Partap also hurled abuses to Babu Ram and his supporters.
Babu Ram deceased was also present at the said Panchayat.
Briefly stated the prosecution case is as under On 9 5 1976 at about 1.00 p.m., a Panchayat was held in the Varandah of one Ram Das Chowdhary to resolve the dispute as regards a kotha situated at village Bakewar Distt.
This wordy quarrel led to the exchange of abuses between the two parties and thereupon Babu Ram abused by saying that the dishonest persons would suffer from the disease of warm.
The respondents in their defence did number lead any evidence.
Chheda Lal PW1 lodged the F.I.R. on the same evening at about 9.30 p.m. The investigating officer alongwith police party reached the place of incident and companymenced the investigation.
The only question, therefore, that needs to be companysidered in this appeal filed by the State of U.P. is as to whether the respondents justify their act of causing grievous injury to Babu Ram deceased in exercise of right of private defence.
District and Sessions Judge, however, gave benefit of doubt to Hari Singh and acquitted him of the said charge.
The prosecution in support of its case examined three eye witnesses, namely, Chheda Lal PW 1 , Munni Lal PW 2 and Gangeshwar Dayal PW 3 .
The Second Addl.
The learned IInd Addl.
On expioration sub cutaneous tissue, muscles soft tissue, vessels and adjacent left sides pleura found cut penetrating into left side being in an area 3.5 x 3/4 from its anterior surface towards posterior surface.
It is number disputed that Babu Ram since deceased who was admitted to Sadar Hospital, Etawah, on 10 5 1976 at 3.50 p.m., succumbed to his injuries.
Ram Sarup son of Munni Lal claimed to be in possession of the said kotha but however, he companyplained that respondent Partap Singh and others took forcible possession thereof some five to six days prior to the date of incident which took place on 9 5 1976.
Dr. C.Prakash who held the post mortem examination on the dead body of Babu Ram, numbered the following injuries Incised wound 4.5 x 1 x cavity deep on the left chests laterally and directions from front to backwards, 4.5 below left nipple and also lateral to it and obliquely.
It is alleged that a heated discussion lasted for about two or two and half hours but numberfinal decision companyld be arrived at as regards the said kotha.
They admit their presence but, however, they pleaded a right of private defence.
The State of U.P. has filed this appeal challenging the legality and companyrectness of the order of acquittal passed by the High Court.
According to the respondents, Babu Ram deceased was holding a shoe in his left hand which caused reasonable apprehension in their minds as regards danger to their lives, and therefore, in exercise of their right of private defence they were justified in their action.
Both the companyrts below on appraisal of materials on record have companycurrently held that Babu Ram deceased sustained the above bodily injury which was grievous in nature and which has resulted into his death.
