SURENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By judgment and order dated 13/15.2.1979 in S.T. No. 162 of 1975 IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad acquitted Sarnam Singh and Sawant Singh of the charges under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 Indian Penal Code with a benefit of doubt, and Surendra Singh, the present appellant, was convicted of the offence of murder under Sec. 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The charges framed against the accused were also under the same sequence.

(2.) The charges related to an occurrence where one Gyanendra Kumar son of Ram Sewak was shot at on 9.5.1975 at about 6 p.m. towards the north and in the open yard of the house of Ram Sewak. Ram Sewak happens to be the father of the deceased Gyanendra Kumar. The contention put forward by the prosecution was in the form that Gyanendra Kumar and Ram Sewak were sitting over their Chabutra when the three accused Surendra Singh, Sarnam Singh and Sawant Singh arrived in the lane; Surendra Singh began to abuse Gyanendra Kumar whereupon Gyanendra Kumar got up to go inside the house. Surendra Singh, who was armed with a Katta fired at him hitting in the left side of abdominal region. The other two accused were said to have accompanied him with Lathis. We need not go into the details about them as they have already been acquitted and that decision has become final. It may be mentioned here that no definite overt action was shown on their part and the situation taken to have been proved by the trial court, all related to the action of Surendra Singh. The prosecution contention further has been that there was some bad blood between the accused and Ram Sewak, and also may be one Jagannath Singh though the facts in this behalf were not mentioned in the first information report and were stated about only later on by P.W.1 Ram Sewak in his cross-examination. The death of Gyanendra Kumar is said to have taken after about 10 or 11 hours from the occurrence. The prosecution contention in this behalf has been that he was carried in a bullock-cart to the police station where Ram Sewak lodged the first information report and the Investigating officer also recorded statements of the informant as well as Gyanendra Kumar. This statement under Sec. 161 Criminal Procedure Code of Gyanendra Kumar was relied upon by the prosecution as a dying declaration but the trial court has turned it down as unworthy of credit and we have least hesitation in saying in the very beginning that the Statement was obviously a manufactured evidence and could not be relied upon. As to who is responsible for this wrong and what is the effect of it may be considered below.

(3.) According to the prosecution, Gyanendra Kumar and party was on their way to District Headquarter but when they reached near Tirwa, Gyanendra Kumar expired. The police of Indergarh, where the first information report was lodged was informed and thereafter necessary formalities of inquest report etc. was done.