R. K. Shukla,J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30-7-1977, passed by the Sessions Judge. Etah, whereby he has acquitted Todi and Manoon accused of the charge under section 302/34 IPC but convicted Lala Ram appellant under section 302 IPC and sentenced him to lite imprisonment.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 11-4-1976 complainant Kamta Prasad, his brother Narsingh Pal and his father Hakim Singh narvested upto 1 p. m. their gram crop standing in a portion of their Chak situate just on the boundary of their village Sikara. Thereafter they went to take their food at their house. At about 4.30 p. m. when they went back to their Chafe to collect the aforesaid harvested gram crop, they found that accused Todi and Manoon of the adjoining village Nagla Rajan had pushed their cattle in the gram field and the cattle were damaging the harvested gram crop. When the complainant protested, then abuses started between the parties and Todi accused plied Lathi on Hakim Singh. Ram Chandra, Moti and Pokhpal. who were in the neighbouring field tried to mediate. At that very time, Lala Ram appellant came running from Nagla Rajan and fired a shot at Hakim Singh, father of the complainant. He received gunshot injuries in his abdomen and fell down on the ground. Thereafter all the accused ran away. Hakim Singh was taken to police station Ganjdundwara where an FIR was lodged on 11-4-1976 at about 7.30 p. m. and a case was registered under section 307 IPC. The injured Hakim Singh was sent to Ganjdundwara dispensary but the Medical Officer was not present and the Compounder after dressing the wound, advised the complainant to take him to the district hospital, Etah. The complainant arranged for a private bus to take the injured to Etah ; but the injured Hakim Singh died near the town hall. The complainant came back with his body to the police station. The crime was converted from section 307 to 302 IPC. Sri Ram Bachan Tewari PW 6 I. O. was present at the police station. He took up the investigation, prepared the inquest report and sent the body for post mortem examination. Dr. R. P. Yadav PW 7 peformed the post mortem examination on the dead body of Hakim Singh on 12-4-1976 at 11.45 a m. He found the following ante mortem injuries on the dead body :- Multiple fire-arm wound of entry over middle of abdomen over and around the umblicus and supra pubic region in an area of 20 cm x 9 1/2 cm size of wounds 3/4 cm x 1/2 cm x skin to abdominal cavity deep to 1 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm skin to abdominal cavity deep. Margins inverted. Slight tattooing present around the margins of the wound and over the margins of wound an abrasion present in between the wounds. On internal examination, it was further found that the shots entered through abdominal wall and perforated the small intestine under it, part of large intestine and urinal bladder, clotted and fluid blood was present, 26 pellets were removed from the intestines and abdominal cavity in the lower part. In the opinion of the doctor the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the firearm injuries. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the three accused, namely, Todi, Manoon under section 302/34 IPC and against Lala Ram under section 302 IPC.
(3.) THE prosecution examined in all eight witnesses in support of its case, out of whom complainant Kamta Prasad PW 1, Moti PW 2, Pokhpal PW 3 and Ram Chandra PW 4, are the eye witnesses of the occurrence. Rest of the witnesses are the aforesaid I. O., doctor and some formal witnesses of police. The defence of the accused was simple denial. They have stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity. They have not produced any evidence in their defence.;