DEENA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by Deena alias Din Dayal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court convicting and sentencing him.

(2.) The case for the prosecution is that on the night of the 20th and 21st June, 1971 the deceased Nainsukh, his brother Hari Singh, his distant uncle Tika Ram, Chandra Pal daughter"s son of Tika Ram and Chokhey slept on the platform of the Chaupal in village Jar. According to the prosecution a lantern has hanging on the platform from the branch of a Neem tree. In the morning at about 4 a.m. the appellant Deena and four others came to the Chaupal of Nainsukh. The dogs began to bark as a result of which Hari Singh (P.W.1) and others were awakened. Deena and his associates carried pistol and electric torches. Deena challenged Nainsukh saying that he would be taught a lesson for appearing as a witness and fired his pistol striking Nainsukh on his head. Hari Singh and Chandra Pal shouted for help. They were also injured. After hearing the alaram Nihal Singh, Panna Lal and others reached the place of the incident but before their arrival the accused had made good their escape.

(3.) The First Information Report was written by Bharat Singh on the dictation of Hari Singh. The injured witness Hari Singh and Chandra Pal then went to Etah Police Station where the report Ex. Ka-4 was handed over at Police Station Kotwali at 9.05 a.m. on 21st June, 1971. The Police Officer took up the investigation and reached the scene at about 1.30 p.m. He found the dead body of Nainsukh and held the inquest, prepared the site plan and recovered the material objects Nihal Singh, P. W. 2, produced the lantern before the Investigating Officer which was burning at the time the occurrence took place. A shell of used cartridge was also recovered from the scene.