JUDGMENT B. N. Katju, J. 1. Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram, Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh son of Viladhar Sharma, Anand Giri and Jamadar Singh have filed Criminal Appeal No. 183 of 1988 and Pratap Singh, Ram Giri, Sant Singh and Subhash have filed criminal appeal No. 168 of 1988 against the judgment of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Blandisher dated 2311988 passed in S.T. No. 358 of 1982. Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram, Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh son of Viladhar Sharma, Anand Giri and Jamadar Singh have been convicted under Sections 302 149, 201/218,12013,323/149, 354/149 and 148, I. P. C. and have been sentenced to death, seven years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for one year, three years' R. I. and a line of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of line to undergo R. I. for six months, one year R. I., one year R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for one month, two years' R.I . and a fine of Rs. 2000. and in default of payment of fine undergo R. I. for three months, three years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of fine to' undergo R. I. for six months. Partap Singh, Ram Giri, Sant Singh and Subhash have been convicted under Sections 302/149, 201, 218, 120B, 323/149, 354/149 and 147, I. P. C. and have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R .I . for one year, seven years' R. I. and a line of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for one year three years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for six months, one year R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for one month, two years' R. L and a fine of Rs. 2000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for three months and two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for one month, two years' R. L and a fine of Rs. 2000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for three months and two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. of six months. All the substantive sentences of imprisonment have been ordered to run concurrently. 2. Sheo Kumar Gupta, Jamadar Singh and Ram Giri appellants are SubInspectors. Kashi Ram appellant is Head Constable. Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh son Viladhar Sharma, Anand Giri, Sant Singh and Subhash appellants are Constables. All these appellants were posted are P. S. Baghpat, District Meerut in June 1980. 3. The case of the prosecution is that father of Smt. Mayu Tyagi P.W. 2 is Trilok Singh and the brother of Smt. Maya Tyagi is Kamal Singh P.W. 15. They are residents of Sakal Patti situated at a distance of Rajbala, the daughter of Kamal Singh, was to be performed on 1861980. On that day Smt. Maya Tyagi along with her husband Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased and two of his friends were proceeding by car from Delhi to Sakal Patti to attend the wedding. The car was being driven by the driver Roshan Lal P. W. 12. There was a puncture in one of the lyres of the car and the driver changed the wheel of the car. Thereafter at about 12 noon on that day they reached Baghpat Chopla (crossing). The car was stopped at the crossing and the driver took the punctured tyre for repair and Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased and his two friends went to the Bazar. Smt. Maya Tyagi remained seated in the car. Shortly thereafter a person in plain dress came there and misbehaved with Smt. Maya Tyagi. She told him that he had no manners and while s scolding him Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased came there and abused him and also threw him down. That person got up and went away. After he had left, the persons, who were nearby, said that that person was Narendra Singh, S I. Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased and his companions wanted to leave that place out of fear, hut the driver was unable to start the car. That person got up and went away. After he had left, the persons, who were nearby, said that that person was Narendra Singh, S I. Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased and his companions wanted to leave that place out of fear, hut the driver was unable to start the car. Ishwar Singh Tyagi and his two companions then got down from the car and began to push the car. When the car had moved about 4 or 6 paces, a party of Policemen, who were about 10 or 11 in numbers and which included the person, who had been thrown down by Ishwar Singh Tyagi, came from behind and fired at Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased and his two companions and also assaulted them with Dandas while Smt. Maya Tyagi and the driver were sitting in the car. Three or four persons thereafter pulled Smt. Maya Tyagi from the car and assaulted her and tore her blouse, petticoat and Sari and made her naked while she was shrieking and shouting. When she tried to cover her body with her hands she was assaulted with lathis and slippers. In the meantime, one person gave her a towel and a Tahmad, but she was not allowed to take them. She was taken in a naked condition from Baghpat Chopal to P. S. Baghpat. Apart from two the remaining miscreants were the accused present in court. They were armed with guns and lathis. After Smt. Maya Tyagi was taken round the Police Station she was kept in a room, which had iron bars. Three SubInspectors and three constables came there and committed rape on her one after the other, as a result of which she began to bleed. SubInspector Gaur then came there and assaulted her with a cane and pulled her breasts and inserted a danda in her vagina. SubInspector Gaur was not amongst the accused present in court. 4. A report regarding the incident was lodged by Narendra Singh S. I .on the same day (1861980) at 2 p. m. at P. S. Baghpat against Roshan Lal P. W. 12 Smt. Sudesh (Maya Tyagi), Brijbir, Prahlad and three unknown persons under Sections 399/402 and 307, I. P. C. and 25 and 27, Arms Act. 5. . A telegram with respect to the incident (Ext. 5. . A telegram with respect to the incident (Ext. Ka 71) was sent by Kamal Singh P. W. 15 on the same day (1861980) to the Chief Secretary, U. P. Government at 11 p. m., which runs as follows : CHIEF SECRETARY LUCKNOW GRIH SACH1V2240 A 11M Ed RUT CITY 18 ISHWAR SINGH VINOD AND OTHER ONE SHOT DEAD BY NARENDRA SINGH S. I. AND OTHER POLICE MEN SMT. MAYA SUBJECTED BY VIOLENCE BEYOND IMAGINATION BY S. O./ BAGHPAT GUARD/AND S. I. NARENDRA HER PREGNANCY ADVERSALLY AFFECTED AND STILL BLEEDING FALSE CASE IS BEING FABRICATED MAYA IS IN POLICE CUSTODY DETAIL WILL BE GIVEN LATER ONKAMAL SINGH. An application (Ext. Kha1) regarding the incident was purported to have been sent by Smt. Maya Tyagi, P. W. 2 to the District Magistrate, Meerut on 2161980. The investigation of the case was first conducted by the Police of P. S. Baghpat. It was subsequently handed over to S. P. Pandey P. W. 23 of the C B C. I. D. on 2461980. The injuries of Smt. Maya Tyagi P. W. 2 were examined by Dr. Neelima Pant D.W.I on 1861980 at 7.15 p. m. at Meerut and multiple injuries were found under her chin and on her back, right elbow, left upper arm. left elbow, left hand, right breast, lower abdomen, right knee, right foot bloodstained. The doctor also found : There is skin deep tear in 7 o'clock position in vagina at the skin margin. Vaginal tear at 6 o'clock position about 2 long and 1 deep is present. Fresh bleeding from tear. Tear stitched and bleeding controlled. Vagina admits 2 fingers easily. Inflarnation and tenderness is present. Ex. soft at about 20 (sic) size. Vaginal smear sent for Hasto Phathological examination for presence of spermatozoa. P. A. Exam. Ut. 20 makes ballotment present. Breast secretions present areola dark in colour 9. Dr. Neelima Pant D. W. 1 again examined the injuries of Maya Tyagi P. W. 2 on 1961980 at 9 a. m. and found the undermentioned injuries on her person : Complaints of pain all over head. No mark of external injury seen on hand. Abrasion with soft scab about 0.5 cm. xO.5 cm. on left side of face 2 cm outer to lateral conthus It. eye. Red blue contusion 6 cm. x0.5 cm. under It. mandible. Linear abrasion with soft scab 8 cm. X0.3 cm on Rt. No mark of external injury seen on hand. Abrasion with soft scab about 0.5 cm. xO.5 cm. on left side of face 2 cm outer to lateral conthus It. eye. Red blue contusion 6 cm. x0.5 cm. under It. mandible. Linear abrasion with soft scab 8 cm. X0.3 cm on Rt. side of neck 10 cm below the pinna of Rt. car extending interiorly. Red blue contusion 8 cm. X 5 cm. on the left upper arm, outer part, lower half, pain and swelling present, injury kept under observation subjected to Xray. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5 cm. X 0.5 cm on the back and upper part of left elbow joint. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5 cm. x0.5 cm. on the back and outer part of Rt. elbow. 8. Red blue contusion 30 cm. x 1/4 cm. on the upper end of middle l/3rdofback extending obliquely from mid off lateral margin or left scapula upto the inferior angle of Rt. scapula. 9. Red blue contusion 30 cm. x 1/4 cm. below injury No. 8 3/4th cm. apart from each other. But injury Nos. 8 and 9 cross on middle of left scapula, contusion on Rt. scapula is 2| cm. wide and common. 10. Red blue contusion 7 cm.XO.5 cm. x 2 cm. below injury No. 8 extending from lateral end of Lt. scapula to centre of back. 11. Red blue contusion 3 cm. x2 cm. just below injury No. 10, Red blue contusion 15 cm. x 1 cm. on the lower 1/Jrd back extend ing obliquely from Lt. to right. Red blue contusion 10 cm. x 2 cm. on the It. side of back 8 cm. below the injury No. 8. Multiple linear (crescentic) abrasion with soft scab in an area of about 5 cm. x 5 cm. on lower medial quadrant of Rt. breast. Each about 0.2 cm. wide and range from 5 cm. = 8 cm. in length. Abrasion with soft scab 5 cm. x0.5 cm. 11 cm. below the umbilicus at 5 O' clock Position. 16. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5cm. x 0.5 cm. outer and lower part of right knee. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. on inner part of right knee. Abrasion with soil scab 3 cm. x O5 cm. on the top of left knee. Abrasion with soft scab 3 cm. x 1 cm. on the left knee 5cm. 16. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5cm. x 0.5 cm. outer and lower part of right knee. Abrasion with soft scab 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. on inner part of right knee. Abrasion with soil scab 3 cm. x O5 cm. on the top of left knee. Abrasion with soft scab 3 cm. x 1 cm. on the left knee 5cm. below injury No. 19. Lacerated wound with soft scab 0.5 cm. x 1.5. cm. x skin deep on the outer part of left great toe. Tenderness present. Red blue contusion 5 cm. x 2 cm. on inner side of left foot at the root of great toe, Red blue contusion on Rt. thigh 11 cm. x 15 cm. on anteremedial surface 20 cm. above knee joint. Red blue contusion 10 cm. x 10 cm. below iliac crest on right hip. Red blue contusion 15 cm. X22 cm. on Rt. hip extending up to Coceys.. 25. Multiple small red blue contusions on left hip at the level of coceys extending laterally. In the opinion of Dr. Pant, all the injuries were simple. Injuries Nos. 3,5,8,9,10,11,12,13,20,21,22,23,24 & 25 were caused by some blunt hard object. Injuries Nos. 2,4,6,7,15,16,17,18 & 19 were caused by friction against hard object. Injury No. 14 appeared to have been caused by finger nails. Duration of all the injuries examined on 1961980 was about one day (24 hours). Vaginal injury noted by on 1861980 was a rape injury and duration of this injury was about half a day. As per supplementary report dated 2161980, in the opinion of Dr. Pant, the age of Smt. Maya Tyagi P.W. 2 was between 19 and 20 years. The injuries of Roshan Lal P. W. 12 were examined by Dr. R. K. Tayal P. W. 11 on 1861980 at 6 p.m. at Baghpat and the undermentioned injuries were found on his person : Red contusion 7 cm. x 3 cm. right side head 5 cm. above the right ear. Linear abrasion 2 cm. on the right palm below the right wrist. Red contusion on the left palm in an area of 7 cm. X10 cm., 6 c..m. below the left wrist. Red contusion 11 cm. x 5 cm. on the right leg 8 cm. below the right knee joint. Red contusion 9 cm. x 2 cm. on the right leg 15 cm. below the right knee joint. Advised Xray. Red contusion on the left palm in an area of 7 cm. X10 cm., 6 c..m. below the left wrist. Red contusion 11 cm. x 5 cm. on the right leg 8 cm. below the right knee joint. Red contusion 9 cm. x 2 cm. on the right leg 15 cm. below the right knee joint. Advised Xray. Injury is kept under observation. 6. Red contusion 19 cm. x 2cm. on the right leg, 15 cm, below injury No. 5. 7. Red contusion 16 cm. X 20 cm. on the left leg, 6 cm. below the left knee joint. 8. Red contusion 10 cm. X 2 cm. on the left ankle. 9. Lacerated wound on the left foot on dorsal aspect 7 cm. x 10 cm. x skin deep 19 cm. away from the left heel." 12. In the opinion of Dr. Tayal, all the injuries except injury No. 5 were simple and could be caused by any blunt object. The injuries could be received between I p.m. to 4 p.m. on 1861980. 13. The postmortem examination of the bodies of Rajendra Dult Gaur, Ishwar Singh Tyagi and Surender Singh Tyagi (deceased) was conducted by Dr. T. R. Sharma P. W. 4 on 1961980 at 3 p.m., 4 p.m. and 4.45 p.m. respectively. 14. The undermentioned antemortem external injuries were found on the body of Rajendra Dutt Gaur deceased : "1. One exit of gun shot wound in front of chest oval in diameter, 6 cm. x 2.5 cm. medially from Rt. nipple. Blackening around the wound present, with fracture of 2nd part of sternum. 2. One entrance of gun shot wound in the left side of abdomen, oval in shape, 1 cm. X 1 cm. in diameter, 14 cm. below the left nipple. Blackening is present around the wound. 3. One through and through gun shot wound in left side of temporal region, 6 cm. x 3 cm. x scalp deep extending from left ear. 4. One entrance of gun shot wound in right side back 1 cm. x 1 cm., 7 cm. below the inferior angle of scapula No. B.T.S. (Blackening, tattooing and scorching). 5. One entrance of gun shot wound in back of chest, 1cm. x 1cm., 8 cm. below the wound No. 4 No. B.T.S. (Blackening, tattooing and scorching). 