Laxmi Prasad and Others vs State of U.P.

R.K. Rastogi, J.—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 15.1.2000 passed by Sri M. K. Mittal then learned Sessions Judge, Jalaun in S.T. No. 190/96, State v. Luxmi Prasad and Ors. S.T. No. 190/96 : Case Crime No. 292/96 (Case Crime No. 292/96) of P.S. Ata, District Jalaun.

The facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 14.6.1996 at 9.10 a.m. Babuji son of Sri Kishori Lal resident of Jora Khera, P.S. Ata lodged a F.I.R. at police station Ata with these allegations that on the aforesaid date at about 6 a.m. he alongwith his father Kishori Lal and brother Santosh had gone to their barn (khalihan) for cutting branches of a neem tree which had fallen down in a thunder storm. When they had cut some branches, his grand-father Laxmi Prasad and cousin brother Amar Nath having single barrel guns in their hands and uncle Kripal Singh having an axe in his hand reached there and abused them, and asked them as to why they were cutting branches of the neem tree. His father Kishori Lal replied that they may also cut the branches, then the above named accused persons again abused them, and Laxmi Prasad fired from the gun in his hand upon his father Kishori Lal who received the fire arm injury on his stomach ; Babuji and his brother Santosh rushed there to protect him but Amar Nath fired from his gun towards Santosh from behind. Then Babuji tried to run away from the spot but Kripal Singh gave an axe blow upon him. He protected himself by taking axe blow upon his hand. Consequently, he received injury on the hand. Kripal Singh gave axe blow upon head of Santosh and thereafter another blow of axe upon eye of Kishori Lal. On hearing noise, mother of Babuji also reached there. Amar Nath gave an axe blow upon her head also. Kishori Lal and Santosh died on the spot as a result of these injuries. Thereafter, the above named accused persons ran away towards Sunahata. Thereafter Babuji got a report of this incident written by Dharmendra Singh Lodhi and then he went to the police station and lodged the report.

On the basis of above report the police registered Case Crime No. 292/96, under Sections 302 and 307, I.P.C. against the accused persons and started investigation. Inquest reports of the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh Kumar were prepared and then the dead bodies were sent for post mortem. Post mortem of the dead body of Kishori Lal was performed on 15.6.96 at 4.30 p.m. and in the opinion of the Doctor the death had taken place one and half days ago. He had found the following ante-mortem injuries on the dead body of Kishori Lal:

Incised wound 8 cm. - 2 cm. - bone deep on left side of fore-head including left eye. Underlying bone is cut.

Incised wound 3 cm. - 2 cm. present over right side head bone deep 4 cm. above the ear.

Abrasion 2 cm. - 1 cm. present over left side chest 10 cm. below nipple.

Gun shot wound of entry 1 cm. - 1 cm. - cavity deep present over left side abdomen 5 cm. lateral to umbilicus. Margins inverted.

Gun shot wound of entry 3 cm. - 2 cm. present over iliac region left side to just above iliac region, cavity deep. Margins inverted.

Gunshot wound of exit 2 cm. - 1.5 cm. present over right side of abdomen 15 cm. below iliac region. Margins everted.

Gun shot wound of exit 3.5 cm. - 2.5 cm. present over right side of abdomen 2 cm. below injury No. 6.

Incised wound 8 cm. - 5 cm. - 2 cm. present over left thigh medial aspect 15 cm. above knee.

Incised wound 9 cm. - 5 cm. present over (Rt) side thigh medial aspect 15 cm. below groin.

In the opinion of the doctor, death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries.

The post mortem of dead body of Santosh was conducted on 15.6.96 at 5.30 p.m. and in the opinion of the doctor his death had also taken place one and half days ago. He had found the following ante-mortem injuries on the dead body of Santosh:

Incised wound 15 cm. ? 5 cm. ? bone deep present over lower part back of head (Rt) side. Underlying bone is cut, brain matter coming out. Wound is deep upto cervical spine. Margins sharp.

Gunshot wound of entry 1 cm. ? 1 cm. present over (Lt) side back 15 cm. below lower angle of scapula. Blackening present. Margins inverted, direction from back towards front and upward.

Gun shot wound of exit 3 cm. ? 2 cm. cavity deep present over (Lt) side chest. Anterior aspect 5 cm. below nipple. Margin everted.

