After due companysideration of this objection, both companyrts held that the appellant had fired two shots from the gun at Bankey Lal.
As he put his hand in his pant pocket to take out fresh cartridges, the appellant was overpowered by the friends and associates of Bankey Lal Kabra namely Sita Ram.
All the sentences are made to run companycurrently In appeal, the High Court at Allahabad companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence and hence this appeal by special leave.
So he left the meeting, went to his house which was about a furlong away and returned with a loaded double barrelled gun.
Objection was taken to the evidence of the eye witnesses on the ground that they were associates of each other and partial witnesses.
By that time the meeting had ended in disorder and the people were dispersing on the road in front of the house where the meeting was taking place.
Munshi Lal died of the gun shot wound and on a post mortem examination of his body it was found that he had a gun shot injury which was chest cavity deep with margins blackened A charge sheet was filed against the appellant and his rescuers.
Banekcy Lal Kabra accompanied by some others was moving away from the place when the appellant came with the gun and addressing those who were accompanying Bankey Lal Kabra said Move away.
The meeting, however, was adjourned to 2.
In the melee, Bankey Lal held the appellant fast by his shirt and a piece of shirt came in his hand as the appellant freed himself by force The appellant with his gun was taken away by his relations.
Saying this, he fired one shot in the direction of Bankey Lal Kabra.
1964 and that he was number present all at at the time of the occurrence.
The appellant, however, pushed him back and fired at Bankey Lal Kabra, Unfortunately Munshi Lal came between the gun and Bankey Lal Kabra and was shot in the back.
The deceased Munshi Lal was a teacher in that School.
21, was attached under a Seizure Memo.
The eye witnesses of the occurrence were Bankey Lal, P.W. 9, Sita Ram, P.W.I, Chandra Shekhar, P.W. 6 and Krishna Gopal P.W 7.
The person who lost his life was one Munshi Lal, the maternal uncle of the appellant.
Both the companyrts held that the prosecution case had been substantially proved.
It was past 3.00 P.M. by number.
A search was taken of the house for the shirt of the appellant and the same, Ext.
One shot missed its aim, Munshi Lal came up to prevent him from filing another shot.
P.W. 1, Chandra Shekhar, P.W. 6 and others.
The incident took place in Ganjdunwara town on August 30, 1984.
There is a School in that town known as the Hindi Muria School, which was run by the Dharmada Committee of the local grain merchants.
The President of the Dharmada Committee received a letter in which it was suggested that the School may either be closed or the salaries of the teachers be reduced.
Besides, there was the evidence of the two empty cartridges, which, in the opinion of the Expert Inspector Rastogi had been fired from the gun recovered from Mahtab Rai.
The appellant attempted to reload the gun after the two spent cartridges were thrown out by the rejector and fell on the ground.
The gun was a breach loader.
The gun was produced by Mehtab Rai.
30 P.M. on August 30, 1964.
Hence a meeting of the Dharmada Committee was called on August 29, 1964.
He missed his aim.
He further stated that he had been falsely involved because his father and uncle were influential men and the prosecution witnesses were jealous of them.
He said that he had gone away to Bareilly on the evening of August 29.
The appellants father Raja Ram and Uncle Mehtab Rai are influential grain merchants of the town and were members of the Dharmada Committee.
I shall shoot this Sala Kabra with my gun.
Bankey Lal Kabra then started running to save himself towards the house of one Laxrai Narain.
A large number of people attended the meeting of the Dharmada Committee.
There were members of the Committee and also number members.
Binkey lal Kabra also joined them they caught the appellant and were marching him to the Police Station when Mehtab Rai, Raja Ram and six of their associates came and rescued him from his captOrs.
Admittedly Munshi Lal had rushed to the appellant to prevent him from firing the second shot.
The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the rescuers but companyvicted the appellant as aforesaid, The defence of the appellant was one of alibi.
Munshi Lal fell down.
On Comparison, the piece was found to be a part of the shirt attached.
The appellant pushed him and then fired the second shot.
On examination of the gun it was found that it had been freshly greased and the barrels had been cleaned.
The gun and the two empty cartridges were sent to the Scientific Section of the U.P. Government where Inspector Rameshwar Prasad Rastogi, P.W. 3 found, after firing two live cartridges from the gun that the two empty cartridges which had been sent to him must have been fired from this gun.
The appellants father Raja Ram and uncle Mehtab Rai took exception to Bankey Lal Kabra taking part in the proceedings on the ground that he had ceased to be a grain merchant and was number entitled to address the meeting as a member.
His action was deliber.
The appellant got very much excited on hearing what was said against his father and uncle and said that Binkey Lal Kabra was creating trouble and it was necessary to look to him.
The two empty cartridges and the piece of shirt were handed over to the Officer in charge.
In the meantime the deceased Munshi Lal rushed towards his nephew, the appellant, in order prevent him from using the gun.
This annoyed Bankey Lal Kabra who made some derogatory remarks against Raja Ram and Mehtab Rai.
The appellant, a number member, was also present at the meeting As soon as the meeting companymenced one Bankey Lal Kabra P.W. 9 pressed for the companysideration of the letter which suggested that the School be either closed or the salaries of the teachers be reduced.
He asked these who were near Bankey Lal to move away because he wanted to shoot Bankey Lal.
With this companyplaint they proceeded to the Police Station and at 3.30 P.M. lodged the companyplaint.
The captors picked up the two empty cartridges which had fallen on the ground and then wrote a companyplaint.
There was also the piece of the shirt of the appellant.
In the evening the Superintendent of Police arrived in town and he called for the gun.
On companyviction he has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to several other terms of imprisonment.
G. Palekar, J. In this appeal by special leave the appellant Gyanendra Kumar who is about 22 years old has been companyvicted by the Civil and Sessions Judge Etah for offences under Sections 302, 307, 224 IPC and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act.
