LAWS(ALL)-2000-1-103

SHOBHA RAM Vs. STATE

Decided On January 25, 2000
SHOBHA RAM Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has arisen out of an order of conviction dated 16-12-1980 passed by Sri M. G. Godbole, Sessions Judge, Jaluan at Orai, in S.T. No. 65 of 1980 under Section 302 and 302/34, I.P.C. Both the appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life. Shobha Ram was sentenced simplicitor.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 8-4-1980, in the evening, the informant, Balaram, was sitting with his father, Ram Kishan including Devi Dayal alias Devi Din, Bhagwan Din sons of Bhoora and another distantly related grand-father Tularam on the Chabutara of his house. They were busy in deliberations. Nearby, on the ground, Bhoora son of Din Dayal Chamar, and Ram Charan son of Ghashita Chamar were also sitting. At about 6.00 p.m. Shobha Ram armed with a licensed gun and his brother Dharam Dass with a double barrel gun came from the side of the temple. They stood near the boundary wall. Dharam Dass exhorted that "the enemy is sitting. Kill him. He may not escape." Immediately, Shobha Ram fired upon Devi Dayal alias Devi Din. The fire struck Devi Dayal on his back and he fell down and died. All the witnesses present at the spot and Halke Singh son of Ram Dularey Singh, who was coming after taking water, exhorted the assailants, who took to their heels afterwards. The motive for the incident, as alleged in the F.I.R., is that Devi Dayal was involved in the murder of Ganga Prasad, maternal uncle of Dharam Dass and Shobha Ram and to avenge his murder the two appellants have murdered Devi Dayal.

(3.) The report of the incident, Ext. Ka-1 on the record, was lodged by Balram at about 10.00 p.m. on 8-4-1980 at P. S. Aata, District Jalaun. The distance between the spot of incident and the police station is six miles. After the registration of the case and preparation of chick report, Ext. Ka-4, the investigation was taken over by P.W. 5 D. N. Chaturvedi. After conclusion of all the formalities, charge-sheet, Ext. Ka-17, was submitted by him against both the appellants.