MOOL CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This criminal appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 4.8.1981 passed in Sessions Trial No. 545 of 1977 by Sri Sanwal Singh, the then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Etah convicting and sentencing appellants Mool Chandra, Satish Chandra, Mukesh and Ram Khilari for six years' rigorous imprisonment each.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, as per the first information report, was that on 24.8.1976 at 7.00 a.m., Kali Charan complainant, lodged the written first information report alleging that his house Govind Bhawan was situated near Varshney School, wherein he was living with his family. In the relevant night, after the rain fall, at about 2.00 a.m., seven miscreants infiltrated by scaling the eastern wall and coming in through the stair-case. THE panels of the door of the stair-case could not be closed due to moisture and rains. THE miscreants entered the house and opened the eastern door. Some of the miscreants had wrapped dhatas on their faces. THE miscreants abused the inmates of the house and said that you were harbouring the criminals on their demand when they threatened to murder the wife and the son of the complainant, the keys were made over to them. THEreafter they looted and committed dacoity for half an hours in the light of the torches flashed by them and took charge of the utensils and clothes kept in the boxes and after bundling them up took them away. Shashi Kant son of complainant, was ill and, therefore, a lantern was kept burning and the dacoits were also flashing torches while taking search of the house. THEy heaped the looted articles in the verandah. During all these activities, the dhatas of those dacoits, who had taken the said precaution, were unfurled and, as such, in the light of the lantern and torches, the complainant and others fully saw the faces and collected the feature of the dacoits. THE complainant, Smt. Kiran Devi, wife of the complainant and Sharad Kumari, his daughter, were nominated in the first information report as witnesses and the long lists of articles were given which have been looted away. THE case was registered at the concerned police station. It is also alleged that before the investigation started, a supplementary list (Ext. Ka-2) of the looted articles was given. THE investigation was conducted and the Investigating Officer prepared the site plan of the spot.

(3.) THE accused persons in their statements recorded under Section 313, Cr. P.C., reiterated their innocence and submitted that they did not commit the dacoity. It was also stated by them that they were the victims of police atrocities and enmity. Accused Mukesh had stated that he had a case against the Investigating Officer Kalbey Ali under Section 332, I.P.C. and, as such, he was fictitiously sent up. It was also said by him that the witnesses knew him from before and he used to come with Shashi Kant and was known to all the witnesses. He also added that the hotel of his uncle was there near the residence of the complainant and field was also situated nearby. THE defence of accused Satish Chandra was that he had studied in Gandhi Smark School and was having tuition from complainant Master Kali Charan whom he could not pay the tuition fee for the last month and, as such, the complainant falsely roped him in this case. Accused Ram Khilari stated that the complainant had a she-buffalo and he had his field nearby. She-buffalo of the complainant damaged his crop due to which some altercation had ensured between the parties and ultimately he was falsely implicated. It was also stated by him that the witnesses from before knew him.