6. One entrance of gun shot wound in the lateral aspect of right knee joint 2 cm. below the inferior angle of scapula No. B.T.S. (Blackening, tattooing and scorching). 5. One entrance of gun shot wound in back of chest, 1cm. x 1cm., 8 cm. below the wound No. 4 No. B.T.S. (Blackening, tattooing and scorching). 6. One entrance of gun shot wound in the lateral aspect of right knee joint 2 cm. X 1.5 cm. hi diamater. 7. One exit of gun shot wound in right leg, 10 cm. x 6.5 cm. x 4 cm. above the right knee joint with fracture of lower shaft of femur bone. 8. Lacerated wound in left knee joint 1.5 cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep." 15. On internal examination, the right lung, pericardium and heart were found to be ruptured. 16. . In the opinion of Dr. Sharma, the injuries found on the body of Rajendra Dutt Gaur deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 17. The undermentioned antemortem external injuries were found on the body of Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased : "1. Entrance of gunshot wound, right from arm 3 cm. x 3 cm, 17 cm. bc'ow the Rt. shoulder joint No. B.T.S. (ii) One exit of gun shot wound in medical aspect of right arm. 1 cm. x 1 cm., 4 cm. below the right axillary fossa. 2. Lacerated wound 17 cm. x 10 cm. on the right forearm, 17 cm. below the right elbow joint, with fracture of both right radius and ulna bones, t 3. One exit of gun shot wound in right side of back 3 cm. X 2 cm. at the junction of right hip joint. 4. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cm. 2 x cm. in left arm, 8 cm. below the left shoulder joint. 5. One exit wound of gun shot in left side of back 4 cm. x 2 cm. x 5 cm. above the left hip joint. 6. One exit of gun shot wound in right leg 1 cm. x 1 cm., 8 cm. below the right popleteal fossa. 7. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cm. x 3 cm., 9 cm. below the right joint. No B.T.S. With fracture of both right tibia and fibula. 8. One entrance of gun shot wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. in left leg. 13 cm. below the left knee joint. N.B.T.S. 9. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cm. 7. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cm. x 3 cm., 9 cm. below the right joint. No B.T.S. With fracture of both right tibia and fibula. 8. One entrance of gun shot wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. in left leg. 13 cm. below the left knee joint. N.B.T.S. 9. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cm. x 5 cm. in the left leg 2 cm. X 5 cm., 9 cm. below the left knee joint. 10. Entrance of gun shot wound 5 cm. X 5 cm., 3 cm. lateral to 1st lumber vertebra. 11. One entrance of gun shot wound 0.5 cm. X 0.5 cm. lateral to injury No. 9. 18. On internal examination, first and second lumber vertebrae were found u> be fractured. 19. In the opinion of Dr. Sharma, the injuries found on the body of Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 20. The undermentioned antemortem external injuries were found on the body of Surendra Singh deceased : "1. One entrance of gun shot wound in right side chest 0.5 cmxO.5 cm at the level of right nipple. No. T.B.S. 2. One entrance of gun shot wound 2 cmx2 cm. 3 cm. lateral to injury No. 1. 3. Exit of gun shot wound in right side of neck 7 cm. X 8 cm. 4cm. above the right shoulder joint. 4. Lacerated wound 8 cm. x 10 cm. at the base right thumb with fracture of metacorpal bone. 5. One exit of gun shot wound in left side of chest 2 cm.x2 cm below the left nipple. 6. One exit of gun shot wound 0.5 cm 0.5 cm. 11 cm below injury No. 5. 7. Multiple abrasion in back 17 cm. x 15 cm. extending from the base of the neck. 8. Lacerated wound on the dorsal aspect of right foot 4 cm. X 4 cm. muscle deep with fracture of 1 to 3rd metacorpal bone, 3 cm. below right ankle joint. 9. . Lacerated wound 18 cm .x 11 cm. X muscle deep in left leg, 5 cm below the left knee joint with fracture of both left tibia and fibula. On internal examination, the pleura, right lung and the heart were found to be punctured. In the opinion of Dr. below right ankle joint. 9. . Lacerated wound 18 cm .x 11 cm. X muscle deep in left leg, 5 cm below the left knee joint with fracture of both left tibia and fibula. On internal examination, the pleura, right lung and the heart were found to be punctured. In the opinion of Dr. Sharma, the injuries found on the body of Surendra Singh deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The prosecution examined four eyewitnesses, namely, Smt. Maya Tyagi P. W. 2, Malkhan Singh P. W. 3. Roshan Lal P. W. 12 and Ishwar Singh P. W. 17. All the appellants pleaded not guilty. Sant Singh and Subhash appellants denied their participation in the incident. Counter version of the incident was given by Ram Giri S. I. appellant, which was adopted by Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram, Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh son of Viladhar Sharma, Anand Giri, Jamadar Singh and Pratap Singh appellants. According to the counter version. Ishwar Tyagi was a dacoit and his gang was notorious and operated in the region of Baghpat. They always had a woman in their car to deceive the Police. On the day of occurrence, Narendra Singh S. I., who was in charge of P. S. Baghpat, received information from an informer that the armed gang of Ishwar Tyagi was coming in a car from Delhi for the commission of high way robbery and dacoity and a woman was also with them. When the said gang reached Baghpat it was stopped by Narendra Singh S. I. and he sent information to P. S. Baghpat for sending a Police force. Members of the P. A. C. were also present at P. S. Baghpat at that time. After receiving the aforesaid information members of the P. A. C. and members of the police force of P. S. Baghpat kit the Police Station for the place of occurrence. Narendra Singh S. I. told Ram Giri, S. K. Gupta, Jamadar Singh and Kashi Ram appellants to chase the dacoits who had run away from the place of occurrence and they ran after them. When they returned the entire incident was over and Narendra Singh S. 1. had arrested Smt. Maya Tyagi and Roshan Lal and had taken them to P. S. Baghpat. When they returned the entire incident was over and Narendra Singh S. 1. had arrested Smt. Maya Tyagi and Roshan Lal and had taken them to P. S. Baghpat. Whatever was done by the Police force was done under the orders of Narendra Singh S. I .There was no time to check and verify. The three deceased, who were killed at the spot, were historysheeters and a list of criminal cases in which they were involved was filed by Ram Giri appellant in court after making his statement. Mam Chand Head Constable (D. W. 1) was examined in defence. The Trial Court after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellants and convicted and sentenced them as mentioned earlier. Narendra Singh S. I. coaccused was murdered during the pendency of the trial. Smt. Maya Tyagi P.W. 2 narrated the prosecution case as mentioned earlier. It was also stated by her that the accused present in Court were the miscreants. There were two other miscreants also. Her statement that she, the three deceased and Roshan Lal P.W. 12 were proceeding from Delhi to Sakal Patti to attend the wedding of her niece Raja Bala is supported by the evidence of her brother Kamal Singh P. W. 15. It is noteworthy that Sakal Patti is only at a distance of about 15 kms. from Baghpat and Baghpat falls on the way from Delhi to Sakal Patti. It is also noteworthy that the attached (Ext. 9), which was found in the car, in which she and the deceased were traveling, con tained Saries, pieces of Poplin and Rubia, Frocs, Chadar, Kachcha (Child's) etc., regarding which recovery memo Ext. Ka 79 was prepared, which also supported her statement that she was going to attend a wedding. Her statement that there was a puncture in one of the tyres of the car and at the Baghpat crossing when the driver had gone to get it repaired and her husband Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased .and the two other deceased had gone to the Bazar at Baghpat, one unknown person in plain dress came and tried to misbehave with her and she scolded him and in the meantime her husband Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased came there and abused him and threw him appears to be natural and convincing. Her statement that when she and the three deceased were informed by the persons in Baghpat Bazar that the person who had been thrown down by Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased was Narendra Singh SubInspector, they tried to leave that place, but the car did not start and while the three deceased were trying to push the car, they were fired at by a Police party is supported by the medical evidence, which indicates that around gunshot injuries Nos. 1 and 2 found on the body of Rajendra Putt Gaur deceased, there was blackening which shows that he was fired at from close range. It is also noteworthy that the photographs Exts. 6, 7 and 8 taken by Sushil Kumar, Photographer P. W. 19 show that the bodies of two of the deceased were lying near the car in which they were traveling. Her statement i hat she was pulled down from the car and assaulted by some of the appellants is supported by the injuries found on her person at the time of her medical examination by Dr. Neelima Pant P. W. 1. It appears that she was made naked and a .assaulted by some of the appellants as she was the root cause of the incident. It also appears that the three deceased were fired at by the Police party at the time o the incident in order to take revenge of the