- (1.) S. I. Jafri, J. The instant appeal on behalf of Kare Deen, Kara Asrey, Bishram and Lal Bahadur, has been tiled against the judgment and order dated 19-1-1985 passed by Sri S. B. Varma, 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jaunpur, recording conviction against the aforesaid appellants under Section 395, I. P. C. . and sentences of four years' R. I. each. Along with the appellants afore said, co-accused Jayant Prasad, whose name also figured in the First In Information Report, also stood in trial, but he was let off" by the trial court.
(2.) TO dwell upon the prosecution case, it is alleged that in the night intervening 12th/13th of June 1980 at about 1 a. m. , while the complainant Sher Bahadur Singh was slept on the roof of the Baithaka of his house, the appellants aforesaid in the company of Jayant Prasad (since acquitted) and two or three unknown persons, raided the house of complainant and out of them four persons, climbed over the roof of the complainant's house and they over-powered the com plainant. The four accused persons first of all, relieved the complainant of his licensed gun and 22 cartridges as well as the bunch of keys. Thereafter, two out of the accused persons came down the stairs, opened the drawing room and took away a two-band Nelco Radio and a bag containing Rs. 2,500. During the course of operation by the accused persons, Sher Bahadur Singh, complainant, made an alarm that attracted a number of persons including Ram Murti, Raj Kumar, Lallan Singh and Doodhnath on the scene of occurrence. The accused persons took to their heels alongwith the booty under a cover of firing. After the occurrence, complainant Sher Bahadur Singh went, to the Police Station, Meeaganj and handed over his written report to the Head Constable who prepared the chik report at 2. 10 a. m. on 13- 6-1980. He also registered a case against the appellants including Jayant Prasad and two or three unknown persons. After registration of the case, the investigation into the case followed and the Investigation Officer, namely, V. M. Pandey went to the place of occurrence, where he inspected the site of occurrence and prepared site plan etc. The investigation into the case, later on, changed hands and Ram Janam Singh ultimately submitted charge-sheet against the appellants and Jayant Prasad. How- over, the Police could not lay hands upon the unknown persons, who had accompanied the appellants during the course of occurrence. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and attributed their false implication in the case to bad-blood with Sher Bahadur Singh complainant and his sons. However the accused persons examined one Panna Lal Maurya, in their defence.
(3.) THE prosecution examined six witnesses in support of its case and out of them Sher Bahadur Singh, P. W. 1, Lallan Singh, P. W. 2, Doodh Nath, P. W. 3 and Bhoola Nath, P. W. 4 were examined as ocular witnesses of the occurrence. The accused persons have brought on record a number of documents in order to hammer home the point that there stood a deep seated animosity between Slier Bahadur Singh and his sons on one hand the accused-appellants on the other. The following pedigree would facilitate the understanding of the relationship existing between Kare Din and Ram Asrey appellants and one Santu. Devi Saran Ram Saran jiudhu Munshi Santu Karedin Ram Asrey (Appellant) (Appellant);