In the opinion of the doctor cause of death was shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem injuries.

The injuries of Babuji were medically examined by the Doctor of P.H.C., Ata, Jalaun on 14.6.96 at 5 p.m. He had received the following injuries on his person:

Incised wound 4 cm. x 1/2 cm. x skin deep on right side of forearm 9 cm. below posterior side of the elbow joint.

Incised wound 1.5 cm. x 1 cm. right side of forearm 4 cm. above posterior side. Bleeding was present.

Contusion with swelling 2 cm. x 2 cm. on the posterior side of left wrist joint. Colour red.

Abrasion 3.5 cm. x 1 cm. an anterior aspect of the back below mandible.

In the opinion of the doctor, all these injuries were simple in nature. Injuries No. 1 and 2 were caused by sharp edged weapon and injuries No. 3 and 4 were caused by hard and blunt object. Injuries were half day old at the time of examination.

Smt. Lilawati wife of Kishori Lal was medically examined at the same hospital on 14.6.96 at 4.30 p.m. She had received the following injuries on her person:

Lacerated wound 3 cm. x .5 cm. x muscle deep on the parietal region, midline of head. Bleeding was present. X-ray advised and kept under observation.

Contusion with swelling 3.5 cm. x 2.5 cm. on right shoulder joint. Colour red.

Lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. x skin deep on right forearm anterior aspect of the wrist joint.

Contusion 4 cm. x 3 cm. on right side upper thigh 10 cm. below iliac crest. Colour red.

The Investigating Officer had collected samples of blood stained and plain earth from the places where dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh Kumar were found and after sealing them separately prepared their memos. Thereafter the I.O. collected two empty cartridge of red colour and two plastic tiklies and one paper tikli from the spot and prepared their recovery memo in presence of witnesses and they were sent for chemical examination. The I.O. had also collected blood stained tahmad underwear, dhoti, baniyan and dupatta of the deceased Kishori Lal and Santosh which were also sent for chemical examination in sealed packets. According to the Chemical Examiner''s report, the sample of earth collected on the spot at both places where the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh were found, had human blood and the tahmad, underwear, dhoti, baniyan and dupatta of Kishori Lal and Santosh and the cork piece recovered from dead body of Kishori Lal had blood stains and there was human blood on tahmad, baniyan and cork piece. Blood stains on the remaining articles were disintegrated.

The police after investigation submitted a charge-sheet under Sections 302 and 307, I.P.C. against all the accused persons.

Charges under Sections 302/34, 324/34 and 323/34, I.P.C. were framed against the accused persons by the trial court to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

The prosecution examined Babuji as P.W. 1. He narrated the entire F.I.R. version on oath. He has submitted that after the incident he had requisitioned a blank paper from the village and had dictated the F.I.R. of the incident to Dharmendra on the spot and Dharmendra had read over the F.I.R. to him and then he had put his thumb mark on that report. He has proved the F.I.R. as Ext. Ka1. He has further stated that after putting his thumb mark on that report he and his mother had gone to the police station Ata where he had given that F.I.R. to the Head Moharrir who had written the report.

Smt. Lilawati was examined as P.W. 2. She is wife of deceased Kishori Lal and mother of deceased Santosh Kumar and informant Babuji. She is an eye-witness of the incident and she has stated that she reached the spot on hearing the noise and saw the incident. She has further stated that the accused Amarnath, after snatching axe from Kripal Singh, had given axe blow upon Babuji, and then he had also given an axe blow upon her, and then she had fallen down.

Dr. R. K. Dubey was examined as P.W. 3. He had performed post mortem of the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh. He has proved the post mortem reports Exts. Ka-2 and Ka-3.

Dr. Nabab Singh Jadaun was examined as P.W. 4. He had performed medical examination of Babuji and Smt. Lilawati on 14.6.1996. He had proved their injury reports Exts. Ka-4 and Ka-5.

Constable Ramjit was examined as P.W. 5. He had proved Chik report Ext. Ka-6 prepared on the basis of the F.I.R. (Ext. Ka-1) and its entry made in the G.D. Ext. Ka-7.

