BAIDHU Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellant-Baidhu is the sole accused who is survived out of five accused persons who were charged for the murder of Ram Dutt and Narain Deen. We have perused the evidence and gone through the judgment of the Trial Court as well as the High Court. We do not find any error in the judgments as regards the complicity of the accused in the incident. His presence at the scene of crime is undoubted. He was armed with a Lathi and was part of the entire group of persons who went to assault the deceased persons.

(3.) However, the learned counsel for the appellant-Baidhu submits that the circumstances of the case are such that appellant-Baidhu cannot be attributed with the intention to kill the deceased persons. Primarily, the learned counsel relies on the fact that the witnesses deposed that Baidhu was carrying a Lathi. PW-8 (Paras) the only witness who had deposed that Baidu had hit him. As stated earlier, the deceased persons are Ram Dutt and Narain Deen. As regards the injuries found on the deceased persons there are some lacerated abrasions, which may have been caused by Lathi or may not have been caused by Lathi because in the scuffle such injuries may have been caused due to falling on the ground or other causes. The learned counsel for the State argued that the appellant-Baidhu harboured and had intention to kill the deceased persons and, therefore, the conviction be maintained.