However, her father refused to solemnize the said marriage as he had learnt that Ranjit was already married.
The learned Trial Judge held at the only surviving accused, viz.,
Although the High Court did number place reliance upon the evidence of Teju Bai P.W.5, agreeing with the findings of the learned Trial Judge, it dismissed the appellants appeal.
P.W.16 Sitabai, however, stated that apart from Sidhnath and the appellant, a few more persons took part in the incident.
During the pendency of the trial, Jagdish and Sidhnath died.
On the door bein opened, the first informant was asked by the accused in regard to the whereabouts of Bhanwar Lal to which he replied that he was outside the house.
Upon companyclusion of investigation, altogether six persons were sent for trial for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Accusd thereafter fled away.
Ram Lal, his companysin came out to protect Bhanwar Lal whereupon he was also assaulted with swords and pharsi.
An appeal was preferred by the appellant before the High Court.
In the FIR, it was stated by P.W.3 Nagu, that as Sitabai P.W.16 was number keeping well she slept with his wife Kamlabai and daughter Sultantabai whereas Bhanwar Lal was sleeping in the next room.
Bidai ceremony took place a few days prior to the date of incident.
Sidhnath, his son Ranjit, the appellant herein and some other persons knocked at the door of the first informant.
At about 2 or 2.30 a.m. on the intervening night of 8/9th October 1994, accused number1.
He held the named accused Sidhnath, Ranjit as also Jagdish, i.e., accused number.1,2 and 4 respectively had companymitted the offence of murder of deceased Bhanwar Lal and Ram Lal.
As a result of the assault, both of them died on the spot.
Before the learned Sessions Judge, apart from other witnesses, P.W.3 Nagu, P.W.4 Kamla Bai, P.W.5 Teju Bai wife of deceased Ram Lal and P.W.16 Sita Bai wife of deceased Bhanwar Lal were examined as eye witnesses.
The learned Trial Judge believed the statements of all the eye witnesses.
B. SINHA, J. Delay companydoned.
On 09th October 1994 at about .30 a.m., a First Information Report FIR was lodged by one Nagu, father of one of the deceased Bhanwar Lal and the companysin of the second deceased Ram Lal, before the Officer in charge of Maksi Police Station in relation to an incident which had taken place at village Merukheri at about 2 or 2.30 a.m. on the said date.
The prosecution case appears to be that Sagai ceremony had been performed for marriage of the appellant herein with Sitabai, P.W.16.
Then, they shouted calling Bhanwar Lal and when he came out, he was assaulted with swords and pharsi by the accused persons.
Sitabai was married to Bhanwarlal.
