STATE OF U P Vs. ABDUL KARIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of U.P. has filed this appeal against the judgment passed by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court directing acquittal of the three respondents (hereinafter referred to as the A-1, A-2 and A-3) respectively.

(2.) The accused persons were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC) by the IVth Additional and Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Sessions Trial No. 359/78.

(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: The first information report (Ex. Ka. 1) was to the effect that Buddhi was the husband of the complainant (PW-1) whereas A-1, Abdul Karim was his elder brother. He was indebted to some Punjabi, and hence had mortgaged his house and 1 1/2 bigha agricultural land with him and abandoning the village 20 years back had gone to Baheri and settled there with his wife and children. The husband of the complainant redeemed that property after paying debt of the Punjabi and exercised possession over the house and agricultural land of that accused. Three months before the occurrence accused Abdul Karim approached her husband and requested him to return his house or to build a shop for him. Hence her husband had given him a shop in a portion of his house. Subsequently, he has summoned his son, Salim to the village and both of them started grocery shop therein. Subsequently some dishonesty cropped in his mind and he started pressing for return of his house and 1 1/2 bigha agricultural land but her husband refused to do so. The agricultural plot of the accused exists by the side of the plot of the deceased, hence he used to cultivate the same together. He had been ploughing these fields for the last three years and one day before the occurrence accused Abdul Karim asked her husband not to plough his field but her husband refused to do so. This enraged the accused and they threatened to teach him a lesson next day if he attempted to plough the field. Her husband did not care for it and challenged them to stop him if they had any courage to do so. On the date of occurrence in the early morning her husband had gone to plough the field with bullocks and plough and at about 7 A.M. the complainant and her son Mukhtar were going to provide him food there and when they reached near the field, they saw the accused Salim (A3) armed with an iron rod, Abdul Hamid (A-2)armed with a spade and Abdul Karim (A-1) armed with a Kassi proceeding towards their field hurling abuses at her husband and they started belabouring him with arms and their hands and injured him. He fell down on the ground. They kept on beating him there. Hearing shrieks of the complainant and her husband, her brother Chhotey who had come there for call of nature appeared there and several other co-villagers also arrived there and on their challenge the accused left the place running towards forest considering that her husband was dead. Later on she arranged for a charpai from the village and after keeping the injured thereon proceeded towards the police station in company of Rafiq, Rashid Alauddin, Munshi, Abdul Samad and reaching near village Etaua. On the way her husband breathed his last and then she had gone to the police station and lodged report at about 11.00 A.M. on the same day. Head Moharrir Jagdish Singh prepared check report and G.D. report (Ex. Ka.3) on the basis of oral information of the complainant in presence of S.I. D.D. Agarwal (PW.5) who took up the investigation immediately. He interrogated the complainant and then prepared inquest report, challan and photo of the Corpse (Ex. Ka.4 to Ka.6) and sealed the corpse and entrusted the same to constables for onward transmission to the hospital for postmortem examination alongwith necessary papers. He also prepared recovery memo (Ex. Ka. 7) for the bloodstained Chadar covering the corpse. Later on he went to the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ex. Ka.8) after inspecting the spot. He took sample and blood stained earth and sealed the same in separate containers (Exs. 1 and 2) after preparing recovery memo (Ex.Ka.9). Later on other witnesses were also interrogated and after concluding the investigation he submitted the charge-sheet against the accused. The accused kept on absconding and surrendered to the court later on. He proved statement of Smt. Mango recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code) vide Ex. Ka. 12 during trial. Dr. I.S. Tomar (PW.4) carried on postmortem examination of the corpse of the deceased on 13-4-1978 at about 3.15 P.M. and he found that the deceased was aged about 40 years and his death occurred within 1¼ days. He was average built and rigor mortis was present in the lower limbs whereas it passed of the upper limbs. He found following ante-mortem injuries on his person: