HORI SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HORI Singh, the father, Har Govind Singh his son, Nau Bahar Singh his brother -in -law all socio criminis of Crime No. 325 of 2003 have filed this appeal challenging their convictions and sentences under Section 307/34 and 506 I.P.C. for ten years R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/ - each on first count and one year R.I. on the second count. They have further been ordered to undergo three months imprisonment in default of payment of fine by Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 7 Bijnor vide his impugned judgment dated 31 -7 -2006 passed in Sessions Trial No. 208 of 2004, State v. Hori Singh and Ors. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE thumb nail description of the prosecution case against the appellants are that Rikkhi Singh, father of informant Har Swaroop Singh had 28 Bigahas of land at Khasra No. 28. Out of the said 28 Bighas Rikkhi Singh had sold 20 Bighas of land to Nirmala Devi wife of Hori Singh his brother. Rest 8 Bighas of land were mutated on 11 -6 -2005 in the name of his own wife Vimla Devi. Puran Singh, the brother of the Rikkhi Singh had also 20 Bighas of land. On 7 -3 -2003 in the night Hori Singh, Har Govind Singh and Nau Bahar Singh brother -in -law of Hori Singh went to the field because they had suspicious that the other side will cut the crop. They were accompanied by Yogesh Kumar and Narendra Singh. At the field they met Hori Singh, his son Har Govind Singh and brother -in -law Nau Bahar Singh who started vetuparising them. When they were asked to desist from vetuparization, Nau Bahar Singh instigated the other two on which Har Govind Singh whisked out a country -made pistol from his pant pocket and fire a shot at the informant Har Swaroop. The shot, however, evaded the informant but caused injury to Narendra Singh in the head. Injured Narendra Singh was rushed to Jaspur Hospital from where he was referred to Vivekanand Hospital. Informant lodged the F.I.R. regarding the said incident on 8 -7 -2003 at 9.30 p.m. It was mentioned that incident was witnessed in the torch light. F.I.R. is Exhibit Ka -7 and GD entry Exhibit Ka -8. The ensued investigation resulted in the charge -sheet against accused appellants and they were committed to the Court of Sessions by IInd Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nagina for trial. Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 7, Bijnor in S.T. No. 108 of 2004, State v. Hori Singh and Ors., charged them with offences under Section 307/34, 504 I.P.C. which charges, was denied by the appellants accused who claimed to be tried.

(3.) ACCUSED in their statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. took the usual defence of false implication and examined Vinod Kumar D.W. 1 in their defence.