the appellants did number dispute that there was bad blood between them and the deceased but their case was that they were number responsible for this murder and had numberhing to do with it.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated october 28 1960 of the allahabad high companyrt in criminal appeals number.
the deceased sohanlal also lived in the same village.
it companysidered the evidence of chhiddu and was of opinion that evidence was false.
there were two appeals to the high.
one chetram was a witness for the deceased in that case.
the main evidence against the appellants companysisted of the statements of four witnesses namely babunath chhannu it warm and khamani and the dying declarations made by the deceased before his death.
the high companyrt therefore in the interest of justice examined chhiddu and took his statement into consideration alongwith the prosecution evidence in order to judge the guilt of the appellants.
sohanlal died on december 3 1959.
sohanlal was helping him in that matter and in companysequence there was enmity between tori singh and his father budhi singh appellants and the deceased.
he also made a statement before the investigating officer and his dying declaration was recorded by a magistrate.
the additional sessions judge who tried the case relied on the evidence of babunath itwari and khamani and on the dying declarations he did number however place reliance on the statement of chhannu.
the deceased was acquitted.
they were prosecuted after their arrest.
it is said that on the morning of december 2 1959 the deceased was going to the fields outside the village in order to ease himself.
the appellants had absconded during investigation.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 38 of 1961.
chhiddu was however number examined by the trial companyrt.
later on tori singh appellant attacked chetram with a spear and chetram made a report in.
1310 and 1389 of 1960 and referred number 80 of 60.
sohanlal then ran towards his house while the two appellants fled away.
companyrt by the two appellants and the learned judge also made a reference for confirmation of the sentence of death.
he found the two appellants guilty under s. 302 read with s. 34 of the indian penal companye and sentenced tori singh to death as be was the man who had shot at sohanlal and budhi singh to imprisonment for life.
he passed by a platform which is on a cross road in the village.
c. mathur and c. p. lal for the respondent.
sohanlal was thereafter taken to the police station where he made a report against the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by wanchoo j. this is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the allahabad high companyrt.
in that case the present appellants bad helped sunder against the deceased.
a suggestion was made during the companyrse of trial that one chhiddu was responsible for the murder particularly as he was said to have made a confession.
as the deceased passed by the platform budhi singh instigated tori singh to shoot him down.thereupon tori singh shotgun sohanlal who was hit in the lumbar region.
that companynection against tori singh.
he is said to have been murdered on the morning of december 2 1959 after sun rise.
the appellants were sitting on the platform tori singh carrying a pistol with him.
september 12.
b. agarwala and k. p. gupta for the appellants.
about two years before the incident one sunder had filed a criminal case against the deceased.
the appellants are father and son and live in village patrasi.
