# Dhruvjeet Singh v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2024) 5 ILRA 965
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-05-24
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 5218 of 2016
- **Bench:** Arvind Singh Sangwan, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dhruvjeet-singh-v-state-of-u-p-52110
- **Pages:** 35

## Headnote

A. Criminal Law- Criminal Procedure Code,
1973-Section 374(2)-Indian Penal Code,
1860-Sections 302, 307, 323, 504, 506,
147, 148 & 149 - Criminal Law Amendment
Act,2013 - Section 7 - Arms Act, 1959 -
Section 3/25 - challenge to - convictionappellants were convicted of murder of one
Havildar in the Army following an earlier
altercation-both PW-1 and PW-2 claimed
to
have
witnessed
the
attack-their
accounts were consistent, despite minor
discrepancies
raised
during
crossexamination-medical evidence confirmed
that deceased died of firearm injuriesPW-3 and PW5 corroborated the injuries
sustained
by
the
deceased-weapons
were recovered from the accused and
ballistic reports matched the cartridges
found at the crime scene-the motive was
rooted in animosity between the accused
and the deceased over prior disputes in
the market-Thus, the court upheld the
conviction of all accused-all five accused
were
sentenced
to
life
imprisonment.(Para 1 to 63)
The appeal is allowed. (E-6)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

_Characters 0–39,857 of 126,241. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39857 for what follows._

5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
965
(2024) 5 ILRA 965
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 24.05.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.
THE HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN
MISHRA, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 5218 of 2016
With
Criminal Appeal Nos. 5501 of 2016, 5502 of
2016 & 5649 of 2016

Dhruvjeet Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Babu Lal Ram, A, A, Amrendra Nath Singh, Bed
Prakash Rai, Gavendra Pal Singh

Counsel for the Respondent:
G.A., Rajesh Kumar Singh

A. Criminal Law- Criminal Procedure Code,
1973-Section 374(2)-Indian Penal Code,
1860-Sections 302, 307, 323, 504, 506,
147, 148 & 149 - Criminal Law Amendment
Act,2013 - Section 7 - Arms Act, 1959 -
Section 3/25 - challenge to - convictionappellants were convicted of murder of one
Havildar in the Army following an earlier
altercation-both PW-1 and PW-2 claimed
to
have
witnessed
the
attack-their
accounts were consistent, despite minor
discrepancies
raised
during
crossexamination-medical evidence confirmed
that deceased died of firearm injuriesPW-3 and PW5 corroborated the injuries
sustained
by
the
deceased-weapons
were recovered from the accused and
ballistic reports matched the cartridges
found at the crime scene-the motive was
rooted in animosity between the accused
and the deceased over prior disputes in
the market-Thus, the court upheld the
conviction of all accused-all five accused
were
sentenced
to
life
imprisonment.(Para 1 to 63)
The appeal is allowed. (E-6)

List of Cases cited:

1. Ashabai Machindra Adhagale Vs St. of Mah. &
ors. (2009) AIR SC 1973

2. U.P. Vs Naresh (2011) 4 SCC 324

3. Dilip Singh & ors. Vs St. of Punj. (1953) AIR SC
364

4. Bur Singh Vs St. of Punj. (2009) AIR SC 157

5. Jarnail Singh Vs St. of Punj. (1996) 1 SCC 527

6. Mukesh & anr.Vs St. for NCT of Delhi & ors.
(2017) AIR SC 2161

7. Mukesh Singh & anr.Vs St. for NCT of Delhi

8. Mah. Vs Bharat Fakira Dhiwar CRLA No. 1246
of 1997

9. St. of H.P. Vs Jeet Singh (1999) 4 SCC 370

10. Jainul Haque Vs St. of Bih. (1974) AIR SC
1651

11. Suresh & anr. Vs St. of U.P. (2001) 3 SCC 673

12. Surendra Chauhan Vs St. of M.P. , 2000 4 SCC
110

(Delivered by Ram Manohar Narayan
Mishra, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
appellants,
learned
counsel
for
the
respondent No.2 and learned AGA for the
State and perused the material placed on
record.

2. As all these criminal appeals
have arisen out of same judgement of
conviction and sentence, hence, these are
being decided by this common judgement:-

3. Above noted Criminal appeals have
been preferred by the accused appellants
966 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
namely, Dhruvjeet Singh, Vimlesh Singh,
Santosh Singh, Rakesh Singh and Akhilesh
with a prayer to set aside the judgment and
order dated 26.9.2016, passed by Additional
Sessions Judge/Special Judge Gangster Act,
Court No.3, Ghazipur in Sessions Trial
No.256 of 2013, State of U.P. vs. Dhruvjeet
Singh and others in Case Crime No.136 of
2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302,
307, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7 of
Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section
3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Gahmar,
District Ghazipur, whereby, they have been
convicted and sentenced as under:-