humiliation caused to Narendra Singh S. L at a short distance from P. S. Baghpat. It is true that it was stated by Smt. Maya Tyagi that in the application made by her three days after the incident, it was got written by her that they had reached the Baghpat crossing in the afternoon on the day of occurrence and as soon as they proceeded to purchase some articles from some shops, they saw a fight going on between the Police of P.S. Baghpat and some persons and firing took place thereafter, but this is of no importance as it appears to have been made by her under some confusion. The aforesaid statement is obviously incorrect for, if a fight had taken place between some other persons and the Police party, which resulted in firing, there was no occasion for the three deceased to have been fired at by the Police party. The aforesaid statement is obviously incorrect for, if a fight had taken place between some other persons and the Police party, which resulted in firing, there was no occasion for the three deceased to have been fired at by the Police party. H is also true that it was stated by her that she had got written in the aforesaid application that she got to know after the incident that the police had killed her husband and thereafter had set fire to his body. This also appears to have been stated by her under some confusion as admittedly the medical evidence does not .show that the body of Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased was burnt after his death. It is noteworthy that the original application, which is alleged to have been made by Smt. Maya Tyagi three days after the incident, has not been filed in court. Only its copy (Ext. Kha1) has been filed. In these circumstances, Smt. Maya Tyagi has been confronted with the application purported to have been made by her to the District Magistrate three days after the incident. It is true that the name of Smt. Maya Tyagi has been mentioned as Sudesh in Ext. Kha1, but no importance can be attached to this as her name was mentioned as Sudesh in the documents prepared by the Police soon after the incident. Considering the fact that Smt. Maya Tyagi is an illiterate woman, which is evident from the fact that she has thumb marked her statement in court, it is highly doubtful whether she was the author of the application purported to have been sent on her behalf to the District Magistrate three days after the incident (copy of which is Ext. Kha1). It is true that in the injury reports prepared by Dr. Neelima Pant PW 1, her name has been mentioned as Sudesh wife of Rajesh resident of Faridabad, but this is also of no importance as it was stated by her that she had not told her name to Dr. Pant, but the Constables who had taken her had done so. It is noteworthy that her name has been mentioned as Sudesh in the first information report lodged by Narendra Singh S.I. regarding the incident. The statement of Dr. Pant that Smt. Maya Tyagi had told that her name was Sudesh appears to have been made by her under some confusion. It is noteworthy that her name has been mentioned as Sudesh in the first information report lodged by Narendra Singh S.I. regarding the incident. The statement of Dr. Pant that Smt. Maya Tyagi had told that her name was Sudesh appears to have been made by her under some confusion. It was stated by Smt. Maya Tyagi that she had not seen the miscreants after the incident till her statement was recorded in the trial court. It is true that it appears from General Diary Entry No. 23 (Ext. Ka. 163) that Jamadar Singh and Sant Singh appellants had taken her from the Police Station to the hospital for medical examination, but from this it cannot be inferred that these two appellants had not participated in the incident as it is quite possible that she may not have noticed them while she was being taken from the police Station to the hospital after the incident as she must have not in great agony in view of the large number of injuries received by her. Certain discrepancies have also been pointed out in the statement made by Smt. Maya Tyagi in the trial court and the statement made by her before the Commission, but no importance can be attached to them as the statement made by her before the Commission is irrelevant in the trial. We are fortified in our opinion by the decision of the Supreme Court in Kehar Singh and others v. State (Delhi Administration), 1988 SCC 609 . Nothing has been brought out in the crossexamination of Smt. Maya Tyagi to shake her credit. In our opinion, her evidence is reliable. 