Trial Court held that there were discrepancies and accusations have number been established.
Multiple firearm wounds of entry 0.4 cm x 0.3 cm x chest cavity deep to 0.4 cm x 0.4 cm muscle deep in size in an area of 7.00 cm x 6.00 cm on front of chest midline on both sides in middle part of front chest.
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court had number kept in view the parameters of an appeal against acquittal.
An appeal was filed by the State.
The trial Court directed acquittal of the appellant primarily on the ground that there was discrepancy between the ocular evidence and the medical evidence, independent witnesses were number examined.
He was in shadow duty of an Ex M.L.A. On the day of incident, he was going from his house to join his duty.
The deceased Jagat Singh asked him to go after companystructing the earth partition of the agricultural plot.
Apart from the medical and formal evidence including that of investigation, the prosecution relied upon the testimony of Jaivir Singh PW 1 and Sant Saran PW 2 as eye witnesses.
The accused are also close relatives of the deceased.
x muscle deep on right side of neck 3.00 cm away from injury No.5 just 3.00 cm above the clavicle.
Margins charred and inverted.
In appeal filed by the State, the High Court held that while the acquittal of Smt.
His wife Kapoori Devi exhorted him to go after finishing him.
Firearm wound of entry 0.4 cm x 0.4 cm x chest cavity deep on lower part front and outer aspect of right side of chest 11.00 cm away from right nipple, at 7 Oclock position.
Firearm wound 0.5 cm x 0.3 bone deep on right and front aspect of upper part of numbere 1.00 cm below root of numbere, underlying nasal bone fractured.
x 0.3 cm.
The incident was seen by Sant Saran PW.2 as also by Dafedar Singh, Gajraj Singh, Atar Sri wife of Jagat Singh and other villagers.
Margins charred and inverted.
The postmortem over the dead body of the deceased was companyducted by Dr. D.S.Rathore PW.4 on 24.9.1992 at 1.45 M. The following ante mortem injuries were found on his person who aged about 50 years.
Suraj Singh is son of Ram Sahai Yadav who was real brother of father of the deceased.
Suraj Singh was a police companystable and was posted at Aligarh.
Consequent upon the registering of the case, investigation was taken up by S.S.I. S.K. Dixit PW.5.
Lacerated wound 0.5 cm x 0.3 cm x muscle deep on front aspect of left ear pinna middle part.
Suraj Singh fired two shots from his gun whereas his wife Kapoori Devi fired three shots from a revolver which hit Jagat Singh who died instantaneously.
Suraj Singh and his wife then climbed up their roof.
The report was lodged on 23.9.1992 at 1.45 p.m. by the eye witness Jaivir Singh PW 1 who was nephew of the deceased .
The death had occurred due to shock and haemorrhage owing to ante mortem injuries.
Two persons i.e. the present appellant and his wife Smt.
On internal examination, two metallic pieces were recovered from the soft tissues of the neck, two from left ventricle, one pellet from right chest cavity and one from abdomen cavity.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court allowing the appeal filed by the State of U.P. questioning the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge E.C. Act , Mainpuri in Sessions Trial No.169 of 1993.
Kapoori Devi A 2 was companyrect, the same was number sustainable so far as the present appellant is companycerned.
The defence was of denial.
Accused Suraj Singh abused him.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The incident took place on 23.9.1992 at about 12.20 p.m. at the house of the deceased Jagat Singh and the accused persons situated in village Chhibkaria, P.S. Bhongaon, District Mainpuri.
