R.N.Misra, J. - (1.) THESE appeals arise out of same judgment and order, therefore, they have been heard jointly and are being disposed of by a common judgment, which is passed in Criminal Appeal No. 546 of 2003.
(2.) THESE appeals have been preferred by the appellant Gulab Singh and Chandra Shekhar Singh against the judgment and order dated 28.1.2003, passed by Sri Dhani Ram, the then Session Judge, Sonbhadra in S.T. No. 81 of 2000, State v. Chandra shekhar Singh and another, by which they have been convicted for the offences, punishable under Section 302, 323 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and for six months respectively. The facts giving rise to these appeals are as under: The complainant-informant Raj Kumar Singh was resident of village Sahanshahpur, police station Rohania district Varanasi. He was married with Smt. Kusum Devi, the sister of accused appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh, resident of village Judwariya, P.S. Karma, district Sonbhadra. Another appellant Gulab Singh was brother-i.vlaw of appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh, who was the resident of village Kailahat, P.S. Chunar, district Mirzapur. There was some dispute between Chandra Shekhar Singh and his brother Inder Kumar Singh regarding some agricultural land. Smt. Sudama Devi was the mother of these two persons. Awadh Narain Singh was father-in-law of the complainant-informant. He had borrowed Rs. 16,000/- for the marriage of his daughter from the complainant-informant, much before this incident and had mortgaged his six Bighas agricultural land in his favour in lieu of said money. The appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh was living separately from Inder Kumar and Sudama Devi. The mortgaged agricultural land of the complainant-informant was being managed by Inder Kumar and Smt. Sudama Devi, who were living jointly. There was dispute between the parties regarding partition of land and appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh was not liking the mortgage of agricultural land by his father in favour of complainant-informant and in the partition, he wanted his half share in said land also. On 12.8.2000, the complainant-informant along with his wife Smt. Kusum Devi had came to his Sasural. It was about 10.00 a.m. when Chandra Shekhar Singh along with his brother-in-law Gulab armed with Lathi went to take forcible possession over the said mortgaged land. Smt. Sudama Devi and Inder Kumar Singh went there to make protest. When the complainant-informant and his wife came to know about this, they also went at the field. The appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh exhorted his brother-in-law Gulab Singh to kill Inder Kumar Singh and Smt. Sudama Devi and both started beating them. When the complainant-informant and his wife wanted to intervene, they were also beaten by them. Inder Kumar Singh and Smt. Sudama Devi died on the spot.
(3.) THE matter was reported to the police, through FIR Ext. Ka-1 by the complainant-informant Raj Kumar Singh on the same day at about 4.00 p.m. as is evident from Check report Ext. Ka 6. THE Karma police registered a case at crime No. 72 of 2000, under Sections 302,323, I.P.C. against the named accused persons Chandra Shekhar Singh and Gulab Singh. THE relevant entry was made in the G.D. Ext. Ka-7 and SI R.R. Dwivedi started investigation. He went on the spot and prepared inquest report, challan photo of dead bodies and letter to C.M.O., which are Ext. Ka 10 to Ext. Ka 18. He sealed the dead body and sent for autopsy, which was conducted by Dr. P.N. Singh. THE autopsy report is Ext. Ka-2. He also inspected the spot and prepared site plan Ext. Ka-8 and after recordE2ge-sheet Ext. Ka 19 against the accused- appellants. The accused-appellants denied the allegations levelled against them and alleged their false implication due to enmity. In his statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C., the accused-appellant Chandra Shekhar Singh has stated that Smt. Anju Devi was the wife of deceased Inder Kumar Singh and litigations were going on between them. The supporters of Smt. Anju Devi killed the deceased Inder Kumar at 8.00 a.m. on the date of occurrence. The other accused Gulab Singh has stated that he was present in his native village at the date and time of occurrence. However, no evidence in defence has been given by them.;