CHHEDA LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. C. Jain, J. The appellant is one Chheda Lal who has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 16- 2- 1981 passed by Sri Usha Kant Verma, the then Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat in Sessions Trial No. 200 of 1980, State v. Chheda Lal. He has been convicted under Section 326 I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo four years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE accused appellant allegedly killed Ram Shankar in village Bilgavan, P. S. Sajeti, District Kanpur on 19-2-1980 at about 8 p. m. by shooting. THE report was lodged by Gore Lal, brother of the deceased the same night at 2. 50 a. m. THE appellant had brought the victim with him and after half an hour, sound of firing was heard from his house. THE witnesses ran to the house of the appellant on hearing the sound of firing and found Ram Shankar to be injured by shot. He had been hit in his leg and the pellets had been pierced through and through. On being asked, he stated that Chheda Lal appellant complained that he had been backbiting him in the village and then opened fire on him. Gore Lal and others searched for Chheda Lal. He, however, ran away from his house. THE victim because of excessive bleeding became unconscious after some time. Originally, a case under Section 307 IPC was registered. However, he after having been removed to the hospital, died and the case was converted into that of Section 302 IPC.

(3.) THE prosecution in all examined six witnesses. Gorelal PW 1 is the brother of the deceased and Subedar PW 2 is another witness of fact, whose name finds place in the FIR also. Both of them proved that the accused Chheda Lal had taken with him Ram Shankar and after half an hour the sound of shot had been heard from the house of the accused-appellant. THEy rushed and saw Ram Shankar lying injured in the Dalan of the appellant, adjacent to chabutara. He was profusely bleeding and on being inquired, disclosed that Chheda Lal appellant charged him of backbiting and opened shot on him. A lighted lantern was hanging at the gate of the appellant at that time. Both of them also saw the appellant running from the spot.