An affidavit was filed by the constable Mohd. Kasim in which he stated that on 14.6.96 at 9.10 a.m. he alongwith S.O. Sri Lekhraj Singh and constable Tirthraj and other constables had proceeded from the Police Station Ata for the spot in connection with investigation of this case and the inquest reports of the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh were prepared from 10.15 a.m. to 1.15 p.m. Thereafter both these dead bodies were sealed and they were given to him and to constable Tirthraj alongwith 8 documents each. He and constable Tirthraj took the dead bodies with them and on 15.6.96 at 4 p.m. delivered those dead bodies in the mortuary at police line Orai in sealed condition and after post mrotem of these dead bodies, they had handed over two packets with two envelopes at police station Ata at 8.45 p.m. The accused have cross-examined him and his cross-examination was recorded as P.W. 6.

Constable Tejveer Singh was examined as P.W. 7 in which he has stated on oath that on 2.8.96 he had taken the case property in sealed condition to the Forensic Science Laboratory at Agra and had delivered it at F.S.L., Agra. Chemical Examiner''s Report has been tendered in evidence by the prosecution and it has been marked as Ext. Ka-8. The forwarding letter with which the case property was sent to the F.S.L., Agra has been proved as Ext. Ka-9 by P.W. 7.

Sri Lekhraj Singh S.I. was examined as P.W. 8. Investigation of this case was assigned to him. He had prepared the inquest reports of the dead bodies and then had sealed them. He has proved the inquest report of Santosh as Ext. Ka-10. He had sent the dead body for post mortem alongwith copies of the inquest report, chik report, the G.D. Entry, Photo Lash, Challan Lash, Specimen seal, Letters to the C.M.O. and the R.I. These documents were proved as Exts. Ka-11 to Ka-16. He has also proved the inquest report of the dead body of Kishori Lal as Ext. Ka-17 and the aforesaid concerned documents in respect of the dead body as Exts. Ka-18 to Ka-23. He also proved the recovery memo of ordinary earth and blood stained earth as Ext. Ka-24 and recovery memo of empty cartridges, Plastic Tiklies as Ext. Ka-25. He also identified the blood stained earth, ordinary earth, empty cartridges, tickli plastic, one tahmad, one baniyan, one dhoti, one underwear and one dupatta of the deceased persons. They were marked as material Exts. Ka-1 to 13. During investigation he also prepared site plan of the place of the incident which is marked as Ext. Ka-26. After completion of investigation he submitted a charge-sheet against the accused persons, Ext. Ka-27.

Statements of Vishnu Bihari Chaturvedi, who was posted as Pharmacist at Orai District Hospital at that time and of Dharmendra Singh scribe of the F.I.R., were recorded as Court witnesses u/s 311, Cr. P.C., on the request of the accused. Sri Vishnu Bihari Chaturvedi has stated in his statement as C.W. 1 that on 15.6.96 he was posted as Pharmacist in that hospital and the entries on that date at serial Nos. 210 to 211 concerning the deceased of this case were made by him in his own handwriting and they were initialled by Dr. R. K. Dubey but the entry at serial No. 209 which was in respect of deceased Santosh Kumar Tiwari son of Rameshwar Dayal was not in his handwriting and he could not tell as to in whose handwriting it was written. He proved the photo copies of the aforesaid entries at Serials No. 209, 210 and 211.

Mr. Dharmendra Singh C.W. 2 stated in his statement that he had written the F.I.R. of the incident on the dictation of a Sub-Inspector at the police station. He further stated that he had come to the Court on that date with Hukum Singh son of Laxmi Prasad and the informant Babuji, and that they were having talks with Hukum Singh in respect of the village before giving his statement. During cross-examination, he admitted that he is grandson of real sister of the accused Laxmi Prasad. He further stated that he had written the F.I.R. on the next day of the incident at 10 a.m. at the police station on the dictation of the Sub-Inspector.

The accused in their statements admitted their relationships with the informant and his other family members, but they denied the allegation of committing murder of Kishori Lal and Santosh and causing injuries to Babuji and Lilawati.

Accused Laxmi Prasad further stated that this false case was registered against him and his family members on account of enmity, and witnesses were also falsely deposing against them on account of enmity and Ram Ratan had got a false case registered against them and he was doing pairvi of this case, and the gun and cartridges were taken by the Sub-Inspector from his house.

The accused took opportunity to produce defence evidence but no defence evidence was produced by them.