(i) to undergo life imprisonment,
with fine of Rs.10,000/-each and in default
thereof they have to undergo six months
additional imprisonment, under Section
302/149 IPC;
(ii) to undergo ten years rigorous
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.5,000/-each
and in default thereof they haveto undergo
six months additional imprisonment, under
Section 307/149 IPC;
(iii)
to
undergo
six
months
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
two months additional imprisonment, under
Section 323 IPC;
(iv)
to
undergo
one
year
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
two months additional imprisonment, under
Section 504 IPC;
(v)
to
undergo
one
year
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
two months additional imprisonment, under
Section 506 IPC;
(vi)
to
undergo
two
years
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
two months additional imprisonment, under
Section 147 IPC;
(vii)
to
undergo
two
years
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
two months additional imprisonment, under
Section 148 IPC;
(viii) to undergo three months
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
one month additional imprisonment, under
Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act;
(ix) appellants namely, Rakesh
Kumar Singh, Santosh Singh, Vimlesh
Singh and Akhilesh Singh were also
convicted and sentenced to undergo one year
imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/-each
and in default thereof they have to undergo
three months additional imprisonment, for
charge under Section 3/25 of Arms Act. All
the
sentences
are
directed
to
run
concurrently.

4. The prosecution case in brief is
that the informant Digvijay Singh, son of
Harivansh Singh, resident of Village Patti
Khemanrai, Police Station Gahmar, District-
Ghazipur, lodged an FIR at police station
concerned on 25.4.2013, by presenting a
written report (Ext.Ka1) with averment that
on 25.4.2013 in the evening, his elder
brother Ajay Singh, who was posted in
Bengal Engineering (Army), Pune, as
Hawaldar, informant, his father and uncle
Shiv Shanker Singh were conversing in
compound of the house, at around 20:15
hours, accused Dhruvjeet Singh arrived
there with his four sons Rakesh Singh,
Santosh Singh, Vimlesh Singh and Akhilesh
Singh and exhorted his sons to kill
informant's side as they have increased their
attitude. Thereupon, the four sons of
Dhruvjeet opened fire on Ajay Singh, the
elder brother of informant, indiscriminately,
which hit him on chest and right hand and he
fell down being seriously injured in pool of
blood. The informant ran to save him but
5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
967
accused Vimlesh Singh hit him on his right
ear by butt of his firearm. When Shiv
Shanker Singh, the uncle of informant, ran
to save the informant, Akhilesh Singh and
Santosh Singh lifted him and dashed him on
the ground. They assaulted him brutally by
hockey sticks, which were lying nearby the
place of incident. The assailants fled away
towards east by their two motorcycles after
flashing their firearms. A panic and pall of
horror prevailed in the locality due to this
daring act of the accused persons and the
people of locality got panicked and closed
the windows and doors of their house being
scared by the incident. The informant rushed
to police station for lodging the FIR with the
injured, his elder brother namely, Ajay
Singh.

