ARVIND SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Devendra Pratap Singh, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant, Sri Ajit Ray, learned AGA and perused the record.

(2.) This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.02.1996, passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat, in Sessions Trial No. 26/89 (State v Arvind and others), under Sections 302 and 120B IPC, Police Station Roora, District Kanpur Dehat by which the accused-appellant namely Arvind Singh has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of fine one year additional rigorous imprisonment, whereas he has been acquitted from the charge under Section 120B IPC.

(3.) Brief facts of the case is that a first information report was lodged by Munnu Singh (Home Guard) in respect of a criminal incident dated 24.08.1988 at 08:45 PM. The informant is a Home Guard in the village Maizu Mau, Police Station Roora, was on surveillance duty with Home Guards Ghasite Lal, Pancham Lal and Govind Singh in the town and when they were coming from the side of canal to the railway station, at about 08:45 PM, reached in front of town area office on the road. They heard somebody crying Bachao-Bachao from the side of shop of Naresh Kumar. All ran towards the sound raising alarm. They saw that on the road side two persons having Gandasa and axe were assaulting a person. They challenged and seeing them, both the persons ran towards the north of the street and despite efforts made by them, they could not be caught. They saw two persons in the light of torch and electricity and can identify them if they come before them. They saw that a person was lying dead on the spot sustaining injuries. The injuries were bleeding. Many persons reached there and seeing the deceased they said that the deceased person was Aditiya Kumar son of Krishna Bihari Dixit of town Roora. The informant, leaving behind the other Home Guards there, gave an oral information in the police station and on the basis of it, the offence was registered under Section 302 IPC against two unknown persons. On investigation, names of accused persons Arvind Singh, Babua and Sunil Singh came in light. The dead body was taken into possession, inquest report and necessary papers for postmortem was prepared, the dead body was sealed and sent to the District Hospital, Kanpur Nagar for postmortem. The torch of the guard was taken into possession, memo was prepared and the torch was delivered back to him. Blood stained and plain earth was collected from the spot and was kept in two separate containers which were sealed and memo was prepared. After taking the evidence of the witnesses and completing the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against all the three accused persons for the offence under Sections 302 and 120B IPC. Charges were framed for the aforesaid offences against all the accused persons who denied charges and claimed trial. It appears from the impugned judgment that after six witnesses were examined, accused Jaipal Singh @ Bauwa absconded and the trial court separated his file by order dated 29.01.1993, registered as ST No. 26A/89 and thereafter the statement of other witnesses were recorded. On completion of the prosecution evidence, the Statement of the two accused persons were recorded under Section 313 CrPC who put forward the case of denial and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity and with the consultation of the police, the report was lodged. In defence, the accused persons have filed Ext. Kh-1 which is copy of FIR under section 171/332 IPC against Sone Lal, lodged by accused Ramswaroop for committing marpeet and causing obstruction in election process. The learned trial court has noted that accused is neither named nor it has any relation with him.