- (1.) M. C. Jain, J. This appeal has been filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 18-5-1992 passed by Sri Chhotey Lal, the then IInd Additional Ses sions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial No. 124 of 1990 recording acquittal in favour of the four respondents who are police person nel, namely, Naurtu Singh, S. I. , Constable Mahesh Chand, Constable Jwala Prasad and Constable Virendra Kumar. Charge sheet had been laid by C. B. C. I. D. against them and four others, namely, S. I. Devi Dayal, Constable Dambar Singh, Constable Radhey Shyam and Constable Ram Sanehi but only the present four respondents faced the trial as the sum moning order against the remaining four had been quashed in Criminal Revision Nos. 238 of 1986 and 219 of 1988. The present four respondents were tried for the offences punishable under Section 148 I. P. C. , 302 I. P. C. read with Section 149 I. P. C. and 452 I. P. C. The murder of one Lakkhu Singh was involved and the place of occurrence was the house of Lakkhu Singh in village Kinawa, Police Station Kasganj, District Etah on 20-8-1983 at about 9. 30 p. m. The prosecution case was that in 1982 the respondents were posted at police outpost Inaiti of Police Station Kasganj. On 4- 7-1983 at about 6 a. m. the accused respondent Naurtu Singh and Constable Jwala Prasad along with three companion Constables went to village Kinawa and caused Marpit of Lakkhu Singh, his sons Suraj Pal Singh and Saheb Singh, his wife Nemwati, Smt. Vidya wife of Saheb Singh and Smt. Meera wife of Suraj Pal when they were at their field of maize crop. S. I. Naurtu Singh and others also extended threats to them. Regarding this occurrence, Lakkhu Singh deceased made an application to the C. J. M. Etah under Section 156 (3) Cr. PC. on 7-7-1983. A case was directed to be registered and investigated by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, requiring a report by 7-9-1983. Consequently, a case was registered at Police Station Kasganj in which S. I. Naur tu Singh and Constable Jwala Prasad were the named accused. Annoyed thereby the respondents were looking for an oppor tunity of settling the score with Lakkhu Singh and his family. On 20-8-1983 S. I. Naurtu Singh, another S. I. Devi Dayal, Constables Jwala Prasad, Mahesh Chandra, Virendra Kumar, Dambar Singh, Ram Sanehi and Radhey Shyam along with two sections of P. A. C. set out at 5 p. m. The P. A. C. truck and police jeep were parked at some distance from village Kinawa because onwards way was not jeepable. At about 9. 30 p. m. the said police force surrounded the house of deceased Lakkhu Singh. They went inside the house and overpowered Lakkhu Singh and his son Bharat Singh, PW 1. The police per sonnel were armed with lathis and dandas also. They assaulted Lakkhu Singh and Bharat Singh, PW 1. Their cries attracted Achhey Lal, Phool Singh and other vil lagers. Phool Singh was also given a beat ing. Lakkhu Singh became unconscious as a result of assaulting. The police personnel then directed Bharat Singh, PW 1 and Phool Singh to carry the injured Lakkhu Singh to the place where the P. A. C. truck and jeep had been parked. The injured Lakkhu Singh, Bharat Singh, PW 1 and Phool Singh were placed on the P. A. C. truck. Lakkhu Singh died on the way. Bharat Singh, PW 1 lodged report about this incident at the Police Station on 21-8-1983 at 1 a. m. in which S. I. Naurtu Singh, Constable Jwala Prasad, Constable Virendra Singh and Constable Mahesh Chandra were named along with one Daroga, two Constables and P. A. C. per sonnel whose names had not been dis closed. A case under Section 147/148/149/ 452/3021. P. C. was registered by Head Con stable Kalyan Singh, PW6.