5. The FIR (Ext.Ka-1) was lodged
on 25.4.2013, at 20:40 hours against five
named accused persons under Sections 147,
148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7
of Criminal Law Amendment Act and a case
was registered at police station vide relevant
GD entry at the same time under said
sections. S.O. Ram Nihor Singh (PW-11)
took over investigation of the case himself
on the date of lodging of the FIR and
recorded statement of the informant and
author of FIR. The injured was unconscious
as he had suffered several firearm shots. The
Investigating Officer rushed the injured
Ajay Singh to District Hospital, Ghazipur
for treatement by keeping him in his official
vehicle and sent other Sub Inspector and
Constables at place of incident. He produced
the injured Ajay Singh at District Hospital at
21:30 hours but Doctors declared him dead.
He kept the dead body in mortuary and
memo of death information was sent from
hospital
to
Police
Station
Ghazipur,
Kotwali. The informant had also received
injuries and his medico legal examination
was also conducted. He had suffered three
injuries. The Investigating Officer went
back to police station and added Sections
302, 323 IPC due to death of the injured
Ajay Singh vide GD Entry No.37, time
23:45 hours, on 25.4.2013. He visited the
spot and held a spot inspection at the
pointing out of informant. On 26.4.2013, he
prepared site plan (Ext.Ka19). He also
collected four number of empty cartridges
of .32 bore, two live cartridges of .32 bore
and one number of live cartridge of 12 bore
from spot of the incident in presence of
witnesses namely, Harihar Singh and
Janardan Singh. He sealed the ammunitions
and prepared a sample seal under his
signature. He also prepared a recovery
memo of live and empty cartridges
recovered from the spot and got signature of
said witnesses thereon. He proved said
recovery memo as Ext.Ka-20. He also took
into possession plain earth and blood stained
earth from the place of occurrence and
prepared its seizure memo, which was
marked as Ext.Ka-21 and Ka-22 during
evidence of Investigating Officer. He also
collected four broken pieces of two hockeys,
which was found on the place of incident
and prepared its recovery memo under his
signature, which is marked as Ext.Ka-23. He
recorded statements of the informant and his
uncle, injured Shiv Shanker Singh, who
were present on the place of incident, on
27.4.2013. The Investigating Officer entered
medico legal examination report of the
informant and also injured Shiv Shanker
Singh in case diary. He arrested accused
Dhruvjeet Singh on 28.4.2013 from Railway
crossing Gahmar and prepared his arrest
Memo i.e. Ext.Ka-10. On 6.5.2013, an
information was entered in Parcha No.10 of
the case diary to the effect that accused
Santosh Singh, Vimlesh Singh and Akhilesh
Singh had surrendered in the Court.
Investigating
Officer
recorded
their
statement in District Jail, Ghazipur after
968 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
obtaining permission of the Court. Their
police custody remand was obtained by
Investigating Officer by orders of the Court
dated 10.5.2013. Accused Rakesh Singh was
arrested in New Delhi on 1.5.2013, at 13:15
hours from his place of posting and his arrest
memo (Ext.Ka-7) was prepared by PW-7.
He was produced before C.J.M., Ghazipur
on 4.5.2013. On pointing out of accused
Rakesh Kumar Singh, a TVS Apache
motorcycle
bearing
Registration
No.UP61J9907 was recovered on 7.5.2013,
which was used in the offence by the
accused persons, from dense shrubs which
had grown around pump canal in village
Gahmar, situated in the east of the village.
The accused told the police team that after
the incident, he fled away from the place of
incident alongwith his brother Santosh
Singh by this motorcycle and concealed it
there. The accused Rakesh Kumar Singh
also took out a country made pistol of 7.65
bore on which words 'Automatic Pistol' and
"Made in USA" was engraved, from tool
box of the motorcycle. For want of any gun
number, it was treated as a countrymade
pistol. The accused confessed to have shot
the deceased by this pistol. Separate
recovery memo was prepared in presence of
witnesses namely, Sanjay Kumar Singh,
Manoj Kumar Singh regarding said vehicle
and firearm and Section 3/25 of Arms Act
was added in penal sections on the basis of
said recovery. The Investigating Officer also
recovered a countrymade pistol of 12 bore
on pointing out of accused Santosh Singh
pursuant to police custody remand order
dated 10.5.2013 on 11.5.2013 from shrubs
(Toddy Palm Tree) nearby the same shrubs
grown around said pump canal at 10:30
hours and recovery memo was prepared in
presence of public witnesses namely
Harendra Singh and Satrudhan Singh.
Section 3/25 Arms Act was also added on
the basis of said recovery against accused
Santosh
Singh.
On
11.5.2013,
the
Investigating Officer recovered a country
made pistol of .315 bore at pointing out of
accused Akhilesh Singh pursuant to police
custody remand order dated 10.5.2013 from
the vicinity of same pump canal in Village
Gahmar
towards
south
of
Kulward
constructed on a roadside Nala at and a case
under Section 3/25 of Arms Act was added
in penal sections against him on 11.5.2013.
The Investigating Officer also recovered a
motorcycle C.B.Z. (Black Color) bearing
No.UP61M3239 and a countrymade pistol
of 32 bore, which was kept in tool box of
motorcycle during police custody remand of
accused Vimlesh Singh and charge under
Section 3/25 of Arms Act was also added
against him on the basis of said recovery.
The Investigating Officer (PW-11) had also
prepared site plan of places of recovery of 2
vehicles and 4 firearms and proved these as
Ext.Ka-24 to Ka-27. The inquest on dead
body of deceased Ajay Singh was carried out
on 25.4.2013 by S.I. Deena Nath Dubey. He
prepared inquest report, which is proved as
Ext.Ka-3. He prepared Ext.Ka-29 Photo
Nash, Report R.D Ext.Ka-27, Challan Nash
Ext.Ka-28, Report CMO Ext.Ka-31, sample
seal dead body Ext.Ka-30 and dispatched
dead
body
for
postmortem
through
Constables of Police. The Investigating
Officer obtained sanction for prosecution of
accused Rakesh Kumar Singh, Santosh
Kumar Singh, Akhilesh Kumar Singh and
Vimlesh Singh for charge under Section
3/25 Arms Act from District Magistrate. He
sent the ammunitions recovered from the
place of occurrence and firearms recovered
from the accused persons for ballistic
examination at Forensic Science Laboratory,
Mahanagar Lucknow. Four empty cartridges
of .7.65mm were found to have matched
with firearm recovered at the pointing out of
from accused Rakesh Singh in ballistic
examination report. Similarly, in serological
5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
969
examination of blood stained earth taken
from the place of occurrence, stains of blood
were found thereon but it could not be
classified, as the same was disintigerated.
The
Investigating
Officer
submitted
chargesheet against all the five named
accused persons after concluding the
investigation under aforesaid sections and
separate chargesheet under Section 3/25 of
Arms Act against accused persons namely,
Rakesh, Akhilesh, Santosh and Vimlesh was
filed. Incharge Chief Judicial Magistrate
took cognizance of the offence on 24.6.2013
and committed the case to Court of Session
for trial after complying with provisions of
Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

6. The learned Additional Session
Judge, Court No.5, Ghazipur framed charge
under Sections 147, 302/149, 307/149,
323/149, 504, 506 IPC and 7 of Criminal
Law (Amendment) Act against all the five
named accused persons on 10.3.2014 and
also framed charge under Section 3/25 of
Arms Act against Santosh Singh, Akhilesh
Singh, Vimlesh Singh and Rakesh Kumar
Singh on same day. The accused persons
denied the charge and claimed to be tried.

7. The prosecution examined PW-1,
Digvijay Singh; PW-2, Shiv Shanker Singh;
PW-3 Dr. Mohd Jamil Ahmad, the author of
injury reports of injured Digvijay Singh;
PW-4 S.I. Deena Nath Dubey, the author of
inquest report of the deceased; PW-5, Dr.
Naresh Prasad Chaudhari, the author of
medico legal Examination report of the
injured Shiv Shanker Singh; PW-6, S.I.
Rudrabhan Pandey, who arrested accused
Rakesh Singh, who was posted at C.A.M.S.
(Centre For Automated Military Survey)
after taking necessary permissions from
competent offices on 1.5.2013 at 13:15
hours from Delhi; PW-7, Himendra Singh,
the then Incharge Outpost, Sevrai, Police
Station
Gahmar
carried
out
part
investigation of the case and arrested
accused Dhruvjeet Singh on 28.4.2013. The
prosecution also examined PW-8, Dr.
Pragati Kumar, who conducted postmortem
examination on dead body of deceased Ajay
Singh and PW-9, Constable Anand Rao,
who is a witness of recovery, PW-10,
Constable Muharrir Shiv Ram Tiwari, the
author of chik FIR, PW-11, S.H.O. Ram
Nihor Mishra.

8. Learned trial court recorded
statements of accused persons under Section
313 Cr.P.C. after conclusion of prosecution
evidence. They also filed their written
statements under Section 233 (3) of Cr.P.C.
The accused examined Nagina Singh as
DW-1 in defence evidence.

9.

Learned
trial
court
on
appreciation of oral evidence and material
on record, in the light of submissions of
learned counsels of both the parties,
recorded verdict of guilt against accused
persons namely, Dhruvjeet Singh, Rakesh
Singh, Santosh Singh, Vimlesh Singh and
Akhilesh Singh for charge under Sections
147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC
and also recorded conviction of accused
Rakesh Singh, Santosh Singh, Vimlesh
Singh and Akhilesh Singh for charge under
Section 3/25 of Arms Act and sentenced
them for said charges as above. Feeling
aggrieved by the impugned judgement and
order, the accused persons have assailed the
same in instant appeals.

10. PW-1, Digvijay Singh, is
informant in the case. He stated in his
evidence that on 25.4.2013, his brother Ajay
Singh, who works as Engineer in Military,
State of West Bengal, had gone to market in
connection with some shopping with related
to marriage of his cousin Archana, which
970 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
was scheduled to be held on 29.4.2013. In
order to travel to market, his brother Ajay
Singh had borrowed motorcycle of one
Arvind Singh, his co-villager. When this fact
was known to accused Dhruvjeet Singh, he
became angry as there was enmity between
Dhruvjeet Singh and Arvind Singh for two
years due to litigations. When his brother
Ajay Singh came to Gahmar Bazar in the
evening, Dhruvjeet Singh met him on that
date and told him that he had became very
familiar to his enemies and he would see
him and them. He also abused him after
uttering these words. When his brother
objected to this, Dhruvjeet Singh engaged in
brawl with him. The people who were
present in the market had intervened and got
them separated. His brother came to home
thereafter he was talking to the informant
and his uncle Shiv Shanker Singh with
regard to incident which took place in the
market with Dhruvjeet Singh. Suddenly, at
around quarter to 8:00 PM in the evening,
accused Dhruvjeet Singh, Santosh Singh,
Akhilesh Singh, Rakesh Singh and Vimlesh
Singh entered into the boundary of the
informant and Dhruvjeet Singh exhorted his
sons, the co-accused "IN SALO KA MAN
BAHUT BADH GAYA HAI. AAJ INHE
JAAN SE MAR DALO". These five persons
came there in planned and consulted
manner. On exhortation of Dhruvjeet Sngh,
the other accused opened indiscriminate fire
towards the informant and his family
members, who were sitting there. His elder
brother Ajay Singh sustained firearm
injuries n his chest and right hand and he fell
down in pool of blood on the ground having
been seriously injured and started twisting
and turning of body due to acute pain. The
informant ran to the place to save his brother
whereupon Vimlesh Singh hit him by butt of
his pistol on his right ear. Thereupon his
uncle Shiv Shanker Singh came forward to
save the informant but Akhilesh Singh and
Santosh Singh assaulted him by hockeys,
which were lying there. After assaulting the
informant, his brother and uncle, the
accused persons fled away by their
motorcycles towards east while flashing
their
firearms
and
threatening
the
informant's side. The incident caused flutter
and state of fear in the village and silence
prevailed in the locality. The people closed
windows and doors of their houses. Ajay
Singh, the brother of the informant, got
unconscious due to firearm injury. The
informant filed a written report at police
station Gahmar regarding the incident,
which he proved during his evidence as
Ext.Ka-1. The informant identified the
accused persons namely, Santosh Singh,
Akhilesh Singh, Rakesh Singh and Vimlesh
Singh as assailants. The FIR was registered
on his written report. The inquest on dead
body of the deceased was conducted at Civil
Hospital, Ghazipur by police of Police
Kotwali Ghazipur. The inquest report also
bears
signature
of
Pw-1.
In
crossexamination, the witness has stated that
Gahmar is a very large village, which
consists of 200 to 224 patti. He stated that
his father is retired from Army and was
working at NCL, Singrauli. His brother
Dhananjay and deceased Ajay were also
serving in Army. He worked in Vodafone at
Sultanpur. His uncle Harishanker had retired
from Army and was serving at Ara (Bihar)
thereafter. Injured Shiv Shanker Singh, his
another uncle, was working in a transport
company. Arvind Singh also belongs to his
patti (Khandan) and his son Kishan Singh
serve in Army. A case of attempt to murder
was registered against Kishan Singh and
others at the instance of accused Vimlesh
Singh, which was proceeding prior to two
years of this incident. He came to his village
two days prior to the incident on getting
leave and his brother deceased Ajay Singh
came to the village 4-5 days prior to the
5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
971
incident. There is only one exit in his house,
which opens towards north. There is
boundary wall, which surrounded his house,
which is ten feet in height and cemented.
There is one iron gate in his boundary wall
towards west. There was no enmity between
family of informant and accused persons
prior to this incident. Accused Dhruvjeet
Singh was around 50 to 55 years of age at
the time of incident. The house of accused
persons is 50 meters far from his house. He
went to police station by motorcycle after
the incident alongwith Sanjay after 5 to 7
minutes of the incident. He firstly informed
Darogaji about the incident and thereafter
presented a written report to him which was
written by him. They reached at police
station around 8:24 PM. The proceeded to
Sadar Hospital, Ghazipur by vehicle
arranged by Darogaji and reached there
around 9:30 PM. The witnesses came there
by another vehicle. They came back to
police station around 1:00 hours in the night
from hospital and stayed there for 20 to 25
minutes. He pointed the place of incident to
Darogaji on next day at around 6:30 to 7:00
AM, who collected empty cartridges and
two broken hockey sticks from the place of
incident. Thereafter they came to hospital at
10:30 AM together with police personnels
and stayed there up to 11:00 AM. The
inquest on dead body of the deceased was
conducted around 12:00 to 12:30 hours at
Police Station. He also signed the inquest
report alongwith other panch witnesses. The
witness further stated that he is not able to
explain as to why he failed to divulge the
previous altercation which took place in
Gahmar Market between deceased and
accused Dhruvjeet Singh in his written
report. He further stated that his statement
was recorded by Investigating Officer thrice
during investigation, in which he told him
about the altercation which took place
between Ajay Singh and Dhruvjeet Singh in
the market on the date of incident. He had
seen pistols/countrymade pistols in the
hands of accused persons during the
incident. Six cartridges are loaded in pistol
and one or two in countrymade pistol. He
has not divulged in his report that which of
the accused persons was armed with which
type of firearm. He could not recollect as to
how many shots were fired on the spot as
accused were firing indiscriminately. Blood
fell on the spot. He stated to Investigating
Officer that Akhilesh and Santosh assaulted
his
uncle
by
hockey
sticks.
11. PW-2, Shiv Shanker Singh is injured and
uncle of the informant and deceased. He has
stated in his sworn testimony before the
Court that on 29.4.2013 marriage of his
daughter Archana Singh was fixed and he
had gone to Ghazipur to purchase a
motorcycle for giving in the marriage. On
25.4.2013, he came back to home in the
evening and was conversing with his brother
Harivansh Singh and nephews namely,
Digvijay Singh and Ajay Singh regarding
preparations of the marriage. They also
discussed the incident of the day in which
Dhruvjeet Singh had threatened Ajay Singh
and engaged in some brawl with him earlier
on that date. Ajay Singh was narrating this
incident to them. In the meanwhile, accused
Dhruvjeet Singh emerged there alongwith
his sons namely Vimlesh Singh, Rakesh
Singh, Santosh Singh and Akhilesh Singh
and entered into the boundary of the witness.
He challenged the witnesses stating that "IN
SALO KA MAN BAHUT BADH GAYA
HAI. AAJ INHE JAAN SE MAR DALO".
Thereupon, the four sons of Dhruvjeet Singh
opened fire by their respective firearms
indiscriminately on informant's side, in
which Ajay Singh sustained firearm injuries
and he fell down and was squirming. When
Digvijay Singh, the nephew of the witness,
rushed to save Ajay Singh, Vimlesh Singh
hit him by butt of his firearm on his ear.
972 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Thereafter, the witness ran to rescue
Digvijay Singh but Santosh Singh and
Akhilesh Singh threw him and assaulted him
by hockey sticks in which he suffered much
injuries. The accused fled away from the
spot after threatening the witnesses of life
towards east. Pall of terror prevailed in the
locality due to this incident and people
closed the door and windows of their house.
The witness sent injured Ajay Singh to
police station Gahmar by a motorcycle
driven by PW-1, Digvijay Singh. Digvijay
Singh filed a written report at police station
on the basis of which the case was registered
at police station concerned. His medical
examination was carried out at Government
Hospital Bhadaura. He pointed out the place
of
incident
to
Darogaji.
In
crossexamination, the witness stated that on
fateful day, he had gone to Ghazipur in day
hours by motorcycle, which was driven by
Dharamraj Singh, his brother-in-law. After
performing the work in Ghazipur in
connection with purchase of motorcycle, he
came back to his place in the evening. The
main exit of his house is towards west. His
house
is
surrounded
with
cemented
boundary wall, which is ten feet in height.
When he reached in his boundary, his elder
brother Harivansh and nephews Digvijay
Singh and Ajay Singh were present there and
they were talking together. The assailants
stood about two paces away from them.
Nobody received pellet injuries except the
deceased Ajay Singh in the incident. Ajay
Singh fell down after receiving firearm
injuries. He sustained three firearm shots in
standing position and he fell down on the
ground. The shots were fired by pistols and
countrymade
pistols.
His
medical
examination was conducted on next date at
around 9:00-10:00 AM. Ajay Singh had told
him regarding the altercation and scuffle
with Dhruvjeet Singh in the market in the
evening. He told the Investigating Officer
that his brother Harivansh Singh could
hardly perform his daily routine and lack of
mobility. The house of Dhruvjeet Singh
situates eastward of his house after two
houses. He pointed out the place of
occurrence to Darogaji.

