- (1.) THE two appellants Puttu Lal and Murli, real brothers, resident of village Qutbapur, Police Station Sakran, district Sitapur were convic ted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced of life imprisonment for having committed the murder of Rampal resident of the same village in the night between 5th stand 6th of May, 1976 at the Khalyan situate towards the south-east of the village at a distance of about 50-60 paces from the abadi. THE deceased |was aged about 28 years. Appellant Puttu at time of the commission of the offence was aged about 15-16 years while appellant Murli was aged about 28-30 years.
(2.) MOTIVE alleged for the commission of the offence was the deceased Rampal misbehaved with the wife of appellant Puttu on Sunday preceding the date of occurrence. Both the appellants felt enraged and at about noon on the game day, armed with lathis, both the appellants went to the shop of Ahmad Ali where the deceased was also sitting and complained about the misbehaviour of the deceased. The deceased denied the accusation and there were challenge and counter-challenge from the side of the deceased and the appellants but for intervention of Ahmad Ali and others who were present there, they would have indulged in Marpit. The appellants are said to have held out a threat of revenge. According to the prosecution case the deceased was sleeping at his Khalyan during the fateful night and his brother Mendai was also sleeping at his own Khalyan at a short distance and Soney Lal, Chunnoo and Gur Charan were also sleeping at various places in that Khalyan. At about 2 a. m the witnesses woke up on hearing cries of the deceased and they flashed torches and saw the two appellants assaulting the deceased. Puttu appellant was armed with a Bhala while appellant Murli was said to be having a Banka. The witnesses challenged the appellants and gave a chase up to a distance but they managed to escape. Rampal is said to have died a little thereafter. The Chaukidar of the village who was residing in the neighboring village was called and Mendar brother of the deceased then went to the police station situate at a distance of nine miles and lodged the first information report at 7. 30 a. m. on 6-5-1976. The investigation was started by Ram Raksh Pal Singh, Sub-Inspector of the police station and the investigation proceeded the usual way. He went to the village and the place of occurrence, found the dead body at the alleged place, prepared the inquest report and took in possession the blood stained Razai and Kathri (a sort of bed cover) and sent dead body to the District Hospital, Sitapur. The post- mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Gopalji Ojha, Medical Officer of District Hospital, Sitapur at 5 p. m. on 7-5-1976. The factum of the murder of the deceased having taken place in the night between 5th and 6th May, 1976 at the Khalyan in question remained unchallenged by the accused persons at the trial. The defence, however, was one of innocence and having been falsely implicated because of enmity, the suggestion made was that the deceased was a bad character having several enemies and he was murdered by any of his enemies.
(3.) THE prosecution examined five witnesses of facts, three of them claimed to be eve-witnesses, namely Mendai P. W. 1, Spney Lal P. W. 2 and Chunnu P. W. 3 and the other two relating to the incident when the appellants are laid j to have gone to the shop of Ahmad Ali and complained about the misbehaviour of the deceased with the wife of appellant Puttu Lal. Learned Sessions Judge in his well considered judgment rejected the various grounds raised on behalf of the accused persons to challenge the veracity of the prosecution case and came to the conclusion that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. Learned counsel for the appellants has urged three grounds to assail the judgment under appeal being firstly that the prosecution failed to establish the motive against the appellants for commission of this crime, that the testi mony of the three witnesses examined as eye-witnesses is unreliable because the witnesses are partisan and their testimony is full of inconsistencies and contradic tions and lastly that the prosecution case and the evidence led in its support is inconsistent with the medical evidence inasmuch as the injuries found on the dead body of the deceased could not have been caused by the weapons alleged to have been carried and used by the appellants.;