KALI CHARAN Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Kalicharan, Murli, Ninhkoo and Sohan have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 31/7/1979 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Sessions Trial No. 37 of 1979 whereby the appellant Ninhkoo was convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. while appellants Kali Charan, Murli and Sohan were convicted under Section 302/34, I.P.C. but all the appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life under the respective counts.

(2.) The charge against the appellants was that on 28/8/1978 at 8 P.M. in village Harriya, P.S. Kandhupur District Azamgarh one Santoo was done to death on whom appellant Ninhkoo fired with a country made pistol and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. and the other appellants shared common intention and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34, I.P.C.

(3.) The prosecution case is that Murli and Ninhkoo being brothers had two supporters, Sohan and Kali Charan. All the four appellants have been arrayed as co-accused in some cases. There was a dispute between Sheopujan and Barsati about the land. The aforesaid Sheopujan and Barsati alongwith another were arrested in that connection. Proceedings U/s. 107/116, Cr. P.C. were drawn between Munni and others on one hand and Barsati and others on the other hand. It is said that Santoo deceased was supporting Barsan in the said litigation. In the mean time one Jhinnu having some property, died issueless giving rise to claim by Santoo and P.W. 2 Monai that they were nephews of Jhinnu and wanted the land for cultivation as they were looking after it. It is said however, Jhinnu has executed some documents in favour of Santoo deceased. Therefore, after the death of Jhinnu which took place about one and half months prior to the murder of Santoo; the said deceased Santoo filed an application for mutation of his name on the property of late Jhinnu. The accused Ninhkoo however, claims that his son had been adopted by Jhinnu and therefore, filed an application for mutation with regard to the property of Jhinnu. Both parties were consequently contesting their mutation matter and enough bad blood was flowing between two sides and quarrel had taken place. Santoo and Monai claimed possession over Jhinnus plots during life time of Jhinnu. But it is said that after the murder of Santoo the possession went to Ninhkoo accused.