In this case a local inspection was made by the Presiding Officer of the Court on the request of the parties. His inspection report bears papers No. 309 and 310. Objections were invited from both the parties against this inspection report. The prosecution filed objection dated 26.11.1999. It was stated therein that the incident had taken place in hot season but on 19.11.1999 rains had taken place when local inspection was made and there was water logging, and so the direct passage towards the school was flooded with water and so a long passage was used at the time of local inspection for going to the Primary Pathshala and so there was some difference in the counting of steps. No other objeciton was made by the prosecution. The accused have given a long objection against the report contained in Papers Nos. 311-K, 312-K and 313-K.

Learned Presiding Officer of the Court, after hearing the case, came to the conclusion that all the charges were sufficiently proved against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubts. He, therefore, convicted the accused persons u/s 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced them to life imprisonment and to two years R.I., u/s 324/34, I.P.C. and to one year R.I. u/s 323/34, I.P.C. All the sentences were to run concurrently. Aggrieved with the above conviction and sentences the accused-Appellants have filed this appeal.

We have heard Mr. Apul Misra, learned amicus curiae, appearing on behalf of the Appellants and the learned A.G.A., for the State.

Learned amicus curiae first of all assailed the F.I.R. of this case. He submitted that the F.I.R. is ante timed and it was not written by Dharmendra on the dictation of Babuji at the place of incident but at the police station on the dictation of the Sub-Inspector as stated by Dharmendra as C.W. 2 who was summoned by the Court on the request of the accused u/s 311, Cr. P.C. He further pointed out that this F.I.R. was not lodged on 14.6.1996 at 9.10 a.m., but on 15.6.1996 as stated by Dharmendra as C.W. 2.

In reply, learned A.G.A. submitted that the F.I.R. was actually dictated by Babuji on the spot to Dharmendra on 14.6.96 which was registered at police station Ata on that very day at 9.10 a.m., and that subsequently Dharmendra was won over by the accused persons and so on their request he was examined by the Court as C.W. 2 and he gave a false statement before the Court at that time. It is to be seen that Dharmendra is a common relative of both the parties as he is grandson of real sister of the accused Laxmi Prasad, and cousin brother of informant Babuji. He has written in the third line of the report Ext. Ka-1 "Aaj Dinank 14.6.1996 Sabere 6 baje...." The above description of date and time of the incident in the F.I.R. goes to show that it was actually written on 14.6.1996 in the morning just after the incident. It is also to be seen that as pointed out above he is a common relative of both the parties and not an outsider who might have been ignorant of the facts of the incident which happened between the parties. An outsider could say that he simply wrote the F.I.R. on the dictation of another person without knowing the correctness of the contents, but he being a common relative of both the parties was not expected to describe false facts in the F.I.R., and when he wrote in the F.I.R. that the incident had taken place on 14.6.06 at 6.00 a.m. between Babuji, his father Kishori Lal, brother Santosh and mother Lilawati on one side and the accused Laxmi Prasad, Kripal Singh and Amar Nath on other side, the description of that incident written in the F.I.R. cannot be doubted nor it can be expected that he would have mentioned wrong date, time and facts of the incident in the F.I.R. It appears that Dharmendra was subsequently won over by the accused persons, and so he being common relative of both the parties, subsequently thought it proper to support neither of the parties, and so he gave a statement before the Court on 13.9.99, after the lapse of more than three years from the date of the incident, that he was not present on the spot as on the date of incident he had gone out station and on the next day at 10.00 a.m. he came back and then wrote the F.I.R. on the dictation of the Sub-Inspector at the police station. His above statement does not inspire any confidence. If the Sub-Inspector was dictating him a false report, he could have refused to write that report, and even if the police had got it written under pressure containing false allegations against his relatives, he could have complained to the higher police authorities soon thereafter, but did not do so. All these facts go to show that the assertions made by him in his statement as C.W. 2 before the Court on 13.9.99 are totally false and he has made a false statement after being won over by the accused persons.

