Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 1983. Case: Ramrikh Vs State of U.P.. High Court of Allahabad (India)
| Case Number | Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 1983 |
| Judges | S.K. Gupta and Naheed Ara Moonis, JJ. |
| Issue | Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 161, 313; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 134; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 302, 323, 394, 452 |
| Citation | 2016 (93) ALLCC 305, 2016 (92) ALLCC 409 |
| Judgement Date | December 11, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Allahabad (India) |
Judgment:
Naheed Ara Moonis, J.
-
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 15.1.1983 passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in S.T. No. 146 of 1982 arising out of Case Crime No. 169 of 1981 whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under section 302 IPC and five years rigorous imprisonment under section 394 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The facts emanating from the prosecution case are that a First Information Report was lodged by Mamchand on 29.11.1981 at 10.30 A.M. in respect of the incident occurred in the intervening night of 28/29.11.1981 at about 12 P.M. against the appellant Ramrikh and three unknown persons contending therein that on previous night he was sleeping in his hut along with his wife. His brother Meharchand was sleeping along with his wife under a thatch adjoining the house where a lantern was burning. Prakasho, the sister-in-law of Meharchand, was also sleeping in the adjacent room. At about 12 P.M. in the night on the scream of Meharchand the complainant woke up and flashed the torch and rushed towards his brother Meharchand. He had seen that four miscreants holding lathi and spears were beating and dragging his brother Meharchand and Kranti, the wife of Meharchand out of the house. His brother Meharchand and Kranti were screaming badly. At this his nephew Pal came flashing torch light. Prakasho, the sister-in-law of Meharchand, also came out on hearing shrieks. She was also assaulted by the accused persons. Out of them the appellant Ramrikh who resides near his house, was recognized in the torch and lantern light. Rest of the persons were not recognized at that moment. When all the persons raised alarm and exhorted the appellant Ramrikh fired at his brother Meharchand with katta. Two of the accused also ran towards the complainant Mamchand. Then he retraced and tried to run few paces to save life towards north. They had also fired at him but it was missed. Thereafter all the accused persons entered into the house of his brother Meharchand and took away gold and silver ornaments as well as clothes. The complainant's brother Meharchand, his wife Kranti and his sister-in-law Prakasho had sustained serious injuries, on account of which, they were carried on a tractor to Dadri Hospital. The doctor had advised to take them to Delhi for treatment. His brother, however, succumbed to the injuries on his way to Delhi. Few days before the incident Ramrikh's brother Rame and one Santram and others of Badoli had set fire to the house of his brother Meharchand regarding which a report was lodged consequently, Rame, the brother of the appellant Ramrikh and others were sent to jail. On account of the aforesaid enmity Ramrikh, the appellant in association with his companions had committed murder of his brother Meharchand. The complainant has left the dead body of the deceased Meharchand and injured at his house to lodge the First Information Report for action be taken against accused persons.
-
The First Information Report was scribed by Ramvir Singh. Triloki Chand (P.W-5), Head Constable prepared the chik report and registered the case as Case Crime No. 169 of 1981 under sections 302 and394, IPC, P.S. Dankaur, District Baulandshahr in the general diary Ext. Ka-3.
-
The investigation was entrusted to Station Officer J.S. Tyagi (P.W-8) who recorded the statement of the informant. He proceeded along with S.I. Shishram Singh and other police force to the place of occurrence. J.S. Tyagi (P.W-8) had taken the custody of the corpse and started the inquest at 1.30 P.M. which was concluded at about 3 P.M. on the same day and was proved by him as Ext. Ka-7 and recorded the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. He had also prepared the corpse diagram Ext. Ka-8, Challan of the corpse Ext. Ka-9, letter to Chief Medical Officer for post-mortem Ext. Ka-10 and letter to the R.I. Ext. Ka11. The sealed cadaver was carried out by Constable Ranjeet Singh (P.W-6) and Vijay Pal Singh for the autopsy. The investigating officer J.S. Tyagi (P.W-8) had interrogated Smt. Kranti, the wife of the deceased Meharchand and Smt. Prakasho, the sister-in-law of the deceased Meharchand and other persons. He had also collected blood stained and plain earth of which memo was prepared as Ext. Ka-13. The lantern was also recovered which was Exhibited as Ka-14 and the electric torches of the complainant and witness Pal of which memo was prepared as Ext. Ka-15 and were handed over to them. The investigating officer (P.W-8) had also prepared the site plan proved by him which was Exhibited as Ka-12. After completion of investigation on the basis of material collected, the investigating officer forwarded the charge sheet against the appellant Ramrikh which was Exhibited as Ka-16.
