BRIJ LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1-12-1982 recorded by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Sessions Trial No. 563 of 1981. THE learned trial Judge convicted all the 5 appellants under Sec tions 302/149 and 307/149, I. P. C. and sen tenced them to life imprisonment under the first count and to R. I. for 4years under the second.

(2.) BRIJ Lal, Babu Ram and Gokil were further convicted under Section 148,1. P. C. and sentenced to R. I. for 2 years each while Molu and Bhopal were also further con victed under Section 147, I. P. C. and sen tenced to R. I. for one year each. The sen tences were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) IT appears from the records that the matter was placed before Hon'ble single Judge on 13-1-1998 and again on 18-3-1998 wherein orders were recorded to place the matter before the Division Bench as the appeal was cognizable by a Division Bench. IT was placed before the Division Bench on 20-8-1998 but on that date, learned Counsel was not ready to argue. The Division Bench also held that when one of the Judges who recorded the earlier judgment was still available, it should be placed before a Division Bench in which that Hon'ble Judge was a mem ber. Accordingly, the matter was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice and it was directed that the matter will be heard before the Bench of Hon. Giridhar Malviya and Hon. R. N. Ray, JJ. (both of them have now retired), on 29-4-1998, the mat ter came up before the nominated Bench. Hon. Ray, J. was on the verge of retire ment. There had been a prayer for ad journment made on behalf of the appel lants and as such the matter was directed to be put up before the appropriate Bench. Finally the matter came up before the Hon'ble Chief Justice on the question of fresh nomination, if necessary, and by an order dated 15-3-1999, it was directed to be placed before the Bench dealing with criminal appeals. The matter came up before a Division Bench on 6-5-1999 and Hon'ble Kamal Kishore, J. had been a member of that Bench. His lordship was the trial Judge in the instant case and as such a fresh nomination was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice on 25-5- 1999 and thereafter the matter came up for hearing again, but in the absence of lawyers repre senting the appellants, the Court ap pointed an amicus curiae. But before he could take up, a fresh appearance was made by learned Counsel appointed by the appellants and the matter was heard finally on 10th and 19th August, 1999.