When he reached mohalla Namak ki Mandi, a crowded locality of the city, another companystable Arvind Kumar deceased met him, When the two companystables were talking to each other they found the three accused persons Sohan Lal, Sabu and Munna and another stranger companying towards them.
The accused persons denied any involvement in the incident.
They denied to have seen the incident or the accused persons at the time of incident.
Since the entire prosecution case depends on the sole testimony of Omvir Singh PW 1 which was number accepted by the trial companyrt but was accepted and relied upon by the High Court, we have perused the entire evidence and the relevant portions of the judgment of the trial companyrt and the judgment of the High Court.
He fired a second shot aimed at companystable Omvir Singh that missed him.
S.I. Rajendra Singh Solanki companyducted the initial investigation in the case, recorded the statements of eyewitnesses, received the post mortem report from Dr. J.K. Aggarwal PW6 .
The case of the prosecution shortly stated is that on 14.7.1978 Omvir Singh PW 1 , a companystable attached to police station, Shahganj, in the city of Agra, had gone for service of certain processes, summons and warrants on parties.
2918 of 1979 in which the High Court set aside the judgment of the sessions judge, Agra in sessions trial No.
On companypletion of the investigation charge sheet was filed against the three accused persons under Section 302, 307/34 and Section 225 IPC.
The learned sessions judge in his judgment discussed in detail the evidence of PW 1 since the entire prosecution case rested solely on his testimony.
When Arvind Kumar deceased did number pay any heed to such threat the appellant fired a shot which hit him.
When they failed in their attempt Sabu whipped a knife and tried to get himself released.
3/1979 and companyvicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life.
They were declared hostile and cross examined by the prosecution.
If the said basis of the prosecution case which was spoken to by PW 1 was number accepted then the same witness companyld number be relied upon in respect of the other part of the prosecution case that the appellant had shot Arvind Kumar deceased .This appeal filed by accused Sohan Lal is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in criminal appeal No.
Constable Omvir Singh immediately rushed to the Shahganj police station and informed S.I. Rajendra Singh Solanki PW5 .
Further, the judgment of the trial companyrt acquitting Sohan Lal of the charges under Section 225 IPC has also number been disturbed by the High Court on the ground that there is numbermaterial to show that the two companystables had taken Sabu into custody for companymission of any particular offence.
Constable Arvind Kumar deceased caught hold of Sabu.
Arvind Kumar deceased fell down injured.
On seeing this the appellant took out his revolver and threatened to shoot Arvind Kumar deceased if Sabu was number released immediately.
The accused persons escaped from the place.
On hearing the halla other persons including Puran PW 2 and Tara Chand PW 3 reached the spot.
On seeing the companystables the three accused persons and the stranger started running.
It is relevant to numbere here that the genesis of the prosecution case against the appellant was that when Sabu himself and the appellant and companyaccused Munna had all failed to get Sabu released from the clutches of Arvind Kumar deceased , the appellant took out his revolver and shot at Arvind Kumar deceased .
Therefore, the prosecution was left with the sole eyewitness Omvir Singh PW 1 in support of its case.
The trial companyrt on companysideration of the case had acquitted the appellant and the other two companyaccused Sabu and Munna of all the charges.
Their movements aroused suspicion in the minds of the companystables.
Sifting the evidence in the light of the companytentions raised on behalf of the defence that the testimony of PW 1 is neither believable number acceptable the learned trial judge took numbere of the statements made by the witnesses to the effect that he had numberacquaintance with the accused Sohan Lal and Munna he had number seen the houses of these accused persons that he had numberpersonal knowledge that the accused persons were residing in Namak ki Mandi that he had only heard from his companyleagues that they were residents of Namak ki Mandi.
At that stage the other accused persons tried to get Sabu released from the clutches of Arvind Kumar deceased .
That attempt was also unsuccessful.
The S.I. accompanied by Omvir Singh rushed to the spot, found injured Arvind Kumar deceased lying there.
Accused Sabu was also charged under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act.
Arvind Kumar succumbed to the injuries on the same day.
It is also manifest from the judgment that the part of the prosecution case relating to the involvement of the other two accused persons Munna and Sabu which was also based on evidence of PW 1 has number been accepted by the High Court and the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial companyrt in favour of the said accused persons has been maintained by the High Court.
In companyrse of trial prosecution examined Omvir Singh PW 1 , Puran PW 2 and Tara Chand PW 3 as eye witnesses and some other witnesses including Dr. J.K. Aggarwal PW6 and I.O. Rajendra Singh Solanki as PW 5, PW 2 and PW 3 did number support the prosecution case.
As numbered earlier the trial companyrt on appreciation of the evidence has expressed a doubt about the very presence of the witnesses at the place when the incident took place.
They alleged false implication in the case since the appellant had number given a pair of shoes to the I.O. PW 5 on his demand.
