- (1.) B. K. Sharma, J. Criminal Appeal No. 1752 of 1979 has been preferred by Shobran accused-appellant and Criminal Appeal No. 1822 of 1979 has been preferred by Rajvir Singh accused-appellant against their conviction by Sri R. K. Gupta, the then Sessions Judge, Muzaffat-nagar by his order dated 29-5-1979 in S. T. No. 307/1978 - State v. Rajvir Singh and Shobran Singh, for the offence under Section 302/34, I. P. C. for committing the murder of Dhanvir and sentencing them to imprisonment for life. Both the appeals have been heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE information in this case was Meharban Singh PW 6 Dhanvij deceased was his son-in-law. Rajvir PW 7 was the husband of the sister of Dhanvir deceased. Ndeharban Singh, informant was resident of village Mehalki P. S. Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar. Dhanvir deceased used to live in the informant's village for the last eight years before the said occurrence in his adjoining house. Rajvir PW 7 was resident of village Rahwati P. S. Hastinapur, District Meerut. Shobran Singh, accused-appellant was resident of village Mahalki, Rajvir Singh accused-appellant (not to be confused with the Rajvir PW 7, was also resident of village Rahwali P. S. Hastinapur, District Meerut. The prosecution story was that Mehraban Singh had settled the marriage of his younger daughter with Vijendra son of Muni Narain of village Ranwali and in the settlement of this marriage, Rajvir Singh accused-appellant and Shobran Singh accused-appellant had the prominant hand, that Dhauvir Singh deceased subsequently told him that there is defect in a foot of the boy (Vijendra) whereupon, he (the informant) broke the engagement, that due to this break of engagement Shobran Singh and Rajvir Singh accused persons got annoyed and came several times before the present murder to put pressure on the deceased to maintain the engagement but the deceased did not agree ; that Shobran Singh aud Rajvir Singh accused, appellants had come for this purpose one day prior to the occurrence and had gone away offering threats to the deceased that they would see ; that Rajvir PW 7 had come to the village Mehalki four days prior to the occurrence, that Shobran Singh and Rajvir Singh accused persons and Jagdish (third accused in the prosecution story who was not tried with them) came to village Mehalki, that on 30-5-1978 Rajvir PW 7 and Dhanvir deceased started on cycle for village Tikola at about 3 p. m. that they came to Meeraour where on the bus stand Hosh Rhoi and Chet Ram witnesses met them, that then all the four proceeded on cycle towards Tikola at 4 p. m. , that they were in the way at 5 p. m. , that two motor cycles came there from behind and overtook them and their drivers stopped the motor-cycles infront of them, that Rajvir Singh accused-appellant was on one motor cycle and Jagdish co-accused was driving the other motor cycle on which Shobran Singh accused-appellant was sitting behind, that Shobran Singh accused-appellant brought down the deceased from his cycle, took out Tamancha from his phent and inflicted three fire-arm injuries on his body retorting, "tujhe. RISTA CHHURANE KA MAJA CHKHATE HAIN" and threatened Rajvir PW 7 and others with death if they went ahead, that the accused-appellants and their companion Jagdish ran away riding on their motor cycles, that the deceased Dhanvir died at the spot that Rajvir PW 7 came to village Mehalki and narrated the occurrence to Meharban Singh informant whereupon. Meharban Singh PW 6 went to the police station and dictated his F. I. R. (Exb. Ka-7) to the clerk constable the same day at 7. 30 p. m. and registered a case against the accused-appellants and Jagdish co-accused under Section 302, I. P. C. The investigation was taken up by S. O. Anand Prakash Vaishya. He reached the spot. The inquest proceedings were taken and the usual investigation followed. Later on Rajvir Singh accused-appellant surrendered and was put up for identification. In the identification proceedings, Hosh Ram PW 8 correctly identified Rajvir Singh accused and did not make any mistake. After concluding the investigation the I. O. submitted the charge-sheet against the present accused-appellant and the co- accused Jagdish.
(3.) THE post mortem examination on the deadbody of the Deceased was performed by Dr. P. Sharma on 31-5-1978 at District Hospital Muzaffarnagar at 4 p. m. The ocular testimony in this case was given by Rajvir PW 7, Hosh Ram PW 8 and Chet Ram PW 9. Rest of the prosecution evidence was formal in nature. In the defence, the accused-persons had examined three witnesses, Satyapal, Tejraj and Har Saran. Out of them, Satyapal and Har Saran gave evidence of alibi.;