- (1.) V. P. Mathur, J. The two appellants came up against the judgment and order passed by Mr. R. P. Jain, the then Sessions Judge of Etawah on 19-10-1978 while he was disposing of Sessions Trial No. A-81 of 1977 and who convicted both Ramji Lal and Jagdish on a charge under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each on of them to imprisonment for life.
(2.) THREE persons stood trial before the learned Judge. One Satta alias Satya Narain, who was not named in the first information report, was put up for identification and the identification evidence was furnished. On identifica tion evidence, the prosecution case was not accepted by the learned Judges who held that it did not warrant conviction of batta alias Satya Narain and hence Satta alias Satya Narain was acquitted. The prosecution case is that a dacoity took place in Nagla Banjara Farm which is hamlet of village Kunwarpur within the area of police station-Ekdil at the houses of two persons, namely, Bahadur Singh and Kishan Singh. Between 8 to 10 armed dacoits took part in this dacoity and looted properties from these two houses. They were variously armed with Kattas, guns, lathis and kulhari. It is said that out of these culprits, two, namely, Ramjilal and Jagdish, who are interse connected as cousin brothers and belonged to Nagla Pooth, which lies within the hamlet of Berari at a distance of about two furlongs from the scene of occurrence, were already known to the witnesses from before and hence were recognised on the spot. Ramjilal is said to have been armed with a katta (country made pistol) and Jagdish with a gun. Neighbouring witnesses indudiag Parikshit (P. W. 1), Chandan Singh (Chandra Singh) (P. W. 2) Bahadur Singh (P. W. 4) and some others, namely, Sube Singh, Sahab Singh and Kishan Singh also collected near the scene of occurrence. During the course of the dacoity these two persons, namely, appellants Ramjilal and Jagdish with their arms were allegedly standing on the chabutara in front of the chhappar of Bahadur Singh and they were firing from that place obvious ly to scare away the witnesses. Parikshit along with his father came to the door of his Aangan, which is very close to the place where these culprits were standing and it has been show by figure T in the site plan prepared by tho Investigating Officer. Bahadur Singh along with his father's elder brother and his own mother was sleeping inside the chhappar, which is towards the south of the chabutra and he woke up and came out of the chhappar and during the course of the dacoity allegedly continued going in and coming out of the chhappar. A lighted lantern was present, the place of which has been shown in the site plan at point 'a' and it has been variously described by the witnesses including the Investigating Officer as a Khoonti in the wall or the Baderi (rafter on which the chhappar was resting and it was placed on a pillar. It is in evidence that this chhappar was supported by five pillars and there were referred from the eastern wall up to those pillars to support the chhappar. At point (2) shown in the site plan is the place where according to the Investigating Officer, Bahadur Singh was present. This is on the open chabutara. At point '3' which is towards the north western corner of the chabutara, is the place where Kishan Singh remained standing and from where he saw the occurrence. He is one of the victims of this dacoity. His son Sahab Singh, who also came out along-with his father, however, managed to come in the Gali intervening the Aangan of Parikshit and the chabutra of Bahadur Singh and was standing, at the point shown by letter 'x' in the site plan where he received injuries and died in con sequence thereof. Another witness Chander Singh or Chandan Singh was also present nearby in the same Gali. He also received injuries in this occurrence. The prosecution had examined in all nine witnesses in this case. Three of them, namely, P. W. 1 Parikshit, P. W. 2 Chander Singh (Chandran Singh) and P. W. 4 Bahadur Singh are the eye-witnesses. All others are formal. Dr. B. K. Gupta (P. W. 3) conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Sahab Singh. P. W 5 Satya Prakash Saxena is the Assistant Jailor who came to prove the date of admission of Satta alias Satya Narain in the Jail. This accused was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, P. W. 6 is Shravan Kumar, who took down the first information report. P. W. 7 is Dr. Chandra Prakash, who examined by the injuries of Chander Singh on 4-7-1975 at 9. 30 A. M. P. W. 8 is Sri Allauddin, Sub-Inspector, who was the Investigating Officer of this case. P. W. 9 is Sri Manmohan Singh, who was the Executive Magistrate and who conducted the identification proceedings with respect to Satta alias Satya Narayan.
(3.) THE defence was complete denial of the prosecution version and the two appellants gave out that they have been falsely implicated in this case because ranjish. THEy also admitted the fact that they were on bail in a murder case, when this occurrence took place and because some dispute between their Phoopha Chhoteylal Jatav and Bahadur Singh and Chander Singh, they have been falsely implicated in this case. Ext. Kha-2 was placed on the record to prove the fact of the lodging of the report under Section 506, I. P. C. by Chhoteylal Jatav as against four persons including Chander Singh and Bahadur Singh. The defence has also examined three witnesses in this case, namely, Mulaim Singh (D. W. 1), R. S. Agarwal (D. W. 2) and Sri Bhudeo Prasad (D. W. 3), all in connection with the attempt to prove Ext. Kha- 2,;