LAWS(ALL)-2006-2-171

STATE OF U P Vs. AMAR SINGH

Decided On February 10, 2006
STATE OF U P Appellant
V/S
AMAR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State against the judgment and order dated 10 -3 -1980 passed by Sri I.P. Singh, the then Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in Sessions Trial No. 137 of 1977, acquitting the accused respondents Amar Singh, Rakam Singh, Sukhbir, Onkar alias Rirku, Iqbal, Ishwar and Krishna Pal of the offences under Sections 147/148/302/149 I.P.C. Out of them, Amar Singh, Sukhbir, Iqbal and Ishwar had died during the pendency of the appeal and the same has abated against them. The Court is presently concerned with the remaining three accused respondents, namely, Rakam Singh, Onkar alias Rirku and Krishnapal.

(2.) THE incident occurred on 7 -6 -1977 at about 7.30 a.m. at the outskirts of village Jalalabad, P.S. Muradnagar, District Ghaziabad and the F.I.R. was lodged the same day at 9 a.m. by Jogendra Singh PW -4, Rakam Singh and Onkar alias Rirku are real nephews of Amar Singh (deceased appellant). Risal grand -father of the deceased accused appellant Iqbal was the cousin brother of Amar Singh (deceased accused appellant). Ishwar was the nephew of Amar Singh, Krishna Pal accused is the grand -son of Amar Singh. Amar Singh and Vikram Singh (deceased of this incident) had contested the election of directorship of Cane Society in which Amar Singh was defeated by Vikram Singh. A case under Section 307 I.P.C. against Rajbir Singh (nephew of Shiv Charan PW -1) and Ram Pal (son of Shiv Charan PW -1), Vikram deceased and ten others (belonging to the group of Shiv Charan PW -1) started by Sukhbir Singh deceased accused appellant was pending in Meerut. Rirku and Karam Singh were prosecution witnesses in that case while Vikram Singh deceased was doing pairvy for himself and other co -accused. Rajvir and Rampal were convicted while others including Vikram Singh deceased were acquitted in that case. 7 -6 -1977 (the date of present occurrence) was fixed for hearing the two convict persons on the quantum of sentence. In that connection, Shiv Charan PW -1, his nephew Jagvir Singh PW -7 and Vikram Singh deceased left the village at about 7 a.m. to go to Meerut. When at about 7.30 a.m., they reached the Khera of the village where the fields of accused persons were situate, they saw all the accused persons near the tube -well Kotha of one of them, Amar Singh. Near the Khera and tube -well of Amar Singh, there was a culvert. When Vikram Singh deceased was 4 -5 paces ahead of that culvert and Shiv Charan PW -1 and Jagvir PW -7 were 4 -5 paces before the culvert, all the accused abused Vikram Singh and challenged to set him right. Saying so, they started assaulting him and took him to the vacant land near the tube -well of Amar Singh. At that time, Amar Singh was armed with a DBBL gun; Rakam Singh and Onkar Singh were armed with country made pistols Iqbal carried a Ballam; Ishwar carried a Jailli, whereas Sukbhir Singh and Krishna Pal were armed with lathis. Amar Singh, Rirku and Rakam Singh fired at Vikram Singh as a result of which he fell down. Thereafter, Amar Singh fired another shot on him from close range. Jaili and Ballam were wielded like lathis. Nawab Singh PW -2 also arrived there and witnessed the occurrence. Shiv Charan and Jagbir asked Nawab Singh to intervene and save the deceased as they feared that on account of enmity the accused could kill them also. Nawab Singh PW -2 advanced towards the accused persons but he was fired at. The aforesaid witnesses ran towards the village and narrated the incident to Vikram's nephew Jogendra PW -4 and Bijendra PW -10.

(3.) THE defence was of false implication due to enmity.