ASHARFI (IN JAIL) Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The solitary appellant Asharfi was put on trial by the learned Sessions Judge, Bareilly for committing an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. The appellant was tried with acquitted accused Nanki after being indicted of committing an offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. But by judgment dated 27.04.1982, it was the appellant who was found guilty of committing the offence under Section 302 I.P.C and after hearing the appellant under Section 235 Cr.P.C, the learned trial Court directed the appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. The appellant has preferred the present appeal to question the correctness of the findings and appropriateness of the sentence.

(2.) THE prosecution case emanates from Ex.- 1, the written report of P.W.-1 Hemraj, who was the full brother of the deceased Mohan. As per the prosecution story, the two brothers were sleeping at the tea-stall run by them in a wooden Jhopari. It is stated that in between 2.00 a.m. and 2.30 a.m. when the informant was fast asleep, he heard the cries of his brother and woke up to find that the present appellant and his father Nanki armed respectively with Garasa and Suja ( a sharp, round, pointed weapon) were attacking with their respective weapons his brother, Mohan. The informant claimed to have identified the two accused in the light of a lantern which was burning there and also stated that he attempted to catch them. However, the two accused made good their escape, but one of the prosecution witnesses, namely, Jhamman, (P.W.-3) who was attracted to the scene of occurrence and was coming with his torch light saw and identified the two accused in flash thereof. P.W.-3 also allegedly attempted to catch the accused, but could not. The informant stated that he came back to his shop and found that his brother Mohan was already dead and he had received injuries in his throat and head and those injuries were bleeding.

(3.) IT appears that on the basis of Ex.-1, the F.I.R. of the case, i.e., Ex.-ka-3 was drawn up and the investigation was proceeded with, during which, the investigating officer seized the lantern but handed the same over to P. W. 9 as may appear from the evidence of P.W. 1. The investigating officer also seized the soil soaked with blood and other incriminating articles from the scene of occurrence after preparing the seizer memo, Ex. Ka. 9. It further appears that the blood stained earth and other articles were sent for chemical examination to the Forensic Sceince Laboratory and that report at page 11 of the paper book shows that the seized articles from the scene of occurrence were found carrying human blood as may appear from Ex. Ka. 11.