The High Court has made numberattempt to companye to grips with the evidence of the eye witnesses.
According to P.W. 7 Shri Deo Murti Pandey, both the parties came on the scene armed with lat his etc.
P 1 was lodged by P. W. 1 Amarnath, a distant companylateral of the deceased, at Police Station, Mirzamurad on the same day at about 2.45 p.m. stating that the deceased had been shot dead by the accused Janardan, who was armed with a gun, at the exhortation of the other accused Raj Nath, Anirudh, Sudhakar, Vibbakar alias Mangu, Harihar alias Sallar, and Vijai Dutt alias Jhurul, who were present armed with various weapons.
The entire judgment of the High Court companysists of one paragraph which may be reproduced below According to the statements of all the eye witnesses, appellant Janardan was armed with a gun, Vijay Dutt and Harihar were armed with Gundasas, Sudhakar and Vibhakar were armed with spears and Anirudh and Rajnath were armed with lathis when the room of Bardwar was opened by the mother of Amarnath P. W 1 .
Having heard the parties, we are satisfied that the order of acquittal recorded by the High Court has resulted in the manifest miscarriage of justice.
The prossecution examined four witnesses P.W. 1, Amarnath, P.W. 2 Sheomurat, P.W. 3 Aparbal, and P.W. 4 Shyam Behari.
He boarded the train and returned to Varanasi.
It is number necessary for purposes of this appeal to set out the facts in detail except to mention that the deceased Sabha Staankar died of a gunshot wound in front of his house on Aug. 13, 1968 at about 12.30 p.m. The First Information Report Ext.
Sri Deo Murti Pande, Vakil Commissioner P.W. 7 who is companypletely independent and appears to be a wholly reliable witness on the other hand stated that after the room of the Bardwar had been opened by the mother of Amarnath P.W. 1 the party of Rajnath appellant said that the said room had been locked only a few days earlier by Amarnath and that it was in their possession.
These witnesses speak of the presence of the remaining six accused armed with various weapons on the spot.
Thereafter, a verbal altercation had taken place between Rajnath appellant and Sabha Shanker deceased and Sudhakar and Rajnath appellants had said that the deceased should be beaten.
On hearing this Sabha Shanker deceased had declared that they were telling a lie and that this room had been locked by Amarnath since a long time.
Sudhakar and Rajnath appellants then said that the said room of the Bardwar had been locked by Amarnath forcibly a few days earlier.
Sabha Shanker deceased , who was empty handed, had then proceeded towards his house followed by the appellants and when he was emerging from his house armed with a lathi, he was shot by Janardan appellant at the instigation of Sudhakar and Rajnath appellants.
and thereupon he, apprehending danger, left the scene of occurrence.
On his own showing, this witness was anxious to get away from the place of incident and he actually ran towards the railway station where he found the Upper India standing at the platform.
P. Sen, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated Jan. 10, 1975 setting aside the judgment and sentences passed by the 2nd Temporary and Civil Sessions Judge, Varanasi dated Feb. 17, 1971, and acquitting the respondents of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
Five of them have also been acquitted of an offence under Section 148 and the remaining two of an offence under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code.
This witness therefore had number witnessed the incident.