Learned amicus curiae further submitted that according to the prosecution case the inquest proceedings of the dead bodies were completed on 14.6.96 at 1.15 p.m. and thereafter the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh were sealed and sent to the mortuary for post-mortem. He, however, submitted that these dead bodies were received in mortuary in the late hours on 15.6.96 and post-mortem of the dead bodies of Kishori Lal and Santosh was performed at 4.30 p.m. and 5.30 p.m. respectively. He submitted that it is not clear as to what were the police constables doing up to 4 p.m. on 15.6.96 when the dead bodies were delivered at mortuary. He contended that actually the incident had not taken place in the morning of 14.6.96 and it had taken place at sometime in between the night of 14/15.6.96 by some unknown culprits and the accused persons have been falsely implicated on account of enmity and the late delivery of dead bodies at the mortuary supports this contention and it also goes to show that the F.I.R. of the case is ante timed.

We do not find any force in this contention also. It is to be seen that on the basis of the F.I.R. written by Dharmendra Singh, the chik report was prepared at the police station Ata at 14.6.96 at 9.10 a.m. as Case Crime No. 222/96 u/s 302/307, I.P.C. This case crime number and aforesaid sections of the I.P.C. have been described in the inquest report and other documents like Challan Lash, Photo Lash etc., and in the letters to the C.M.O. and the R.I. for post-mortem of the dead bodies. At the bottom of both the inquest reports the list of the documents, which were being sent to the concerned authorities, has been given and in that list there is description of Chik F.I.R. at serial No. 2. Thus, all these documents go to show that the F.I.R. was in existence when the inquest reports were prepared and as such there is no force in the contention of the accused that the F.I.R. is ante timed.

It is also to be seen that Mohd. Kasim, who alongwith Constable Tirth Raj had taken the dead bodies to the Mortuary, has filed his affidavit in which he has stated that after receiving the dead bodies on 14.6.96 at 1.15 p.m., he and Tirathraj had taken the dead bodies on a Tractor to the Police lines and had reached there at about 5.30 to 6 p.m. on 14.6.96 and had deposited the dead bodies at the police lines that day and on 15.6.96 these dead bodies were delivered at about 4.00 p.m. in the mortuary.

Mohd. Kasim was cross-examined as P.W. 6 and there is nothing in his cross-examination which may go to discredit his testimony on this point. As such no adverse inference can be drawn against the prosecution on the basis of delivery of dead bodies in the mortuary on 15.6.96 at about 4.00 p.m.

It is to be seen that in the present case the incident of murder of Kishori Lal and Santosh had taken place on 14.6.96 at about 6 a.m. and the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged soon thereafter at 9.10 a.m. The distance of the police station from the place of incident is 7 kilo meters, and as such the F.I.R. was lodged promptly at the police station and this prompt F.I.R. mitigates the possibility of false implication of accused persons. It is also to be seen that both the eye-witnesses named Babuji and Smt. Lilawati P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 had received injuries in the incident. Their injury reports are on record. They had been examined on 14.6.96 at P.H.C., Ata by the doctor at 5.00 p.m. and 4.30 p.m. respectively. There were four injuries on the body of Babuji including two incised wounds upon his right side of fore arm and similarly Lilawati had also received four injuries including two lacerated wounds upon her parietal region and right fore arm besides two contusions. The injuries of both these persons were half day old in the opinion of the doctor who examined them on 14.6.96 at 4.30 and 5 p.m. respectively. It may also be mentioned that in the chitthi majroobi of both these injured persons which were sent from the police station to the hospital for their medical examination Case Crime No. 292/96 and sections of the offences (302 and 307 I.P.C.) were mentioned. This fact also goes to show that on 14.6.96 when chitthi majroobis were prepared, the F.I.R. had been registered at the police station. It is also to be seen that according to the post-mortem reports of Kishori Lal and Santosh conducted on 15.6.96 at 4.30 p.m. and 5.30 p.m. respectively, the doctor was of the opinion that their death had taken place one and half days ago. Thus, the time of the incident, according to all these four documents of medical evidence tallies with the prosecution case, and this fact again goes to falsify the contention of the accused-Appellants that the F.I.R. was written by Dharmendra at the police station on the dictation of the Sub-Inspector on 15.6.96 at 10 a.m. If the F.I.R. had been prepared at the police station on 15.6.96, the crime number and the sections of the offences could not be mentioned in the chitthi majroobis which were sent to the P.H.C. on 14.6.96 when the injuries of the injured persons were medically examined by the doctor of the P.H.C., Ata.

