Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The prosecution case is based upon a written report made by Pramod Kumar Shukla (PW-1), scribed by Vipin Shukla, as per which on 19.5.2004 the informant and his elder brother Ashok Kumar Shukla, Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad Konch and his cousin brother Santosh Kumar Shukla had gone to take part in the last rites of their neighbour Amar Chandra Agrawal. After the cremation was over, they were returning at about 10.30 in the morning and when they reached near Kanchad Baba Mandir at Tilak Nagar, Konch, an unknown person came from behind and took out a half barrel gun and shot Ashok Shukla on his head from behind. The assailant was apprehended on the spot by the cousin of informant, namely Santosh Shukla, and other persons present on the spot pounced on him and he was assaulted. Gun of the unknown assailant was snatched. It was only then that the second accused fired with an intent to kill and in the process Vinod Agrawal son of Babulal, Santosh Shukla son of Uma Shankar and Laxmi Narain Tiwari son of Mathura Prasad sustained firearm injuries. The companion of the main assailant tried to free the apprehended accused and when members of public chased him, the second assailant fled from the spot, and that the informant can recognize him. The dead body of Ashok Shukla was lying on the spot. The main assailant has also been apprehended alongwith his half barrel gun. It was alleged that deceased has been done to death through contract killers by paying them money. On the basis of such written report (Ex.Ka-1), the first information report came to be lodged in Case Crime No.166 of 2004, under Section 302, 307 IPC at about 11.20 am on 19.5.2004. The place of incident from the police station was about two kilometres. The police came on the spot and prepared a recovery memo of half barrel 12 bore damaged gun, which has been exhibited as Ex.Ka-2. The investigating officer also collected plain earth and bloodstained earth from the place of occurrence (Ex.Ka-19). The inquest commenced on the same day at 11.50 and concluded at 12.50. There is apparently an overwriting in the inquest on recording of Section 307 while referring to the case crime number. As per the inquest witnesses the deceased died due to gunshot injury and for ascertaining the correct cause of death the postmortem was required to be conducted. Consequently, postmortem has been conducted of the deceased at 2.00 pm on 19.5.2004. The deceased was around 50 years old and the time since death is determined as 6 hours. The deceased was of average built body and the cause of death is shock and haemorrhage on account of following ante-mortem firearm injuries:-

12. PW-1 is Pramod Kumar Shukla, who is the informant and has supported the prosecution case, according to which accused Anil Kumar Ahirwar fired on the deceased from behind by his half barrel gun, whereas the other accused namely Chhotu Pilot fired in defence of Anil Kumar Ahirwar and the bullet hit the three injured. This witness has also supported the prosecution case, as per which there was a property dispute between the deceased and Satya Narain Shukla, which is required to be elaborated, at this stage. As per the prosecution, PW-2 Brijmohan owned 8 bigha fertile land in the village. This land surreptitiously was got exchanged by accused Satya Narain Shukla in favour of his wife Smt. Sita Devi. The deceased came to the aid of Brijmohan and got an agreement to sale executed in favour of Pradeep Shukla and Awadh Kishor Niranjan in respect of the property, which has been obtained by the main accused Satya Narain Shukla. This apparently was the cause of discord between Satya Narain Shukla and the deceased Ashok Kumar Shukla. According to prosecution it is for this reason that Satya Narain Shukla arranged for contract killers, namely Anil Kumar Ahirwar and Chhotu Pilot and it was Anil Kumar Ahirwar, who in pursuance of such conspiracy shot dead the deceased. Though this witness has been elaborately cross-examined but he has remained firm in his deposition.

13. Brijmohan has appeared as PW-2 and has supported the prosecution case with regard to conspiracy being the cause of the killing of deceased.

14. Ram Babu Verma has been produced as PW-3. His testimony is also in support of the prosecution plea of conspiracy. PW-3 was engaged by the accused Satya Narain Shukla for looking after his cattle and he claims to have heard the accused Satya Narain Shukla talking to the two main accused Anil Kumar Ahirwar and Chhotu Pilot early in the morning hours of the date of incident. The witness apparently was arranging fodder for cattle when he overheard the accused Satya Narain Shukla that this is a good opportunity to eliminate the deceased as there would be a lot of rush during cremation. The witness also alleges that the gun and certain money were provided to the contract killers by Satya Narain Shukla as well as his sons. Similar stand has been taken by the PW-4 Smt. Vimla Devi, who also was working as domestic help with the accused Satya Narain Shukla. It is worth noticing, at this stage, that both PW-3 and PW-4 were introduced by the prosecution almost two and a half months after the filing of the chargesheets. As per the prosecution these two witnesses gave affidavits stating that they had heard the above conversation on the date of incident and it is thereafter that their statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. PW-3 and PW-4 have been cross-examined, particularly on the aspect of delayed disclosure made to the investigating officer with regard to the incident in question. The two prosecution witnesses have explained the delay on the ground that Satya Narain Shukla had threatened them as PW-3 had heard him talking to the main contract killers and a threat was extended that he would be eliminated if he would disclose such facts to anybody. It is for this reason that these witnesses left the village for almost two and a half months and it is only thereafter when they came to know that Satya Narain Shukla and his two sons have been arrested that they could muster enough courage to come to the police what they have heard. In the cross-examination these two witnesses, however, could not disclose as to when they came to know through newspaper about the arrest of the accused. In reply to specific question posed by the defence, PW-3 has stated as under:-

27. On the basis of evidence so led during course of trial, the court below has come to the conclusion that on account of enmity about landed property, the deceased has been done to death, pursuant to the planned conspiracy hatched up by Satya Narain Shukla and his two sons, wherein two accused Anil Kumar Ahirwar and Chhotu Pilot have been engaged as contract killers, and Anil Kumar Ahirwar not only killed the deceased, Ashok Kumar Shukla but his companion also caused firearm injuries to other three injured. A finding has been returned that the prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt and consequently accused appellants have been convicted and sentenced. Thus aggrieved, appeals are before this Court, challenging the impugned judgement and order passed in Sessions Trial Nos. 199 of 2004 and 200 of 2004.