SHRIPAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ravikaran, Shripal and Sehdev who were convicted by Mr. V.S. Kulshrestha the then IV Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahrvide his judgment and order dated 25.9.1979 under Sections 326/34 IPC and 324/34 IPC and were sentenced to undergo R. I. for a period of three years under Section 326/34 and for a period of two years under Section 324/34 IPC each have come up in appeal before this Court.

(2.) It appears that during the pendency of the appeal, which was pending before this Court, ever since the year 1979 accused Shripal had died as per report dated 14.6.1994 received from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr. It is said that the accused Shripal has since been killed in police encounter and accused Sehdev has died in his natural death, the appeal against these persons namely Shripal, and Sehdev had, therefore, abated. The appeal proceeded as against the accused Ravikaran.

(3.) Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for the accused Ravikaran has vehemently argued before me that as many as 8 persons as also one unnamed were mentioned as culprits in the FIR. The police had challaned only 7 persons and had left the eight accused person namely Nanhey, who was related as brother-in-law of accused Sehdev. After a needful trial, the learned Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, had acquitted 4 of the accused persons namely, Chanderpal, Rajbir, Harbans, Baijit. It was argued that the role of accused Rajbir as stated by the injured Tejpal Singh in his statement before the Court below, was identical to that, of the Ravikaran who was an appellant before this Court. It was argued on behalf of the appellant that there was no justification for the learned Court below to convict the accused-appellant Ravikaran when the co-accused Rajbir was left over.