-
Dr. S.K. Dutt (P.W-4) who had performed the autopsy of the deceased Meharchand on 30.11.1981 at 4.50 P.M., had found following ante-mortem injuries which are as follows:
• Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/4" over left leg 2" below right knee joint;
• Lacerated wound 1/2" x 1/4" over right forearm back 2" below right elbow;
• Firearm wound of entry 1 1/4" x 1 1/4" x cavity deep 3 1/2" away from umbilicus (abdomen) at 10 O' clock position right side with blackening present;
• Firearm wound (Exit) 1 1/2 x 1 1/4" x cavity over abdomen left side 3" away from umbilicus at 2 O' clock position intestine with omentum coming out;
• Abraded contusion 1/2" x 1" on left arm front 2" below left shoulder;
• Contusion 4" 4" over left half of scalp.
-
On internal examination he found the frontal and left parietal bones fractured with sub-dural haematoma. Membranes of the brain were intact but were congested and the brain was compressed with blood clot on the left side. The peritoneum was lacerated at the place of fire arm wound and there was blood in the abdomen. There was digested food in the stomach. The small as well as large intestines were lacerated and so also the lobe of the liver. In his opinion the death had resulted from shock and haemorrhage due to the ante-mortem injuries. The postmortem report has been proved by him is Ext. Ka-2.
-
Dr. S.R. Chaudhary (P.W-7) had examined the injuries of Smt. Kranti, the wife of the deceased on 29.11.1981 at 7.15 P.M. and following injuries were found on her person:
• Incised wound 3 cm. x 1/2 cm. x bone on top of left forehead, 4 cm. above left eye brow, margins are clean cut bleeding present;
• Contusion 9 cm. x 2 cm. on back of left chest on scapula bone;
• Contusion 10 cm. x 2 cm. on back of middle of chest left 8 cm. below injury No. 2;
• Contusion 6 cm. x 2 cm. 2 cm. below injury No. 3 kept under observation;
• Contusion 8 cm. x 2 cm. on top of right shoulder.
Injury No. 1 was caused by sharp weapon and the rest were caused by some blunt object. Injuries No. 4 and 5 were kept under observation and X-ray was advised. The injury report is Ext. Ka-5.
-
Smt. Prakasho, the sister-in-law of the deceased was also examined by Dr. S.R. Chaudhary (P.W-7) at 7.30 P.M. and the following injuries were found on her person:
• Lacerated wound 2 cm. x.5 cm. x scalp on back of left side 3 cm. above left ear;
• Lacerated wound 5 cm. x 1 cm. on outer aspect of left forearm middle deep up to muscle;
• Traumatic swelling 6 cm. x 4 cm. on front of left knee.
-
All the injuries were simple caused by some blunt object. The duration of the injuries of both the victims was 1/4 day which tallies with the time of the occurrence. The injury report of Prakasho (P.W-3) is Ext. Ka-6.
-
The case was committed to the Court of sessions. The charges were framed under sections 302 and394 IPC which were read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty. Hence the trial commenced.
-
The prosecution in order to bring home the charges under sections 302 and 394 IPC framed against the accused appellant examined 8 (eight) witnesses. Out of them three were witnesses of fact, namely, Mamchand who was examined as P.W-1, Kranti, the wife of the deceased as P.W-2 and Smt. Prakasho, sister of P.W-2 Kranti as P.W-3 who are the injured witness as they had been assaulted at the time of the incident. The prosecution examined formal witnesses, namely, Dr. S.K. Dutt as P.W-4 who had performed the autopsy of the deceased Meharchand, Head Constable Triloki Chand as P.VV-5 who had proved the chik report and the G.D. Entry, Ranjeet Singh as P.W-6 who took the dead body in a sealed cover for postmortem examination, Dr. S.R. Chaudhary as P.W-7 who had examined injured P.W-2 Kranti and P.W-3 Prakasho and S.O. Jitendra Singh Tyagi as P.W-8 who had conducted the investigation and submitted the charge sheet against the appellant Ramrikh.
-
The appellant was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. who had denied the incriminating circumstances put before him. He had also denied that his brother Rame had set fire the hut of the deceased Meharchand and has stated that he has falsely been implicated due to enmity and under the pressure of the police. He had also contended that the deceased Meharchand was a man of bad character and assaulted his brother's wife Gyanwati regarding which his brother Ram Murti had lodged a report. His brother has been implicated in a false case and on account of the same he has also been nominated in this crime. The appellant had...
To continue reading
Request your trial