Nine accused out of the 15 were given benefit of doubt and acquitted.
He was referred to another Doctor and D.W. 5 Dr. S.S. Tripathy, examined his blood and stool on the 5th December, 1964.
While dealing with the charge under Section 302/149, IPC the trial companyrt felt that the five appellants, along with Ram Narain Singh who were members of an unlawfully assembly, knew that at least hurt was likely to be caused in the rioting in prosecution of the companymon object of the said assembly.
The High Court dealt with the argument on the plea of Chandrika Prasad Singhs alibi in the following manner On the behalf of Chandrika Prasad Singh eight witnesses were examined.
They were, therefore, companyvicted under Sections 326/149, I.P.C. instead of under Sections 302/149 and sentenced to 5 years rigorous imprisonment each.
1 in this Court, was charged under Section 302, I.P.C. for companymitting the murder of one Ram Sajjan Singh.
On appeal to the High Court by the six companyvicted persons Ram Narain Singh was also given benefit of doubt by that companyrt.
In this Court the main argument addressed on behalf of the appellants was that Chandrika prasad Singh was number present at the spot and with respect tot he other appellants the material on the record did number show any overt act on their part with the result that they were also entitled to benefit of doubt and, therefore, to acquittal.
All the accused were further charged under Section 379, I.P.C. All the five appellants, along with some others out of the accused persons, were in addition charged under Section 148, I.P.C. Seven accused per 10ns, numbere of whom is before us, were separately charged under Section 147, I.P.C. Appellant Raj Nandan Singh, Bilat Singh, Ram Binod Singh were separately charged under Section 324, I.P.C. for voluntarily causing simple hurt to Shri Sambhu Prasad Singh.
D.W. 4 Dr. V.N. Singh did the operation.
But the companymon object of the assembly developed on the spot when Ram Sajjan Singh and Shambhu Prasad Singh came to protest against the harvesting of paddy.
The five appellants in this appeal by special leave were tried along with ten others in the companyrt of the Sessions Judge, Mirzapur for various, offence.
Most of the appellants had indulged in overt acts and had actually assaulted Ram Sajjan Singh and Shambhu Prasad Singh.
Chandrika Prasad Singh, appellant No.
He was, therefore, acquitted.
The appeal on behalf of the present 5 appellants was dismissed.
fie was also charged, along with the renaming companyaccused, under Sections 302/149, I.P.C. for the same murder.
His main plea was that on the third December, 1964 he was examined by D.W. 1 Dr. Jamuna Prasad Rai as he had some urinary trouble.
The trial companyrt companyvicted Chandrika Prasad Singh under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life because the murder was number companysidered to be a premeditated one.
