SHYAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment impugned in this appeal is dated 8 -12 -1981 passed by Sri Manphool Singh, the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No. 201 of 1980. Five persons, namely, (i) Shyam, (ii) Gulab, (iii) Baladin, (iv) Suraj and (v) Hari Singh were booked for trial in the said case. Baladin died during the trial. The remaining four were convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. and each sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the murder of one Mansha. Shyam, Gulab and Suraj were also convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. and each sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. Hari Singh was also convicted under Section 147 I.P.C. and sentenced to one years' rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the appeal, Shyam and Gulab appellants died. The appeal in respect of Gulab was abated under order dated 3 -11 -2003 and in respect of Shyam under order dated 19 -2 -2004. Presently, the Court is concerned only with appellants Suraj and Hari Singh. Accused Gulab and Baladin were real brothers.

(3.) AS to the motive part, it was the dispute or litigation between Mansha and Shyam accused in respect of landed property belonging to Hira Lal (father -in -law of Shyam). Hira Lal had died about 3 or 4 years before this occurrence and his daughter Dassi with her husband Shyam accused had started living in her parents' village i.e., the village of incident for about a year before the occurrence. A litigation was going on between Shyam accused and Mansha in the consolidation Court at the time of incident. Baladin and his brother Gulab accused were also actively supporting Shyam accused in this litigation, while the other two, namely, Suraj and Hari Singh had also been doing pairvi for him. Mansha was the younger brother of Hira Lal and he was a hurdle in the way of the accused in usurping the land of Hira Lal (father -in -law of Shyam accused). The prosecution case was that Hira Lal being issueness had transferred his agricultural holding in the name of Mansha deceased to the exclusion of his son -in -law Shyam accused. It was also the prosecution case that Hira Lal had kept a lady who had brought Dassi with her and the marriage of Shyam with Dassi was performed. But for the transfer of his land, Hira Lal preferred his brother Mansha. The land of Hira Lal came to be mutated in the name of Mansha in the consolidation proceedings which resulted in the litigation between Mansha and Shyam. So, it was the background relating to motive.