LAWS(ALL)-1994-2-37

JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Decided On February 11, 1994
JARNAIL SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforesaid three matters arise out of the judgment and order dated 6-8-1979 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit, in Sessions Trial No. 46 of 1977. The aforesaid sessions trial was held in pursuance of the committal proceedings relating to case crime No. 154, Police Station Puranpur, district Pilibhit, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307, I.P.C.

(2.) Dalip Singh had lodged a first information report on 11-6-1976 at 7.45 p.m. relating to the incident which had happened on the same day at 4.00 p.m. in village Tulapur, Police Station Puranpur, district Pilibhit. The said first information report was lodged against accused (1) Jarnail Singh, accused (2) Lakhvir Singh (both armed with licensed Guns), accused (3) Jagdeo Singh (armed with country-made gun), accused (4) Devendra Singh (armed with country-made pistol), accused (5) Saudagar Singh (unarmed father of accused No. 1), accused (6) Singhara Singh (unarmed) with the allegations that at the instigation of accused Nos. 5, 6 and 7 accused Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 fired from their fire arms causing death of k/m. Paramjit (female child aged about five months) and causing injuries to Smt. Balvendra Kaur (mother of the deceased) and Mahendra Singh son of the informat. All seven accused had entered in the house of the informant to take revenge against informant by the Revenue Authority. After considering the evidence the trial Judge acquitted the accused Nos. 6 and 7 holding that they did not share common intention inasmuch as they were unarmed and not connected with the family of the other accused. The accused No. 7 Saudagar Singh father of the accused appellant Jarnail Singh died during the pendency of the trial and, therefore, the trial Judge held the trial as having abated as against him though holding that his participation was proved beyond doubt in the incident. He further held that death K/m. Paramjit (child aged about 5 months) was unintended and there was no common intention inasmuch as her death could not have been common object of the unlawful assembly. Consequently he has convicted and sentenced accused No. 1 Jarnail Singh, accused No. 2 Lakhvir Singh, accused No. 3 Jagdeo Singh and accused No. 4 Devendra Singh under Section 304 (Part II) read with Section 149, I.P.C. to five years R.I. under Section 307/149, I.P.C. to four years R.I. and under Section 148, I.P.C. to one year R.I. Against this conviction and sentence Criminal Appeal No. 2335 of 1979 has been preferred. The State of U. P., however, felt aggrieved by the acquittal of these four appellants of the charge under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. Therefore, Government Appeal No. 255 of 1980 has been preferred by the State of U. P. as regard this acquittal. The informant Dalip Singh feeling aggrieved by the acquittal of No. 6 Singhara Singh and No. 7 Himmat Singh have consequently filed Criminal Revision No. 1768 of 1979 challenging the said acquittal.

(3.) Shri G. S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the accused-appellants and respondents as well, Shri S. P. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State of U. P. and Shri A. D. Prabhakar, counsel for the informant have been heard at length in all the three aforesaid connected matters which are being disposed of by this judgment. The entire record has been thoroughly scrutinised.