ASHOK SRIVASTAVA, J. - (1.) THE present appeal arises out of judgement dated 28.07.1983 passed by learned Sessions Judge Mathura in Session Trial No. 239 of 1982 by which the six appellants were held guilty of committing offence under Section 302/149 I.P.C. and each of them was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. There were individual orders of conviction also, like, appellant Mahabir Singh and Phal Singh were held guilty also under Section 148 I.P.C. and each of them was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. Likewise, appellant Jaipal Singh was held guilty of committing offences under Sections 147 and 379 I.P.C. and was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and two years on the two respective counts. The remaining appellants, namely, Om Prakash, Raj Pal and Satya Pal were also held guilty of committing the offence under Section 147 I.P.C. and each of them was also directed to suffer similar term of imprisonment like Jaipal Singh.
(2.) THE prosecution case is contained in Ext. Ka.-1, the written report of Kalyan Singh (P.W.-1), who happened to be the father of deceased Mohan Singh. It was stated that Brijendra Singh son of acquitted accused Har Charan, who had also been put on trial with appellants, had been murdered some 14-15 years back and the deceased Mohan Singh had been arrayed as an accused in that murder trial. Gopi Chand, father of appellants Mahabir Singh, Phal Singh and Jaipal Singh had deposed in support of the prosecution in that murder trial against the accused persons. But, in spite of that, the deceased Mohan Singh was acquitted. The second incident of murder of Boga Jatav had taken place in which, appellants Mahabir Singh, Phal Singh, Jai Pal Singh and Gopi Chand, the father of appellants Mahabir Singh, Phal Singh and Jai Pal Singh, had been arrayed as accused and in that trial the deceased had deposed in support of the prosecution and appellant Mahabir Singh had been convicted. These are the reasons, due to which the appellants, as per allegation, were treating the deceased as their staunch enemy. Besides, one further reason was assigned that acquitted accused Har Charan had contested the election of Pradhanship of the village. His candidature was opposed by Mohan Singh (the deceased) who also contested the said election. Har Charnan lost in that election. In the above background of enmity and ill-will, Kalyan Singh (P.W.-1) was stating that on 26.06.1982, at about 8.00 a.m., the deceased after having taken his bath at the tube-well, picked up his licenced gun and the cartridge strip and was coming from his tube-well to his house situate in the village. Appellants Phal Singh and Mahabir Singh alongwith appellants Om Prakash and Gopi Chand, were clearing the irrigation channel of their field, whereas appellant Raj Pal and Satya Pal were scraping grass in their respective neighbouring fields. Jaipal Singh appellant was plucking the Moong pods from his field. Om Prakash was also engaged in plucking of the same pods. When deceased Mohand Singh reached on the ridge of the field of appellants Om prakash and Gopi Chand, i.e., the field of the father of Mahabir Singh, Phal Singh and Jaipal Singh, it is alleged, both appellants Jaipal Singh and Om Prakash caught him by his hands whereas appellant Om Prakash came into his back and put his arm around him and put him down on the ground. Appellants Jaipal Singh and Om Prakash caught each of the hands of the deceased while appellants Raj Pal and Satya Pal, who were scraping grass in the nearby filed, came running and caught hold of each of the legs of the deceased Mohan Singh. Appellant Raj Pal Singh, thereafter, dealt a Bhala blow to Mohan Singh whereas appellants Phal Singh and Mahabir Singh gave blows with Phawara on the neck of the deceased to severe it from the trunk.
(3.) THERE was a hue and cry raised by Mohan Singh during that course and that attracted Bani Singh (P.W.-2) who was at his tube-well and Laxman Singh (not examine) who ran towards the deceased to save him. The daughter of the deceased, namely, Lajjawati also raised her cries, but the accused persons in order to scaring away the witnesses and also with an intent to kill the informant picked up the gun and cartridges of the deceased and started firing blank. The acquitted appellant Har Charan also fired from his own licenced gun as a result of which the informant and other witnesses did not proceed further to intervene into the occurrence.;