- (1.) THE then XIVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Moradabad vide his judgment and order, dated 19-2-91 con victed the accused Mukut Singh, appellant on a charge under section 302 1pc and sentenced him to undergo life imprison ment. He, by the same order, acquitted the co-accused Charan Singh, Bnarat and Chander Sen on the charge under Section 302/34, IPC.
(2.) THE prosecution case started on the basis of an F. I R. , (Exhibit Ka.-l), dated 22. 10. 89. In it, the time of occur rence is said to be 21-10-89 at 11 p. m. and the report was registered on 22-10-89 at 9. 45 a. m. THE distance of the police station is 14 kms. from the place of occurrence. It has been alleged that on 21-10- 89, the complainant Danvir Singh, P. W. 1 was sit ting with his brother Sri Kalyan Singh, P. W. 2 and uncle Sri Ram Lal (deceased), after taking their meals. THE complainant and his brother Sri Kalyan Singh were still talking with each other, whereas their uncle Ram Lai had slept. THEre was lantern giving light in the cottage. It was about 11 p. m. when the accused Mukut Singh (appellant), Charan Singh, Bharat Singh and Chandrabhan (acquitted) came to the place, where the complainant and his brother were talking. THE accused were telling that a good lesson should be taught for Ram Lai (deceased) for bring ing the stay order and on this account, the relation between the two camps had deteriorated. Thus saying, Mukut Singh, appellant fired with his pistol at Ram Lal. THE other accused Bharat Singh wielded his Pharsa towards the complainant and accused Chandrabhan put his pistol at Sri Kaiyan Singh, P. W. 4 and said that in case they shouted, they would be shot dead. THEreafter, Raghubir Singh and Mansuri, P. W. 1 came there. But the accused bolted away. Ram Lai had received injuries in his temporal region and died on the spot. On the basis of the said written F. I. R. , a case was registered in the G. D. by Head Constable Sri Kiran Singh and its entry was also made in the chik. The I. O. , Sri Nirankar Singh, P. W. 6 was present at the time when the case was registered at the police station. He took the investigation in his hands immediately and recorded the statement of the Head Constable. Thereafter, Danvir Singh, complainant, P. W. 3's statement was recorded and after that, he reached to the spot. He found the dead body of the deceased and held an inquest upon it and prepared the related documents and kept the dead body sealed and sent for post mortem examination.
(3.) P. W. 5 Dr. Sudhir Singh conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Ram Lal on 23- 10-89 and found the following injuries on his person:- (1) One gunshot wound on the right eye and adjoining the right side face and nose, 6. 5 cm. x 6 cm. x cavit deep. Margins inverted and irregular. Blackening, charring and tatooing present. On internal examination, he found that the right side parietal and frontal bones were fractured. The death was caused due to ante-mortem injuries haemorrhage and shock due to the wounds caused by some fire-arms. The injury was sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause immediate death. It was possible that the deceased might have sur vived for 5-15 minutes, but not more than that. He had taken his food about 5-6 hours earlier and prior to the death. The death was probable at about the night of 21/22-10-89.;