12. PW-3, Dr. Mohd. Jamil Ahmad
conducted medico legal examination of the
injured Digvijay Singh on 25.4.2013, at
10:40 hours and proved his injury report as
Ext.Ka-2 in his evidence. At the time of
examination, the Doctor noted following
injuries on his person:-

(i) lacerated wound of 1cm X 0.2cm
X skin deep, right side of back of ear pinna,
which middle side;
(ii) lacerated wound of 1.5cm X
0.2cm X skin deep, right ear pinna just back
side of injury No.1;
(iii) lacerated wound of 0.5cm X
0.2cm X skin deep, back side of just root of
right ear pinna.
In the opinion of Doctor injury
Nos.1 to 3 were caused by hard and blunt
object and were simple in nature. Duration
was fresh.

13. PW-4, S.I. Deena Nath Dubey
conducted inquest on dead body of the
deceased on 26.4.2013 and prepared inquest
report in his hand writing and proved the
same as Ext.Ka-3. He stated that the
deceased Ajay Singh died due to firearm
injuries. He conducted inquest proceeding at
Sadar Civil Hospital, Ghazipur. He received
information of death of Ajay Singh and it
was entered vide Report No.54, time 22:10,
GD dated 25.4.2013, Police Station Kotwali
Sadar, District Ghazipur. The dead body was
kept in mortuary of the hospital. He handed
over the body to constables at 12:30 hours
after the inquest. He was not aware of
registration of any case at police station
5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
973
concerned regarding this incident so long as
he carried out inquest proceeding. He did
not find any police staff of police station
Gahmar during inquest.

14. PW-5, Dr. Naresh Prasad
Chaudhari
conducted
medico
legal
examination of injured Shiv Shanker Singh
on 26.4.2013, at CSC, Bhadaura, District
Ghazipur at 10:00 AM and proved the same
as Ext.Ka-4 by his evidence. According to
the PW-5 following injuries were found on
the person of the injured:

(i) contusion and swelling of 3cm X
2cm left side of face;
(ii) contusion and swelling of 3cm X
2cm in the left side of frontal head;
(iii) contusion and swelling of 2cm
X 2cm on the left shoulder;
(iv) contusion and swelling of 2cm
X 2cm on the forearm.

In the opinion of the Doctor, all the injuries
were simple in nature and caused by hard
and blunt object. Duration was about one
day. The medico legal examination of both
the injured namely, Digvijay Singh and Shiv
Shanker Singh was conducted on letter of
S.O. Gahmar as police case.

15. PW-8, Dr. Pragati Kumar
conducted the post mortem examination on
the person of deceased Ajay Singh on
26.4.2013 and prepared the postmortem
examination report in his hand writing and
signature and proved the same as Ext.Ka-11
by his evidence during trial. He stated that
on 26.4.2013, he was posted as Medical
Officer at Police Hospital, Police Line,
Ghazipur. The dead body of Ajay Singh was
brought for postmortem by two constables
namely, Raghunath Singh and Homeguard
Laxman Pal of police station Gahmar. The
deceased was aged around 38 years. Rigor
mortis was present in both the upper and
lower extremities.

