Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

(The judgment is pronounced in terms of Chapter VII Sub-rule (2) of Rule (1) of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 by Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, J.) (Per Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J. for the Bench)

1. All these three appeals have been filed by the convicts/appellants Siya Ram @ Siya Ram Rawat, Ram Jas Rawat @ Ram Yash Rawat and Rang Bahadur Yadav @ Rangai against the impugned judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Faizabad in Sessions Trial No. 262 of 2011 (State Versus Siya Ram @ Siya Ram Rawat & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2011. Convicts/appellants Siya Ram @ Siya Ram Rawat and Rang Bahadur Yadav @ Rangai were sentenced under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "I.P.C.") and punished with life imprisonment coupled with a fine of Rs.10,000/- In default of payment of fine further imprisonment of six months was awarded. Convicts/appellants Siya Ram and Ram Jas Rawat Rawat were also held guilty under Section 504 IPC and punished with one year rigorous imprisonment. Convict/appellant Rang Bahadur Yadav @ Rangai was acquitted of charge frame under Section 504 IPC. Further all three convicts/appellants were acquitted of charges framed under Sections 506 and 120-B IPC. Convict/appellant Siya Ram was also acquitted of charge framed under Section 4/25 Arms Act.

2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the facts necessary for disposal of these appeals are:-

A first information report (in short "F.I.R.") was lodged by the complainant Ramu Yadav against the convicts/appellants Siya Ram and Ram Jas Rawat by presenting a written report Exhibit Ka-1 on 20.03.2011, at Case Crime No. 136 of 2011 at 14.30 hours, Police Station Patranga, District Faizabad. In the written report, it was stated that on 20.03.2011 at about 2 O'clock during the day Siya Ram and Ram Jas Rawat both son of Rati Pal, resident of village of the complainant, came infront of his house and started abusing. On this his brother Shiv Raj, who was having meals at that time, came out. As soon as Shiv Raj came out Siya Ram assaulted upon him with knife, he fell down being injured, the complainant raised alarm then his uncle Ram Baran, Mahadev son of Nannu, Lalla and many people of the village reached at the spot and when they tried to catch the accused persons, then Siya Ram aimed with knife on the complainant also and Ram Jas armed with Lathi also threatened to kill the complainant. The complainant and his uncle carried Shiv Raj along with other in a push-card to police station. The F.I.R was lodged under Sections 307,504 and 506 IPC. Later on, after the death of injured Shiv Ram Section 302 IPC was also added on the same day. The case was investigated. During investigation the complainant and Mahadev, Ram Baran, Shiv Kumar, Lalla and Pradeep filed affidavits implicating Rang Bahadur Yadav @ Rangai along with Siya Ram and Ram Jas and prayed for action against them. After investigation, Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet No. 44 of 2011 against convicts/appellants under Sections 302, 120-B, 504 and 506 IPC. A separate charge sheet no. 27/11 was also submitted against convict/appellant Siya Ram under Section 4/25 Arms Act for the alleged recovery of weapon of offence i.e. knife at the pointing out of the convict Siya Ram. The Magistrate concerned after taking cognizance of the offence committed the case to Sessions Court for trial. The Sessions Court framed charges against the convicts/appellants. They denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

10. Learned counsel for the convict/appellant Ram Jas Rawat @ Ram Yash Rawat in Criminal Appeal No. 1261 of 2012 argued that there is no evidence against the convict/appellant Ram Jas Rawat @ Ram Yash Rawat because according to prosecution version, Ram Jas Rawat assaulted the deceased with stick (Lathi) but no injury of stick (Lathi) was found in the postmortem on the body of the deceased. All the witnesses of facts are relative and interested witnesses. The ocular evidence is not in consonance with medical evidence available on record. The trial Court has committed a manifest error in not believing the version of defence which is more reliable and trustworthy than prosecution version. The trial Court on the basis of evidence of same set of witnesses have acquitted the convict/appellant from the charges framed under Sections 506 and 120-B IPC but relied upon for convicting the convict/appellant under Section 302 and 504 read with 34 IPC.

(i) Incised wound 1-1/2 X 1 cm over the left side of lower abdomen 7-1/2 cm above from left iliac crest.
(ii) Incised wound 2 X 1 cm over the left side of Back 20 cm below from the lower end of left scapula.

He has also stated that the deceased died by hemorrhage and shock due to these anti mortem injuries. This witness has proved the postmortem report of the deceased as Exhibit Ka-2.

20. P.W. 5 Sub-inspector Lal Bahadur, who initially did the investigation of the case has stated before the Court that on 20.03.2011, he was posted at Police Station Patranga, District Faizabad on the post of Sub-inspector. On the same day, on the basis of written report of complainant Ramu Yadav Case Crime No. 136 of 2011 under Sections 307, 504 and 506 IPC was registered against Siya Ram and Ram Jas and the investigation was entrusted to him. He recorded the statement of the complainant Ramu, inspected the site of the crime on the pointing out of the complainant and prepared the site plan. He collected the blood soaked soil and plain soil from the spot and prepared the recovery memo of the same in his hand writing and under his signature. This witness has proved the site-plan as Exhibit Ka-3 and recovery of plain soil and blood soaked soil as Exhibit Ka-4. The recovered plain soil and blood soaked soil were submitted by him at the Police Station concerned along with specimen seal. On 21.03.2011 by which entry in General Diary was made at "Rapat" No. 17, time- 18:15 hours. Thereafter, the investigation was handed over to Station House Officer (S.H.O) . He has further stated that the then S.H.O. Sarvesh Kumar had died now. He is well acquainted with his hand-writing and signature. S.H.O. Sarvesh Kumar had arrested the accused and recovered the weapon of crime i.e. knife. The recovery memo of knife is in his hand-writing and his signature on it, is there. On this recovery memo signature and thumb impression of Siya Ram was also taken. This witness has proved recovery memo as Exhibit Ka-5 and site-plan of spot of recovery of knife has also been proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-6 and he has stated that this site-plan was prepared by SHO Sarvesh Kumar.