PARSHADI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were charged under Sections 147 and 307 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. and they were acquitted of the said charges. They were further charged under Sections 399 and 402 I.P.C. They have been found guilty under the aforesaid provisions of law. On the first count, four years R. I. has been awarded to each of the appellants. Three years R. I. was awarded to them under the second count. The two sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Appellants Pershadi, Pitamber, Mihi Lal and Babu have also been found guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 25 of the Arms Act and each of them has been sentenced to undergo R. I. for a period of one year. The sentence awarded to these appellants has also been made concurrent with the sentences awarded to them under Sections 399 and 482 I.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution case, shortly stated, is that on July 4, 1972 Station House Officer, Police Station Dadon Amar Das Sharma (P.W. 1) received information through an informant that some miscreants were going to assemble at the Canal Rest House at Kehra during the course of the coming night in order to commit dacoity at the house of one Inderjit Brahman. On receipt of this information, Amar Das Sharma sent Laturi Singh and Mukat Singh constables to guard the house of Inderjit Brahman. He also directed Bhudeo Sharma and Lachhman Singh constables to collect independent witnesses in the grove situate in the proximity of the Canal Rest House at Lehra. After making these arrangements Amar Das Sharma accompanied by police party consisting amongst others of Rampal Sharma (P.W. 2), H. C. Sharma (P.W. 5) proceeded to the spot at about 7-10 P. M. Some time thereafter the constables who had been sent to fetch independent witnesses also came there accompanied by a number of other persons including Prem Swarup (P. W. 3) and Bahori Lal (P. W. 4). The assembly on the side of the police was complete by 9-45 P. M. Mutual search was taken by the raiding party and nothing illegal was found on the person of any one of its members, Amar Das Sharma thereafter divided the entire group into three parts. He himself led the first group. Rampal Sharma was put in charge of the second group and constable Anang Pal was made the leader of the third party. Amar Das Sharma gave instructions to all the members of the police party to keep silent and not to light any match-stick or cigarette. He also gave a password to the members of the raiding party. It is alleged that at about 10.45 P. M., the appellants started converging in the rest house and they assembled in the verandah of the said Rest House. At this stage some one amongst the appellants is alleged to have said that Soran Kachhi, resident of Rampur has not turned up and it was getting late and that they should now proceed to commit the dacoity in the house of Inderjit Brahman. The raiding party which had been divided into three parts had surrounded the Rest House from three sides and one side of the Rest House had been left open. When the conversation stated above was heard by Amar Das Sharma he challenged the appellants that they were surrounded by the police party and that they should surrender themselves forthwith. At this stage, one of the appellants is said to have fired a shot towards Amar Das Sharma who replied by triggering his light pistol. The raiding party fell upon the appellants and caught hold of them. Country-made pistols with fire arms are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of Parshadi, Pitambar, Mihi-lal and Babu appellants. A recovery memo was prepared and was signed by the witnesses. Lakhan Singh and Sia Ram appellants were said to possess lathis or Dandas at the time of the arrest while Birbal appellant had a kulhari in his hand.

(3.) The prosecution in order to bring home the charge against the appellants examined as many as five witnesses They are Amar Das Sharma (P.W. 1), Ram Pal Sharma (P.W. 2), Prem Swaroop (P.W. 3), Bahori Lal (P.W. 4) and H. C. Sharma (P.W. 5). It would thus appear that out of the five prosecution witnesses, three are police officials and only two are independent witnesses.