SCC Online Web Edition, © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 8 Monday, October 24, 2022 Printed For: Navami Krishnamurthy, Jindal Global University SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30. The PW-1, Shambhu Raidas is the first informant. He happens to be the brother -in-law of the accused appellant i.e. husband of the accused appellant's sister. On 22.01.2010 while he was at his house, the accused appellant is said to have visited him at 6 : 30 in the morning and was informed that at 1 o'clock in the night four unidentified persons knocked at his door. The accused appellant woke up and enquired who was it. As no one replied, the accused appellant went on the roof of his house and saw four persons standing outside his house. The accused appellant is said to have seen those four persons under the light of a torch. The accused appellant informed the PW-1 that one of the persons was from the village Basadiha. One among the four persons fired at the accused appellant. The accused appellant is said to have jumped from the roof top. At that point of time, one of the four hit the accused appellant on his head with the butt of the gun. The accused appellant thereafter ran away towards a farm. The accused appellant is said to have witnessed those persons entering into his house from a distance. After sometime, he noticed smoke coming out of his house. The accused appellant went to Behnanpurwa, Khalikpurwa and Lahki for help but he was not able to procure any help. PW-1 has deposed that after the accused appellant narrated the entire incident, he himself along with one Pratap reached the house of the accused appellant. The accused appellant also accompanied the PW-1, Shambhu Raidas and Pratap. When the PW-1 reached the house of the accused appellant, he saw the dead bodies of Sangeeta and the four daughters burning. PW-1 with the help of Pratap started to douse the fire with water. PW-1 has deposed that while he himself and Pratap were trying to douse the fire, the accused appellant took out his blood stained baniyaan (vest) and threw it in the fire. The accused appellant thereafter started warming his body. On seeing this, the PW-1 got annoyed and told the accused appellant that how could he sit beside the fire when his wife and children had been killed. The PW-1, Shambhu Raidas thereafter went to the Dhaurhara Police Station and lodged the FIR. In the FIR, he named four unidentified persons as the suspects. The PW-1 has further deposed about the illicit relationship of the accused appellant with Manju. He has deposed that while the accused appellant was married to Sangeeta, he decided to get married to Manju. The engagement ceremony of Manju with accused appellant Ramanand was also performed. However, before the accused appellant could get married to Manju, he came to be arrested in connection with one offence registered against him under Section 307 of the IPC. He has deposed that Sangeeta (deceased) was highly opposed to the idea of her husband Ramanand getting married to Manju. He has further deposed that the accused appellant killed his wife and four children in the hope that he may receive some monetary compensation from the Government. In his cross examination, the PW-1 has deposed that his house is at a distance of one kilometre from the house of the accused appellant. When the accused appellant reached his house at 6 : 30 in the morning on the day of the incident, the PW-1 found the accused appellant in lot of tension. In his cross examination, he has categorically deposed that he was at the police station up to 2 o'clock in the night i.e. upto 23rd of January, 2010 at 2 A.M. He has deposed in so many words that the accused appellant Ramanand was also with him at the police station all throughout. He has deposed that while he left the police station, Ramanand - accused appellant was not allowed to leave the police station. He has deposed that Ramanand was challaned by the police on the third day, till then Ramanand was continuously staying at the police station. 31. What emerges from the evidence of the PW-1 is that after the incident, the accused appellant visited his house at 6 : 30 in the morning and narrated as to what had happened. PW-1 along with one Pratap thereafter reached the house of the accused appellant and saw the dead bodies of Sangeeta and four minor daughters burning. PW-1 tried to douse the fire by pouring water on the dead bodies with the help of Pratap. PW-1 has deposed about the illicit relationship of the accused appellant

Select target paragraph3

Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents