AMAR SARAN, J. - (1.) THE appellant, Om Narain Dixit @ Chhaiya, has been sen ­tenced to imprisonment for life under sec ­tion 302 IPC and to six month's RI under section 323 IPC by a judgment and order dated 12.9.1997 passed by the 12th Addl. Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar, in S.T. No. 805 of 1994, against which the instant ap ­peal has been preferred..
(2.) ANOTHER co -accused, Shakeel, who faced trial in S.I. No. 1500 of 1996 was, however, acquitted by the aforesaid com ­mon judgment by the Court below. No Government appeal has been preferred against the acquittal of Shakeel. In a nutshell, the allegations in the present case are that the appellant Om Narain Dixit @ Chhaiya was a bad charac ­ter, who had teased the sister -in -law of the informant, Vinod Bhatia, six months prior to the present incident. The police had ar ­rested him on the complaint in which Vi ­nod Bhatia was one of the witnesses. As an aftermath to the said incident, on 11.5.1994, at about 8.30 pm, when Vinod Bhatia and his servant Satish Kumar and Jagdish Bhatia (the deceased) were present in the cosmetics shop of the deceased, the appel ­lant Om Narain came along with two ac ­complices on a scooter. Parking the scooter in front of the shop, he walked in carrying a jhola (bag). He fished out a bomb from the bag and hurled it on Jagdish and Vinod Bhatia with an intention to murder them. Jagdish was injured on his face as a result of the blast. Vinod, however, took shelter behind the counter, whereupon Om Narain hurled a second bomb which fell and ex ­ploded on the counter, shattering the glass pane and scattering its pieces all over the shop. Om Narain threw a third bomb, which caused injuries to Satish Kumar, the servant of Vinod Bhatia. Om Narain there ­upon exhorted his accomplices to shoot Vinod Bhatia with their country -made pis ­tol. However, as Vinod Bhatia had taken shelter behind the counter, he escaped in ­juries because of the smoke released by the bomb. As the nearby shop -keepers arrived thereafter the bomb blasts, the appellant and his accomplices fled away firing with their fire -arms. Vinod Bhatia and the ser ­vant Satish Kumar and other persons of the locality saw and identified Om Narain and his accomplices in the electric light and Vi ­nod Bhatia mentioned in his application that he could identify the accomplices if they were produced before him.
(3.) VINOD Bhatia lodged a written re ­port of this incident (Ext. Ka -1) at P.S. Govind Nagar, Kanpur Nagar, on 11.5.1994 at 9.30 p.m. The case was registered by H.C. Rajendra Singh, who also prepared chik FIR (Ext. Ka -4) and the G.D. entry (Ext. Ka -5) at case crime No. 193 of 1994 under sections 302, 307 IPC against Om Narain and two unknown persons. PW 6, S.I. Vishwa Nath Singh com ­menced the investigation of this case. He sent Satish Kumar, the servant, for medical examination. He was medically examined on the same night (11.5.1994) at 11.55 pm by CW 1, Dr. R.K. Dixit at UHM Hospital, Kanpur Nagar, who found the following injuries on Satish Kumar as mentioned in his injury report (Ext. C -l): 1. M. Abrasion in an area of 15 cm. x 6 cm. Rt. Side face and left side face just below the left eye. Largest 1.5 cm. x 1.5 cm. and smallest 0.5 x 05 cm, kept under observation. Advise X -ray. 2. Both eyes are reddish (conjunctiva) and feeling pain. Kept U.O. Refer to eye surgeon for Ex. OP. As Satish was referred to the eye sur ­geon by Dr. R.K. Dixit, he was examined by Dr. Vinod Tripathi (PW 3) on 12.5.1994 at 11.30 am at UHM Hospital, Kanpur Nagar, who noticed the following injuries in the eye (Ext. Ka -2): 1. Abrasion of 1 cm. x 1 cm. is present on left side of face, 6 mm below the lateral margins of lower lid. 2. Redness of conjunctiva is present on medial half of left eye, pacifica ­tion of cornea at 10 O'clock posi ­tion remark. Both injuries are sim ­ple caused by forceful blunt blow. Duration about one day. ;