RAJ NARAIN YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 29 accused were put up for trial before II Addl. Sessions Judge. Ballia in Sessions Trial No. 56 of 1978 and at the con- - clusion of the trial by the judgment dated 4-4-1979 the learned Trial Judge has convicted 10 appellants, namely, (1) Raj Narain (2) Deepa (3) Chhangur, (4)(Ram Dayal (5) Raja Ram (6) Jairam (7) Hareram (8) Rarnnath (9) Baliram and (10) Jagarnath under section 302 IPC read with section 149 IPC and various other sections such as under section 307 IPC, 323, 324, 452, 436, 147, 148, 149 IPC. It may be mentioned here that so far as Raj Narain is concerned he was convicted under section 302 IPC simpliciter. All the appellants have the sentence of Life Imprisonment on the major charge and various terms of Rigorous Imprisonment with regard to other charges which shall be mentioned and discussed at the relevant stage in this judgment. The informant Sudama has filed revision against the acquittal of 19 respondents, namely, Baleshwar Yadav, Dhup Narain Yadav, Vishwanath Yadav, Rajnath Yadav, Shankar Yadav, Chhiceshwar Yadav, Rameshwar Yadav, Parmeshwar Yadav, Bashisht Pandey, Ram Biyas Pandey, Sudarshan Yadav, Bir Bahadur Yadav, Bishu Yadav, Uma Yadav, Shewadhar Yadav, Ram Dahin Vadav, Hare Ram Yadav, Sheonath Yadav and Surajdin Yadav on the charges framed against them also. Since both the matters arise out of the same case, they are being disposed of together.

(2.) SRI Gopal Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the appellants and SRI S. P. Singh, learned Government Advocate for the respective parties have been heard. The entire record has been examined. It may be noted here that against the acquittal of the aforesaid 19 persons the State of U. P. have not filed any appeal and the finding recorded by the learned Trial Judge with regard to the acquittal of those accused has become final between the State and the accused.

(3.) IT may be mentioned here at the out-set that from the evidence produced during the trial specific roles were attributable only to the ten appellants and, therefore, the learned trial Judge gave benefit of doubt to 19 accused who are respondents in the revision and recorded conviction as detailed above with regard to the ten appellants. The further fact to be noted here is that Baleshwar accused who was said to have been present and who instigated all the accused, to use the exact words mentioned in the FIR 'MAN SE MAR DO VA PALANT PHUNK DO HAM DEKH LENGE' has been acquitted only the trial Judge on the finding that the evidence against him was weak in nature and that on the facts and circumstances it was neither accessary nor expedient to expect that the action of the accused would be dependent only on the said instigation of Baleshwar accused. The said acquittal of Baleshwar accused and for that matter, rest of the accused have not been challenged by the State of U. P. in the appeal.