- (1.) M. C. Jain, J. Appellant Arjun has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment by Sri S. N. Lal, the then I Addl. Sessions Judge, Azamgarh by the judgment dated 15-1-1981 passed in Sessions Trial No. 218 of 1979. His father Algoo and one Munib (cousin of appellant Arjun) were also tried with him but they were acquitted.
(2.) THE prosecution case, as unfolded from the FIR and evidence adduced in the Court, was that deceased Jagarnath had illicit relations with Panna, sister of the appellant Arjun and it was allegedly the cause of the incident. THE incident occurred on 22-3-1979 at about 7 a. m. in village Para Mobarakpur, P. S. Kopaganj, District Azamgarh. THE report was lodged by Dhannu-father of the deceased the same day at 9. 15 a. m. Dhannu also happened to die after this incident. THE distance of the Police Station from the place of occurrence was 3 miles. Algoo allegedly caught hold of the victim whereas Munib exhorted the real assailant appellant Arjun. Appellant Arjun pierced knife in the chest of the victim who dropped down dead instantaneously. THE deceased's father Dhannu, Gangadhar, Mannu and Banshraj with certain others allegedly witnessed the incident. On the lodging of the FIR, a case was registered and the police investigated the case as usual. The Investigating Officer was PW 7 S. I. Vishwanath Singh. The post-mortem over the deadbody of the deceased Jagarnath was conducted by PW 8 Dr. R. R. Rai on 23-3-1979 at 12 o'clock noon. The deceased was aged about 30 years and about 29 hours had passed since he died. The following ante-mortem injuries were found on his person: (1) Punctured wound with clean cut margins 3 cm x 1 cm on left side chest, just outer to mid chest. 6 cm medial to left nipple at 7 o'clock position. The wound was chest cavity deep. (2) Abrasion 3 cm x 2 cm on front of right knee. (3) Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on front of right leg lower part. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to ante-mortem injuries.
(3.) THE defence was of denial and of false implication owing to enmity. The prosecution examined as witnesses eight persons in all. Out of them PW 1 Gangadhar, PW 2 Banshraj and PW 3 Mannu were examined as eye-witnesses. However, P. W. 1 Gangadhar and PW 2 Banshraj denied to have witnessed the occurrence with their own eyes. The case largely depended upon the evidence of PW 3 Mannu. Dhannu, informant (who was also an eye-witness) could not be examined as he died after this incident.;