- (1.) IMTIYAZ Murtaza, J. The above appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 12. 6. 1991 passed by Special Judge (B. C. Act), Aligarh in S. T. No. 159 of 1990 convicting and sentencing the appellants to undergo for life imprisonment under section 302/149 I. P. C. , under section 307/149 I. P. C. to undergo R. I. for 5 years, under sections 452 and 148 I. P. C. to undergo 2 years R. I. each. Both the appeals have been heard together. The Criminal Appeal No. 1146 of 1991 shall be treated as the leading appeal.
(2.) IN this case, the incident has its genesis in the election rivalry between the, accused persons on one hand and the deceased on the other hand. The occurrence is stated to have taken place at about 4. 30 p. m. at Nagla Danda within the circle of P. S. Pisawa. The fracas, it would appear, erupted when the accused persons imputed the First INformant to have prevented certain persons from voting in a recently concluded election for Member of legislative Assembly. INitial bickering conflagrated into frayed temper and then followed the assault resulting in the loss of two lives and injuries to as many as seven persons. The first informant is one Man Singh who lodged the F. I. R. at Police Station Pisawa on 23. 11. 1989 at 7 p. m. The village where the incident occurred lies at a distance of about 15 Kms from the Police Station. The facts forming back ground are that in the last election, Tek Chand father of the First Information had romped home and had been elected Pradhan which led to estrangement between the two sides. Prior to occurrence, Rajveer Singh accused had moved no confidence motion against the deceased and this resulted in re-election in which again the deceased won the election and was installed as Pradhan. Another causative factor for the annoyance of the accused persons was stated to be the wedding of Preetam Singh brother of the First Informant in the family of Vijendra Singh of Mahrauli (Delhi ). It is stated that earlier the marriage was settled with Bhoj Raj Singh son of accused Ram Veer Singh and subsequently the girl's family snapped the betrothal on coming to know that the father of Bhojraj Singh had be taken a second wife and Bhojraj Singh was born of the 1st wife of Rajveer Singh and settled the marriage with Preetam Singh which was due to be solemnized after about one or two months. On the day of occurrence, i. e. 23. 11. 1989 at about 4. 30 p. m. there took place heated exchange between the first Informant and Raj Veer Singh on first informant being accused by Raj Veer Singh that he had prevented certain voters from voting in the election which led to frayed tempers and thereafter Raj Veer Singh is said to have left the place in a huff threatening to settle scores with the victim and after a short while he came back to the spot armed with his licensed gun accompanied by Mukut Satish, Bhojraj, Ramvir, Ashok and Udai Veer who are said to be armed with country-made pistols and after gaining entry into the house, Ram Veer Singh ignited attack and to begin with he opened fire at his father while his accomplices in the crime also started firing. It is further stated that Tek Chand his father and Preetam Singh his brother succumbed to injuries instantaneously while the sister-in-law of Preetam Singh, namely, Sukhbiri sustained firearm injuries. It is further alleged that when other persons present on the scene namely Daryab Singh, Rajendrd Singh, Nawab Singh, Ram Pal Singh, Ravindra Singh and Sukhpal tried to intervene, they were also assaulted and sustained fire arm injuries. Vikram Singh brother of First Informant escape attack narrowly. The incident is said to have occurred in the presence of Badan Singh, Devi Ram and other family members who were present in the house. The investigation was taken up by Zulfikar Ahmad, Station Officer of P. S. Pasawa who commenced investigation by reaching the place of occurrence where he prepared the site plan Ext. Ka 32. The inquest report and other relevant papers were processed on his direction by S. I. Raj Singh and thereafter, he recorded the statements of Man Singh, Smt. Sukhbiri, Sukhpal and other family members and recovered empty cartridges and bullets and prepared recovery memo marked as Ex. Ka 33. After the conclusion of investigation, the charge sheet Ex. ka 34 was filed in the Court.
(3.) THE autopsy on the' bodies of Preetam Singh and Tek Chand was conducted by Dr. R. P. Gupta. THE Doctor found following ante mortem injuries on the person of the deceased Preetam Singh : 1. Gun shot wound of entry measuring 0. 6 cm. x 0. 6 cm x cavity deep to 0. 8 cm x 0. 8 cm x cavity deep on the following part. One at each part (i) Middle of Menubrium sterni. (ii) Epigastrium. (iii) 6 cm below the umbilicus at 5 O'clock position. (iv) (Lt.) side of chest 8 cm. Below the nipple at 6. 30 O'clock position. (v) Upper part of (Rt) exilla. (vi) (Rt.) side of abdomen 20 cm. Away from umbilicus at 10 O'clock position. No wound of exit seen. No blackening & charring seen. 2. G. S. Wound of entry (Lt) front of (Rt) elbow joint. No wound of exit. No blackening & charring seen. Measuring each 0. 8 cm. x 0. 8 cm. x skin to muscle deep, causing of humerus & radius and ulna (Rt) side. THE doctor opined the death due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries. On the person of deceased Tek Chand the Doctor found the following ante-mortem injuries: Gun shot wound of entry on following parts measuring 0. 4 cm. x 0. 4 cm. x skin to cavity deep on following parts. No blackening & charring seen. No wound of exit seen: (i) One on (Lt) side of head. 13 cm above the (Lt) ear. (ii) Two over body of sternum. (iii) Six wounds on front of (Lt) shoulder. (iv) Two wound on (Lt ). In this case also, the Doctor opined death due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries noted in ante mortem in juries. Dr. S. C. Agarwal medical office-, P. H. C. examined the injured on 24. 11. 1989 at 1. 30 a. m. namely Nawab Singh, Ram Pal Singh, Ravindra Singh, Rajendra Singh and Smt. Sukhbiri and Dariyab Singh. All the injured witnesses were found to have sustained firearm wounds of different dimensions. The accused persons repudiated the charge and claimed to be tried. However, they pleaded their false implication in the case on account of enmity.;