HARGOVIND Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants Hargovind, Sohan Lal and Chhotey Lal have filed this criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 07.11.1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in S.T. No.256/1991, whereby all of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years each along with a fine of Rs.500/ - under Section 307/34 IPC.

(2.) ACCORDING to prosecution case, the informant Ram Pal lodged an FIR on 27.10.1989 with the allegation that he was having enmity with the appellant No.2 Sohan Lal since prior to the occurrence. On 27.10.1989, when his father was ploughing his field and his sister Premwati was also present there at about 8.00 AM, the appellant Sohan Lal came armed with licensed gun along with the appellant No.1 Hargovind armed with spear and Chhotey Lal armed with "lathi". It is stated that some altercation took place between them with regard to ploughing of field and during the altercation, the appellant Sohan Lal opened fire with his licensed gun. The appellant Hargovind also assaulted his father with spear. When the sister Premwati tried to save her father, the appellant Chhotey Lal assaulted her with "lathi". In the meantime, several persons from the nearby places reached there and thereupon all the appellants escaped towards south of the village. The informant's father received fire arm injury on his right leg while he also received injury of spear on his forehead. On the basis of the written information, the police registered a case against the appellants and proceeded to investigate the matter. The Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, prepared site plan and interrogated the informant as well as other witnesses. The injured persons were sent to the hospital for medical examination. The Investigating Officer after completion of investigation submitted charge -sheet.

(3.) DURING the course of trial, the prosecution examined seven witnesses while the appellants also examined two witnesses in defence. The learned trial court on appraisal of evidence found the charge of offence of attempt to commit murder proved against all the appellants and convicted them, as aforesaid.