(2.) A little earlier thereto at 12. 25 a. m. a written report Ex. Ka-4 with a different version of the occurrence was lodged at Police Station Kasganj by S. I. Naurtu Singh - respondent No. 1 also. The version given by him in the report was that he along with S. I. Devi Dayal, Constable Dambar Singh, Constable Radhey Shyam, Con stable Jwala Prasad, Constable Mahesh Chandra, Constable Virendra Kumar, and Constable Ram Sanehi duly armed along with two sections of P. A. C. were in search of wanted criminal and when they reached in the northern side of village Kinawa at about 10 p. m. Lakkhu Singh, his son Bharat Singh, PW1 and Phool Singh met them in injured condition and disclosed that because of party factions and enmity in the village there had been a quarrel and Lakkhu Singh was precariously injured. At their request, they were accommodated on the Government vehicle but Lakkhu Singh died on the way. The defence as put forth at the trial was that injury to Lakkhu Singh had been caused by his son Bharat Singh, PW 1 and others and when Phool Singh P. W. 2 and others rushed to mediate in the matter, he (Phool Singh) was also inflicted injuries. The accused-respondents, however, did not examineany witness insupport of their defence. On the other hand, the prosecu tion examined nine witnesses Bharat Singh, PW 1 was the son of deceased Lak khu Singh and the informant as also the injured of the present felony. He narrated the entire incident. He was supported by his mother Nemwati, PW 3 who was the victim and eye-witness of earlier incident of 4-7-1983 about which too she gave evidence and regarding which the applica tion under Section 156 (3) Cr. PC. , Ex. Ka 7 was made by her husband Lakkhu Singh naming S. I. Naurtu Singh and Constable Jwala Prasad (respondents) along with three unknown Constables. Phool Singh, P. W. 2 was also an injured. However, in stead of standing by the side of prosecution, he supported the defence case. Another witness was Head Constable of P. A. C. Dashrath Singh, P. W. 4. Yet another eye-witness examined was P. A. C. Head Constable Parmatma Singh, P. W. 7 One Ajay Pal Singh, P W 5 was also examined as an eye-witness but he was also declared hostile having not supported the prosecu tion case. He stated that shouts were emanating from the house of Lakkhu Singh and he had reached there. He had found that Lakkhu Singh, Saheb Singh and Bharat Singh, PW 1 were quarreling and Lakkhu Singh and Bharat Singh, PW sustained injuries. According to him, he did not see the respondents assaulting them. His version was that they came later on and took them away. The version of Phool Singh, PW 2 was also to the effect that in the night at about 9. 30 or 10 p. m. he had heard shouts from the house of Lakkhu Singh and had reached there where he had found Saheb Singh and Lakkhu Singh quar relling. During the course of the incident the police arrived and took away Lakkhu Singh and his son along with him. He testified that during the quarrel between Lakkhu Singh and his sons he also sustained injuries while mediating. Nav Ratan Singh, Advocate PW 8 proved Ex. Ka 7 which was the application made by Lakkhu Singh to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah in relation to the earlier incident of 4-7-1983, Dy. S. P. of C. B. CID Sri Mahavirsingh Tomar, P. W. 9 had inves tigated the case. The later part of the inves tigation was conducted by Inspector PC. Chaturvedi.
(3.) IT may also be stated here that the injury reports of Bharat Singh, PW 1 and Phool Singh, PW 2 and post-mortem report of the deceased Lakkhu Singh were exhibited without formal proof as the ac cused- respondents admitted the same. As per the injury report Ex. Ka-23 of Bharat Singh, P W1 he had sustained a bruise with traumatic swelling which was of a blunt object and simple in nature. As per the injury report Ex. Ka-22 of Phool Singh, PW 2 he had sustained seven simple in juries of blunt object. The post- mortem report of the deceased Lakkhu Singh is Ex. Ka-21. Post- mortem over his dead body was conductedon21-8-1983at 4. 30p. m. by P. W. 4 Dr. G. C. Agrawal. He was aged about 55 years. The following ante-mor-tem injuries were found on his person: 1. Lacerated wound 2. 5 cm x 1/2 cm x scalp deep on left side of head 10 cm from left ear and 14 cm from left eyebrow. On dissection 2 cc hematoma present underneath the scalp. 2. Contusion 8 cm x 6 cm on outer aspect of left upper arm. Upper part. On dissection hematoma present in subcutaneous tissues and muscle fibers lacerated. 3. Abraded contusion 10 cm x 8 cm on dorsum of left hand wrist. On dissection exten sive hematoma present in subcutaneous tissues. 4. Contusion in an area of 24 em x 8 cm on front of leg (left) in middle. On dissection exten sive hematoma present on muscles, tisses torn. 5. Contusion 11 cm x 10 cm on outer aspect of right upper arm middle. On dissection extensive hematoma present in tissues and muscles torn. Abraded contusion 6 cm x 4 cm on back of right upper arm upper part. On dissection hematoma present in tissues and muscles torn.;