*Antemortem Injuries:-
(1) firearm injury 1cm X 1cm,
circular in shape and 6 cm middle to right
nipple. Inverted margins. Collar of abrasion
is present. Profused bleeding present i.e.
wound of entry;
(2) wound of exit is 2 cm X 2.1cm
at left side of back of chest (lateral side)
25cm above left iliac crest. Profused
bleeding present. Margins everted. After
probing, it was found that this injury was
exit wound of injury No.1. Both the lungs,
muscles and heart of the deceased got
lacerated due to this injury.
(3) firearm injury of 1.2cm X 1.1cm,
8 cm below right nipple. Margins inverted.
Collar of abrasion present i.e. wound of
entry. Track is towards abdomen. One
metallic bullet 1cm X 1cm cylindrical in
shape was recovered and two wad piece
recovered from the injury.
(4) firearm injury of 0.9cm X 0.9cm
at right arm, above elbow. Margin inverted
i.e. entry wound. 1.2cm X 1.2cm at front of
right elbow. The projectile tract fractured in
elbow bone.
* Internal Examination:-

pleura lacerated. Syngenesis in
walls and ribs. Right and left lungs
lacerated. Heart lacerated and empty.
Pericardium lacerated. There is wads and
one metallic cylindrical bullet recovered
from lower part of abdomen, sent to S.P.
Ghazipur through constables, who brought
the dead body for postmortem. Semi
digested food was found in stomach. Gases
and liquid were found in small intestine.
Gases and faecal matter detected in large
intestine. Kidney and pancreas were
lacerated. Bladder was empty. Time of death
was about one day. In the opinion of Doctor,
974 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
cause of death was haemorrhagic shock as a
result of antemortem firearm injuries.

16. In cross-examination, Dr.
Pragati Kumar stated that all the antemortem
wounds of entry were in right side of the
body. The directions of wound No.3 was
from upper to lower side. He has noted
direction of Injury No.4. Injury No.5 is its
exit wound. Injury Nos.1 and 3 were caused
from a distance of more than 5 feet, which
implies that the distance of weapon of
assailant and the deceased was more than
five feet. He could not say that injury no.1
and 4 were pellet injuries or caused by
bullet. Injury No.2 and 5 are exit wounds of
injury no.1 and 4 and, therefore, he did not
find any residue of ammunitions therein.
The state of stomach reveals that the
deceased had taken meal five hours earlier.
He could not tell with certainty that
deceased had eased himself prior to the
incident. The bullet recovered from the dead
body was not produced before him at the
time of evidence. The duration of death from
postmortem noted in PM report implies that
he died 18 to 24 hours earlier to the
postmortem.

17. PW-5, S.I. Rudrabhan Pandey
conducted part investigation of the case in
absence of PW-10, Ram Nihor Mishra and
visited place of posting of accused Rakesh
Singh in C.A.M.S. (Army) New Delhi and
after completing necessary formalities
arrested him on 1.5.2013 on being handed
over by his Officers and produced him
before C.J.M., Ghazipur on 3.5.2013, from
where he was remanded to judicial
custody.

