SHANKAR LAL SHARMA Vs. LACHHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Shankar Lal, a private complainant filed this revision against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 15-1-1979 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura where by he has acquitted Lachhaman, Chandrapal and Rishi Kumar accused respondents, of all the charges leveled against them in a double murder case.

(2.) All the three accused persons were charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code read with section 34 Indian Penal Code for committing the murders of Sheo Charan and Makhan of their own village-Iroli Junardar, P.S. Surir, district Mathura on 9-1-1978 at 3 P.M. on the chabutra of one Manohar Lal of the same village. Rishi Kumar accused was further charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code for committing murders of the aforesaid persons. Lachhaman accused was charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code read with section 109 Indian Penal Code for bringing his gun on the roof from which it is alleged that the deceased were shot dead. A written report (Ex. Ka. 1) is said to have been lodged at 5.30 P.M. on the same day i.e. 9-1-1978. The matter was investigated by Sulan Singh S.O. P.W. 10, Post-mortem examinations on the bodies of both the deceased were conducted by Dr. M.K. Rawat, P.W. 5 on 10.1.78 at 4.30 and 5 P.M. The doctor found 7 gun shot wounds on the body of Sheo Charan, 2 multiple and 3 grin shot wounds on the body of Makhan Lal, deceased. Ten witnesses were produced on behalf of the prosecution in support of its case out of whom Shankar Lal P.W. 1, Babu Lal P.W. 2, Vidhya. Ram P.W. 3 and Dhan Pal P.W. 4 are the eye witnesses of the occurrence. The remaining witnesses are Chhotey Lal P.W. 6, Damodar-Lekhpal P.W. 7. Ninnoni Singh constable clerk-P.W. 8, and Om Prakash Saraswat P.W. 9. Rest of the witnesses are aforesaid investigating officer and doctor. Mr. Om Prakash Saraswat, C.W. 1 was summoned as Court witness.

(3.) The accused persons denied the prosecution story and state4 that the daughter of Babu Lal (P.W. 2) Km. Surmai was close to the accused Chandra Pal and thus Babu Lal had grudge with the accused, who are real brothers. According to them, their late father Bhoodar Mal carried money lending business and Shankar Lal P.W. 1 was on bad terms with their father. There was litigation between the parties. According to accused Rishi Kumar, he had moved an application (Ex. Kha. 5) against Dhanpal son of Sheo Charan, Sheo Charan, Ram Swaroop and others under Rule 115 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act for cancellation of their pattas, which was unlawfully obtained by them from the Pradhan Gram Samaj. They also filed a copy of application (Ex. Kha-6) moved by Charan Lal. They did not examine any witness in defence. Rishi Kumar took the plea of alibi but he did not examine any witness. The suggestion of the accused persons is that the deceased were murdered at some different place in the dark hours of the evening by some unknown persons but the accused persons have been implicated falsely in this case as they are the rich families of the village and some villagers bear grudge with them. They further stated that the F.I.R. of this case was prepared with the help of Police Officer next day in the morning.