we have been led through the evidence of p.w.
the material facts of the prosecution case were that there was a land dispute between nimba p.w.6 father of the deceased poona on the one hand and respondent amara and the members of his family on the other.
the five other accused persons including respondent amara were companyvicted under section 302 read with section 149 and under section 147 of the penal companye and each of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to one and a half years rigorous imprisonment respectively.
poona met with instantaneous death.
this companyrt granted special leave to appeal only against the two respondents and refused it as against the other four.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 543 of 1976.
on july 17 1970 at about sunset the accused persons of whom respondent kalki was armed with an axe and respondent amara with a dharia came to the house of the deceased.
at that time the deceased was inside his hut with his wife mooli p.w.1 .
respondent kalki was companyvicted under section 302 and section 148 of the penal code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and for rigorous imprisonment for two years respectively.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 6th may 1975 of the rajasthan high companyrt in d.b.
police registered a case.
the question before us is whether the two respondents or any of them caused the death of poona.
nimba lodged a report at the police station at nana.
poona came out followed by his wife mooli when he was knumberked down by amara and rama whereupon kalki gave him blow with the axe on the neck.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by baharul islam j. this appeal by special leave on behalf of the state of rajasthan is directed against the judgment of the rajasthan high companyrt acquitting the two respondents shrimati kalki alias kali and her husband amara alongwith four other companyaccused .
criminal jail appeal number.
277 413 to 416 and 918 of 1971.
1 was that there were material discrepancies.
the high companyrt has set aside the order of companyviction and sentence passed by the session judge on the grounds 1 that p.w.1 the widow of the deceased isa highly interested witness in as much as she is the wife of the deceased and there was an enmity between the deceased and the accused on account of the dispute about the agricultural land and 2 that there are material discrepancies in her statement.
dalveer bhandari for the respondent.
amara called poona.
in due companyrse the case was sent to and tried by the session judge who companyvicted and sentenced the six accused persons including the two respondents as stated above.
there is numberdispute that poona met a homicidal death.
badri das sharma for the appellant.
mooli p.w.1 raised an outcry when geli mother of the deceased p.w.2 who had been at some distance from the hut came running to the place of occurrence and saw the assailants leaving the place.
with respect in our opinion both the grounds are invalid.
the second ground on which the high companyrt refused to place reliance on the evidence of p.w.