The presence of aforesaid both the injured witnesses on the spot is sufficiently proved from this fact that they had received injuries in this incident. Both of them have completely corroborated the prosecution case. They have been sufficiently cross-examined at length by the accused persons but nothing has come in their cross-examinations which may go to discredit their testimony. Learned Sessions Judge has elaborately discussed the evidence in his judgment and has rightly believed their testimony. We find no error in his judgment.

It has been stated by the accused Laxmi Prasad in his statement u/s 313, Cr. P.C., that he and his family members had been falsely implicated in the case on account of enmity with Ram Ratan who was doing pairvi of the case. It has, however, nowhere been disclosed as to what was the enmity of the accused with Ram Ratan and what was its cause and what pairvi was being done by Ram Ratan. The accused neither stated anything in this regard in their statements u/s 313, Cr. P.C., nor produced any evidence to this effect.

It was further submitted by the learned amicus curiae that there was no sufficient motive for the accused persons to commit murder of Kishori Lal who was son of Laxmi Prasad and real brother of Kripal Singh and of Santosh who was real grandson of Laxmi Prasad and nephew of Kripal Singh. It appears that there was some property dispute between the parties and a quarrel took place with regard to cutting of branches of a neem tree which had fallen down and at that time the accused committed murder of these two persons and also caused injuries to Babuji and Lilawati. It is also to be seen that there was no motive for Babuji and Lilawati to falsely implicate their own family members for murder of Kishori Lal and Santosh. The allegation of the accused persons that Kishori Lal and Santosh had been murdered by some unknown persons in between the night of 14/15.6.96 has been found to be false by us as discussed above. When their murder had taken place in broad day light, there was no motive for Babuji and Lilawati to spare the real culprits and to falsely implicate the accused persons who are their own family members. Moreover, when there is direct evidence of eye-witnesses in a broad day light incident, the absence or insufficiency of motive loses its importance in view of direct testimony of the eye-witnesses on the point.

The position in this way is that the prosecution case was sufficiently proved against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubts and the learned Sessions Judge committed no error by recording a finding to this effect. We are in agreement with this finding and confirm the same.

Learned amicus curiae in the last submitted before us that it was a case of sudden provocation and so no case u/s 302, I.P.C. is made out and at the most the case falls u/s 304, I.P.C. We do not find any force in this contention also. It is to be seen that all the accused persons had reached the spot having arms with them. Laxmi Prasad and Amar Nath each had single barrel guns with them, and Kripal Singh had an axe with him which is a heavy cutting weapon. Laxmi Prasad and Amar Nath fired upon Kishori Lal and Santosh from those guns and Kripal Singh gave axe blows to Kishori Lal and Santosh upon their head. A perusal of the post-mortem report of Kishori Lal reveals that he had received two gun shot wounds of entry alongwith their corresponding exit wounds. He had also received incised wounds on his head which were caused to him by Kripal Singh. Santosh had received one gun shot wound of entry with its corresponding exit wound and one incised wound. As per prosecution case Amar Nath had fired upon Santosh from behind and Kripal Singh had given an axe blow upon the head of Santosh. It is a double murder case in which all three accused actively participated and the acts done by them make it clear that they had intention to kill Kishori Lal and Santosh, and with that intention they had caused fire arm injuries to them and had also given axe blows to them. It is thus a clear cut case of murder punishable u/s 302, I.P.C. and the learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted the accused-Appellants u/s 302/34, I.P.C. for murder of Kishori Lal and Santosh and under Sections 324/34 and 323/34, I.P.C. for the injuries caused to Babuji and Smt. Lilawati. The conviction order passed by the learned Sessions Judge against the accused-Appellants and the order awarding sentences to them do not call for any interference by this Court. Thus, there is no force in this appeal and it is liable to be dismissed.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge convicting the accused-Appellants under Sections 302/34, 324/34 and 323/34, I.P.C. and the sentences awarded by him for the above offences to the accused-Appellants are hereby confirmed.

The accused-Appellants Laxmi Prasad and Amar Nath are detained in Central Jail, Fatehgarh. They shall remain in custody to undergo the sentences awarded by the Court. Kripal Singh is on bail. He shall be taken into custody to serve out the remaining sentence. A copy of this order shall be sent to the C.J.M., Jalaun at Orai for taking Kripal Singh into custody to serve out the remaining sentence.