18. PW-7, S.I. Himendra Singh
carried only one day's investigation on
28.4.2013 and arrested accused Dhruvjeet
Singh at 21:00 hours.
19. PW-9, Constable Anand Rao
stated that on 7.5.2013, he was posted as
constable at Police Station Gahmar. On that
date, accused Rakesh Kumar Singh was
brought out from District Jail, Ghazipur for
recovery of weapon of offence and he
alongwith police team proceeded by official
Bolero Jeep in search of the weapon. On that
date, on pointing out of Rakesh Singh, a
motorcycle used by accused persons for
fleeing away from the place of incident after
offence and one countrymade pistol of 7.65
bore, which was in serviceable condition, in
which magazine was loaded, was recovered
by police team near eastern pump canal at
Gahmar. The recovered firearm was sealed
on the spot at around 11.30 hours and a copy
of recovery memo was given to the accused.
In cross-examination, the witness stated that
the recovery memo was signed by S.O. Ram
Nihor Mishra, the police witnesses and
public witnesses. On that date, at pointing
out
of
accused
Akhilesh
Singh,
a
countrymade pistol of .315 bore, which was
used in the commission of offence of murder
of Ajay Singh was recovered in presence of
public witnesses Harendra Singh and
Satrudhan Singh. The weapon was sealed on
the spot and accused was taken into custody
for charge under Section 3/25 of Arms Act,
at 11:30 AM. On the same date, accused
Vimlesh Kumar Singh got a motorcycle
CBZ recovered on his pointing out, which
was used by him and co-accused Akhilesh
Singh for fleeing away from the place of
occurrence after commission of murder of
Ajay Singh. A countrymade pistol .32 bore
was also recovered at pointing out of
accused Vimlesh, which was sealed on the
spot and its recovery memo was signed by
S.O. Ram Nihor Mishra, police personnel
and public witnesses. It was 12:30 hours of
day. He proved the recovery of four firearms
as Ext.Ka-12, Ka-13, Ka-14 and Ka-15 by
his evidence. In cross-examination, the
5 All. Dhruvjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
975
witness has stated that he proceeded from
police station on 7.5.2013, at 6:00 AM
alongwith S.O. Ram Nihor Mishra and two
constables. They reached District Jail,
Ghazipur at 7:30 AM and got their entry
made in jail register. They reached place of
recovery at around 9:00 AM alongwith
accused persons. Motorcycle was lying in
open and in unclaimed position. There were
8-9 people on the spot at the time of
recovery. No statement of accused was taken
during their journey from place of incident.
Their Government vehicle was parked 100
meters away from the place of recovery. He
signed recovery memos on asking of S.O.
Ram Nihor Mishra. He was not acquainted
with the accused. They brought back the
accused to jail at 3:00 PM. They made entry
of firearms at police station at 8:00 PM. On
11.5.2013, his departure from police station
occurred at 6:00 AM. S.O. Ram Nihor
Mishra and three constables were along
side him. They came to District Jail,
Ghazipur at 7:30 AM and S.O. Ram
Nihor Mishra made his entry in the jail
register. He brought out three accused
persons from jail within 10 to 15 minutes
and proceeded to Gahmar alongwith
them at around 8:00 AM. The three
accused persons were taken to probable
places of recovery. The place of recovery
was 30 to 35 kms. away from District
Jail, Ghazipur. It took one and half hours
in reaching the place of recovery form
district jail. The country made pistol,
which was recovered on the pointing out
of accused Akhilesh was kept in open
and was not brought out from dickey of
the motorcycle. The weapons recovered
on the pointing out of the accused
persons were deposited at police station
at 10:00 PM. He had not signed on sealed
covers of firearms recovered at the
pointing out of the concerned accused
persons.
20. PW-10, Shiv Ram Tiwari, the
then Constable Muharrir of Police Station
Gahmar, stated in his evidence that he was
posted as constable muharrir at police
station Gahmar on 25.4.2013 and on that day
on the basis of written report produced by
Digvijay Singh, son of Harivansh Singh; he
registered a case vide Crime No.136 of
2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307,
504, 506 IPC and Section 7 of Criminal Law
Amendment Act vide chik No.30 of 2013, at
20:40 hours against accused persons named
in the written report. He proved the chik FIR
as Ext.Ka-16 by his evidence. He proved
extracts of GD of registration of case Report
No.32, time 20:40 hours dated 25.4.2013, on
which Ext.Ka-17 was marked. He also
proved extracts of amended GD dated
25.4.2013, Report No.37, time 23:45 hours
whereby Section 302/323 IPC was added.
He proved these extracts of GD by
producing original GD from police office
before the Court. In cross-examination, he
stated that in chik FIR, endorsement of
Chief Judicial Magistrate is made on
7.5.2013. He stated that he is unable to
explain the delay occurred in production of
chik
FIR
before
the
Chief
Judicial
Magistrate after 12 days of its lodging. He
further stated that in original GD, there is no
mention of dispatch of special report to
senior officers with regard to present case.
The signature of C.O. on original GD is
undated. He further stated that on 25.4.2013,
the injury memo of injured Digvijay Singh
was prepared and on 26.4.2013 injury memo
of injured Shiv Shanker Singh was prepared.
Prior to registration of this case vide crime
No.136 of 2013, a case was registered vide
Crime No.135 of 2013 at 9:15 hours on
25.4.2013. In between these two cases, no
other case was registered on that date.

21. PW-11, S.H.O. Ram Nihor
Mishra is the Investigating Officer of the
976 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
case. He proved steps taken towards
investigation of the case. He has stated in his
evidence that this case was registered vide
Crime No.136 of 2013 in his presence on
written
report
produced
by
injured
informant Digvijay Singh at Police Station
Gahmar. The chik FIR was prepared on the
basis of this written report by Constable
Muharrir Shiv Ram Tiwari (PW-10). After
registration of case, the witness signed chik
FIR. He took over the investigation of the
case just after its registration. He recorded
statement of the informant on same day. The
injured Ajay Singh was unconscious due to
firearm injuries. He rushed immediately to
hospital by Government vehicle alongwith
informant to District Hospital, Ghazipur and
sent other sub-inspectors and constables to
place of occurrence. He admitted the injured
to District Hospital, Ghazipur at 21:30 hours
in the night but Doctors declared him dead.
He got the dead body kept in the mortuary
of the hospital from where death memo was
sent to police station Kotwali. He also got
medico legal examination of the informant
conducted and mention its description in
case diary. He sustained three injuries.