Allahabad High Court
Ram Kumar & 4 Ors. vs State Of U.P. on 3 September, 2014
Bench: Ravindra Singh, Vishnu Chandra Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Reserved
Criminal Appeal No. 3036 of 2009
Ram Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P.
Hon. Ravindra Singh, J.
Hon. Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.
Heard Sri S.H. Imbrahim, learned counsel for the appellants Sone Lal, Avadhesh and Balak Ram.
None appears to press the bail application of the appellants Ram Kumar and Shrawan, their bail application is disposed of for want of prosecution.
The appellants Sone Lal, Avadhesh, Balak Ram, Ram Kumar and Shrawan have been convicted for the offence punishable under sections 147, 323/149, 364/149, 302/149 and 201 IPC. The appellants Ram Kumar and Shrawan have been further convicted for the offence punishable under section 148 and the appellant Ram Kumar has been further convicted for the offence punishable under section 25/27 Arms Act. The other co-accused namely Jai Pal, Nattha, Desh Raj, Raja Ram, Ram Kumar son of Visheshwar Dayal, Mede Lal and Ganeshi have been acquitted for the offence punishable under sections 147, 323/149, 364/149, 302/149 and 201 IPC and the appellant Shrawan has been acquitted for the offence punishable under section 3/25 Arms Act.
From the perusal of the records, it reveals that FIR of this case has been lodged by P.W. 1 Ram Krishan on 3.11.2005 in respect of the incident allegedly occurred on 2.11.2005 at about 5.30 P.M. alleging therein that the appellant Ram Kumar, Shrawan, Sone Lal and Avadhesh armed with fire arms, lathi and Danda raided the house, they did the marpeet with the first informant, his daughter Pushpawati, his son Mool Chand and Raj Bahadur and they damaged his tractor also. On hue and cry his brother Ram Bali, villagers Mewa Lal, Sewa Ram and many other persons came in rescue but all the four accused persons forcibly taken away to his brother Ram Bali to the out side of the village where four shots were fired. The intensive search was made in the night but no whereabouts of his brother could be known, he was having suspicion upon all the four accused persons that they had committed the murder of his brother Ram Bali. On 6.11.2005 at the pointing out of the appellant Balak Ram, the dead body was taken into the possession by the police and it was sealed at about 9.30 A.M. After recovery of the dead body the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, and 201 were also added along with offence under section 323, 427 and 364 IPC. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased had sustained fire arm ante mortem injuries in which injury No. 1 was fire arm wound of entry in right side of the stomach, injury No. 2 was fire arm wound of entry on the right side of the neck, it was having exit would marked as 3-B and injury No. 3-A was fire arm would of entry having its exit would marked as 3-B. In the said incident Mool Chand, Raj Bahadur, Ram Krishan and Pushpawati were medically examined. The injured Mool Chand had sustained two abrasions and one contusion. The injured Raj Bahadur had sustained five contusions. The injured Ram Krishan had sustained a contusion and complaint of pain on the back. The injured Pushpawati had sustained two lacerated wounds and one contusion. The injuries sustained by the injured persons were simple in nature. In support of the prosecution version 11 witnesses have been examined in which P.W. 1 Ram Krishan, P.W. 2 Raj Bahadur and P.W. 11 Smt. Pushpawati have been examined as eye witnesses, they had sustained injuries in the said incident also. According to the deposition made by P.W. 1 Ram Krishan, P.W. 2 Raj Bahadur and P.W. 11 Smt. Pushpawati the appellants Ram Kumar and Shrawan were armed with country made pistols. The deceased had also sustained injuries caused by fire arms. He had not sustained any injury caused by hard and blunt object. In such circumstance, the case of the appellants Sone Lal and Avadhesh who were allegedly armed with Lathi, danda is distinguishable with the case of Ram Kumar and Shrawan who were armed with country made pistols and the deceased had sustained injuries, all the injuries were caused by fire arm. In such circumstances, the appellants Sone Lal and Avadhesh are entitled for bail.
So far as the appellant Balak Ram is concerned, at his pointing out the dead body of the deceased has been recovered from the lake, he is not named in the FIR and no active role of committing the alleged offence has been assigned by the eye witnesses. In such circumstances, he is also entitled for bail.
Let the appellants Sone Lal, Avadhesh and Balak Ram convicted in S.T. No. 310 of 2006, under Sections 147, 323/149, 364/149, 302/149 and 201 IPC, P.S. Bangarmau, District Unnao be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
The realization of fine shall remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
Dt: 03.09.2014
RPD
