MAHABALI SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal and connected appeal have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.4.1999 rendered by 8th Addl Sessions Judge Kheri in Sessions Trial No 137 of 1991 whereby the appellant Mahabali has been convicted for offences under section 302/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life followed by fine quantified at Rs 5000/ -. The appellant has further been convicted in ST No 138 of 1991 under section 25 Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo one year R.I.

(2.) IN the connected appeal preferred by the State of U.P. against the acquittal of the accused namely Surendra Pal Trivedi, Vimal Kumar and Shivendra Pratap Singh alias Pappu Singh, the judgment and order of the trial court dated 15.4.1999 has been assailed whereby the accused persons aforesaid have been acquitted of the offences under section 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC and 25 Arms Act.

(3.) THE written report dated 3.12.1990 is scribed by informant Satish Chandra Mishra addressed to the Station officer Police Station Neem Gaon District Lakhimpur Kheri alleging thereon that on the aforesaid date, his son Rakesh Mishra who was practising law in the district courts at Lakhimpur Kheri had told him at about 9 am that he has been called by the SI Indra Jeet Chauhan at the police outpost and he would proceed to district courts after calling on the Sub Inspector. He further alleged that since he was also to leave for School to attend his duties, he accompanied his son upto the crossing. On the crossing, his son proceeded towards the police outpost and as soon as he reached the gate of the outpost, the accused persons namely Surendra Pal Trivedi, Vimial Kumar, Mangali Singh, Mahabali Singh and Govind Pratap Singh who were armed with guns, opened indiscriminate fire at his son. After receiving fire arm injuries, his son Rakesh fell down on the ground inside the precincts of police outpost. It is further alleged that the occurrence was witnessed by various persons named in the written report. On being challenged by him and the witnesses, the accused persons escaped firing warning shots. He also alleged that after the accused persons had escaped, he rushed to the place where his son was lying and on being felt, it was found that he was already dead. The informant has also attributed the occurrence to old enmity with the accused persons. As a post script, it has been mentioned by the informant that the accused are persons of criminal proclivity and they have formed a clique and that there was imminent danger to his life and to the lives of his family.