SAHAJ RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave, by accused Nos. 1 to 4, 8 and 9, is against the judgment and order dated 13-1-1969 of the High Court of Allahabad confirming the conviction and the sentences imposed on them by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut. All the appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149, I. P. C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Appellants 3 and 6 (accused Nos. 8 and 9) have been convicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and each of them has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 18 months. Appellants Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 (accused Nos. 1 to 4) have been convicted under Section 147, I. P. C. and each of them has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The six appellants along with four others, who were accused Nos. 5 to 7 and 10, were tried by the learned Sessions Judge for offences under Section 302 read with Sections 149, 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 5 to 7 and 10 were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge and there was no appeal by the State challenging their acquittal. For purposes of convenience the appellants before us will be designated as group I and the acquittal accused will be designated as group II.

(3.) The prosecution case in brief was as follows: The accused belonging to group I are very closely related and are discendants of a common ancestor belonging to the same family. In or about 1958 there was a marpit between some of the accused of this group and their friends on the one hand and Kartar Singh alias Kartara, the deceased, his brother, Aman Singh and their friends on the other. The dispute related to the breaking of a mend. In the said marpit, accused 2 and 3 recevied injuries which resulted in cases being registered against both parties under Section 147 and 323, I.P.C. Ultimately the cases were registered as having been compromised. Notwithstanding this compromise the relationship between the accused belonging to group I and the deceased were not cordial. The accused belonging to group II had very great enmity towards the deceased, who was strongly supported by PW 7 and some of his friends. One Smt. Kuri, whose son-in-law was PW 7, had some lands in the village. The wife of PW 7 was her only daughter. PW 7 had desired that the lands of his mother-in-law should be given to his wife. The lands were being cultivated by the deceased, Kartar Singh, for about ten or eleven years, Though Smt. Kuri wanted to give the lands to her daughter's children (children of PW 7), accused Nos. 5, 6 and 7 belonging to the 2nd group fraudulently got a sale deed executed in their favour of the lands in question on December 14, 1964. One of the attesting witnesses to this document was accused No. 10 belonging to this group. The 2nd group wanted to get possession of the properties, which attempt was very streneously resisted by the deceased, Kartar Singh, supported by PW 7 and certain others. This led to a series of criminal complaints and civil litigation, each one alleging that the other was committing criminal acts against them. In view of this bitter enmity, the accused belonging to group II had a strong motive to put an end to Kartar Singh, who was obstructing possession being taken by them. The accused belonging to both these groups became friendly with each other because of the common enmity against the deceased and accordingly joined together and assaulted Kartar Singh at about 12 Noon on September 14, 1965, when the latter was working in his fields, and inflicted very serious injuries which resulted in his instantaneous death. The first information report was given by PW 1 who was working in the adjoining field and had seen the occurrence. Investigation followed and all the accused were apprehended and put up for trial.