PAWAN KUMAR @ TAMATAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals emanate from common judgment and order dated 4.3.2004 passed by Dr. Manju Nigam, the then Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 1), Allahabad in S.T. No. 936 of 2000. State v. Pawan @ Tamatar and two others, under Section 302/ 34, I.P.C. and 30 Arms Act, (Case Crime No. 21 of 2000), and in S.T. No. 32 of 2002, State v. Vinod Kumar Tripathi. under Section 302/ 34, I.P.C., P.S. Kokhraj, district Kaushambi, whereby both the accused -appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 10,000 each, therefore, they have been heard and being decided together. Succinctly stated, the prosecution case is that on 31.1.2000 at about 2.30 p.m., complainant Ram Prakash Pandey son of late Hanuman Prasad Pandey, resident of Village Bidanpur, Police Station Kokhraj, district Kaushambi submitted a written report in Police Station Kokhraj stating that he is permanent resident of Village Bidanpur, Police Station Kokhraj, district Kaushambi. Today, he alongwith his wife Hem Lata, sons Pankaj Pandey, Surya Narain Pandey and servants Ram Pratap and Budh Ram had gone to Village for irrigating the agriculture field. His wife Hem Lata Pandey and servants Ram Pratap and Budh Ram were at the field, while he alongwith his two sons was at the tube -well. At about 2.00 p.m. Vinod Kumar Tripathi, son of Radhey Shyam Tripathi armed with a D.B.B.L. gun, his nephew Pawan @ Tamatar son of Ashok Tripathi carrying a S.B.B.L. gun alongwith Deepu son of Paras Nath came at the field and surrounded his wife. On her alarm they saw that Pawan fired a shot on her chest. She fell down and thereafter Vinod Kumar Tripathi shot fire from his gun on her chest and all the three accused persons made their escape good towards western side. This incident was witnessed by the complainant and his aforesaid companions. It has been further stated in the written report that his wife had deposed in a murder case against Vinod Kumar Tripathi and he was sentenced to imprisonment for life in that case. On account of this fact Vinod Kumar Tripathi and his family bore enmity with them.

(2.) ON the basis of this report case at Crime No. 21 of 2000, under Section 302, I.P.C. and 30 Arms Act was registered in Police Station Kokhraj, district Kaushambi, investigation whereof was taken up by Station Officer Arun Kumr Shukla. The investigating Officer reached at the spot, interrogated the complainant and eye -witnesses Pankaj Pandey and Surya Narain Pandey. He inspected the spot and prepared site -plan. He recovered an empty cartridge 12 bore and also seized plain and blood stained earth from the spot through memos. He instructed Sub -Inspector Ram Sakal Tiwari to conduct inquest of the deceased. After inquest the dead -body of the deceased was sent for post -mortem examination in a sealed cover alongwith usual papers. He arrested accused Pawan Kumar @ Tamatar and Deepu @ Akhilesh Pandey on 5.2.2000. Accused Pawan Kumar confessed his guilt and offered to get the S.B.B.L. gun used in the crime recovered. He took them to village Bidanpur and from near his residence he took out an S.B.B.L. gun from a Kothri. Dr. J.B. Singh on 1.2.2000 at 4.40 p.m. conducted autopsy on the corpse of the deceased. He found that 45 -years old deceased was thin built, her eyes and mouth were semi closed. Rigor Mortis was present in all the four limbs and there was no sign of decomposition. The doctor had found the following ante -mortem injuries on the person of the deceased:

(3.) ON transfer of Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, the investigation was taken over by Sub -Inspector N.N. Singh, who interrogated accused Ram Bahadur in Central Jail, Naini on 2.5.2000 and after completing investigation submitted charge -sheet against accused Pawan @ Tamatar and accused Deepu @ Akhilesh Pandey, under Section 302/ 34, I.P.C. and under Section 30 Arms Act against accused Ram Bahadur. Accused Vinod Kumar Tripathi could be apprehended by the police on 7.9.2001 and Sub -Inspector Rajeev Yadav submitted supplementary charge -sheet against him. The Investigating Officer had sent the sample of plain and blood stained earth seized from the spot for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Lucknow, who have opined that the samples appeared to be the same. The S.B.B.L. gun handed over by Pawan Kumar @ Tamatar bearing No. 12803 alongwith 20 pellets, two Motiwad and a Tickli as also two empties 12 bore were sent for examination to ballistic experts of F.S.L., Lucknow. After examination the Laboratory vide report dated 24.1.2000 has opined that empty cartridges E.C. -1 was fired from S.B.B.L. gun No. 12803, while the other cartridge E.C. -2 was not shot from that gun. The Laboratory could not give definite finding about the pellets and tickli. In another report the Serologist of the aforesaid Laboratory has found blood on the wearing apparels of the deceased and human blood on pellets and tickli. However, its origin could not be ascertained on account of disintegration of the blood.