JAMAL AHMAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present four appellants, viz., Jamal Ahmad, Sajjad Ahmad, Aziz Ahmad alias Lallu and Javed Ahmad Khan were tried along with Quresh Ahmad Khan,Razi Ahmad Khan and Babu Khan for the murder of Fakhrul Hasan alias Fakku son of Sri Izhar Alam alias Munna Miyan. THE murder of Fakhrul Hasan alias Fakku was said to have been committed on 14-3-1976 at 3.30 PM. THE father of Fakhrul Hasan, who lodged the first information report was alleged to have received the information of murder at about 5 PM at his Chakki and thereafter he was alleged to have lodged the first information report on that very day at 5.45 PM. THE distance between the place of occurrence and PS Manikpur where the report was lodged was five miles. THE report was alleged to have been scribed by Shah Parvez, the nephew of the informant. THE informant claimed to have gone to the Police Station himself along with his nephew Israr Husain.

(2.) THE occurrence had taken place in village Oonchgaon which is also known as Mubarakpur within the circle of PS Manikpur, District Pratapgarh. THE post-mortem on the body of the deceased was done by Dr. R. N. Katiyar (PW 9) on 15-3-1976 at 11.30 AM. THE prosecution in support of its case examined 16 witnesses. On behalf of the defence Sri R. K. Sharma (DW 1) was produced. As indicated hereinbefore seven persons were accused before the learned court below. Out of these seven persons four were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge and the remaining three were acquitted. All the seven persons who were tried by the learned Sessions Judge belonged to the same family and their relationship with each other would be evident from the following pedigree;- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_185_ACRR_1979Image1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) THUS according to the medical evidence the deceased had on his person gun-shot wounds and incised wounds. Around gunshot wounds blackening was present. The learned Sessions Judge believed the testimony of PWs 1 arid 2 whom he found to be neither partisan towards the complainants side nor inimical against the accused. He, therefore, found that conviction of the appellants could be based upon the independent testimony of PWs 1 and 2. He also believed the testimony of PW 4 Musa Khan who was alleged to have been the person who last saw the deceased in the company of appellant Jamal Ahmad. The learned Sessions Judge also believed the motive for the crime although he observed that in view of the presence of eye-witnesses motive was immaterial.