SUDARSHAN Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 13.7.2010 passed by Special Judge (E C Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia in Sessions Trial No.174 of 1998 (State v. Nathuni & others), convicting accused Sudarshan under Sections 148, 323/149, 302 and 342 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment; to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment; to undergo imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs.3000/-, in default thereof, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment respectively. Rest of the accused, namely, Deena, Parma (since deceased), Bhola, Prabhu, Parashuram, Suryabali (since deceased), Ambika and Sachita have been convicted under Sections 147, 323, 302/149 and 342 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment; to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment; to undergo imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs.3000/- each, in default thereof, one year rigorous imprisonment and to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment respectively. All sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) In the present case, name of the deceased is Prabhu, son of Kamta (PW-1) and Sarali Devi (PW-2). On 24.4.1997 at 5:50 am, a written report, Ex. Ka.1 was lodged by (PW-2), alleging in it that at about 3:00 am, when she and her husband were sleeping at the doorstep of their house; light was switched on; it was a full moonlight and her son Prabhu was sleeping on the roof of his friend Chhotak. On account of an old land dispute, accused persons carrying deadly weapons, like clubs, ballam, farsa and gandasa, reached to the roof of Chhotak and caused injuries to the deceased. She has alleged that Ramji Jaiswal, who was sleeping along with deceased, and the deceased both raised their cries and upon hearing the same, she, her husband Kamta (PW-1), Uma Shanker (PW-3), Ram Bilas (not-examined), Brij Kishore (PW-4) reached to the place of occurrence and saw accused Nathuni (died during pendency of trial) causing injuries to her son and bringing him down from the roof. She states that all the accused persons took the deceased along with them near the house of accused Nathuni, tied him up with a peg and caused several injuries to him. She states that when the deceased became unconscious, leaving him as it is, all the accused persons fled away from the spot. It has also been stated by her that she and other witnesses have intervened in the matter, but she too was beaten by the accused persons. Based on her written report, FIR Ex.Ka.16 was registered against the appellants, including three deceased accused persons, namely, Nathuni, Parma and Suryabali under Sections 147/148/149/342/323/302 of IPC.

(3.) Inquest on dead body of the deceased was conducted, vide Ex.Ka.10 on 24.4.1997 and the dead body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on 25.4.1997, vide Ex.Ka.3 by Dr A K Rai (PW-6).