HIRAWATI AND ANR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Written objections filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the trial court judgment and record.

(3.) It is argued by learned Counsel for the appellants that the incident has taken place in village Harisinghpur in the premises of co-accused Karan Singh whereas the eyewitnesses Raghuveer, Pragnath and Devpal belong to village Harpalpur, which was 1 1/2 kilometers from village Harisinghpur and they were the chance witnesses on the spot. The prosecution case that the appellants after beating the deceased-Kallu Singh pressed his neck with danda is belied by the postmortem report, which shows that there was a ligature mark on the neck, which is the cause of death. The dead body of the deceased was found in the premises of co-accused Karan Singh, who died during trial. It is submitted that the case of appellant Banwari, who was the sala of Karan Singh, is different from the case of Karan Singh. So far as appellant Smt. Hirawati is concerned, according to the eyewitnesses, she was pulling the testicles of the deceased at the time of incident, but there is no mark of injury on the testicles of the deceased. These facts about pressing the neck of the deceased and catching hold of testicles of the deceased have also not mentioned in the F.I.R. It is further contended that the appellants were on bail during trial. The incident is of year 1988.