28. Malkhan Singh PW 3 corroborated the evidence of Smt. Maya Tyagi PW 2 regarding the incident. It was stated by him that on the day of occurrence he had come to Baghpat from his village Sakal Patti to take the deed of agreement which was with Munshi Kishan Sahai. He had reached Baghpat at about 11 a.m. at about noon after he had taken the aforesaid document and hud reached Baghpat crossing, a car was parked there and a girl and a man were sitting in the car. In the meantime about 10 Policemen came therefrom the side of the Police Station armed with guns and Lathis. Three other persons, who were present near the car, were pushing the car. In the meantime about 10 Policemen came therefrom the side of the Police Station armed with guns and Lathis. Three other persons, who were present near the car, were pushing the car. The Police party fired at them, as a result of which two of them died near the car while the third fell at some distance. The girl, who was sitting in the car, was then dragged from the car and she was robbed of her ornaments and was made naked and was dragged to the Police Station. She tried to cover her private parts with her hands but she was pushed with Dandas. He also proceeded towards the Police Station. He recongnised Smt. Maya Tyagi PW 2 as she was the daughter of Trilok Singh of his village. While she was being taken to the Police Station, one person threw a Lungi towards her, but the Policemen took it. The marriage of the daughter of Kamal Singh (PW 15) son of Trilok Singh was to be performed on that day is village Sakal Patti. He was not allowed to enter the Police Station. He pointed to the appellants, who were present in court, and said that they had killed the deceased and had made Smt. Maya Tyagi naked and taken her to the Police Station. One of the miscreants, whoso name lie got to know subsequently as Narendra, was not present in court. After the incident he told Jagbir Singh, Advocate PW 16 to go to Sakal Patti and inform Trilok Chand l regarding the incident. Jagbir Singh then arranged for a car and he went on it to Sakal Patti and informed Trilok Singh and his family members regarding the incident. None of the three persons who were killed by the Police were armed. Smt. Maya Tyagi also did not have any cartridge with her and none of the three deceased had fired at the Police party at the time of the incident. He had heard the shrieks of Smt. Maya Tyagi while she was inside the Police Station, but he could not see her. After he had informed Kaiual Singh PW 15 regarding the incident, Kamal Singh and his family members came to Baghpat on a tractor. The explanation furnished by him for his presence at the time of the incident appears to be convicing. After he had informed Kaiual Singh PW 15 regarding the incident, Kamal Singh and his family members came to Baghpat on a tractor. The explanation furnished by him for his presence at the time of the incident appears to be convicing. His evidence is supported by the evidence of Kamal Singh PW 15, who deposed that he was informed regarding the incident on the day of occurrence by him and also by Jagbir Singh P.W 16. It is true that he is a resident of village Sakal Patti and Trilok Singh and his family members were known to him before the occurrence, but this is not sufficient to reject his testimony. His evidence is also supported by the medical evidence. Nothing has been brought out in his crossexamination to shake his credit. In our opinion, his evidence is also reliable. 29. Roshan Lal P. W. 12 deposed that he is the owner of Taxi U. P. G. 6005. On 1861980 at about 11 a.m. while he was at the Moti Nagar Taxi Stand at Delhi, two persons came there and engaged his taxi for taking them to a village at a short distance from Baghpat in connection with a wedding. He took them from the taxi stand to Subhash Nagar where three other persons and one woman were picked up. He was thereafter declared hostile and was crossexamined on behalf of the prosecution. It was stated by him in his crossexamination on behalf of the prosecution that Smt. Maya Tyagi was picked up from Tilak Nagar. She had an attached with her. He was sent to jail on 1961980, but he did not know in what connection. He was arrested on 1861980 at about 2.30 p. in. by the Baghpat Police while he was getting a tyre repaired at the Baghpat crossing. He had brought five persons and Smt. Maya Tyagi from Delhi to Baghpat in his taxi. He denied that he had stated before the investigating officer that three persons and a woman had sat in his taxi at Tilak Nagar and lie could offer no explanation how this was mentioned in his statement. The attache of Smt. Maya Tyagi was kept in the dicky of the car. He had stopped the car at the Baghpat crossing to get the tyre, which was punctured, repaired. The attache of Smt. Maya Tyagi was kept in the dicky of the car. He had stopped the car at the Baghpat crossing to get the tyre, which was punctured, repaired. The persons who were sitting in the car had got down at Baghpat to purchase articles, but Smt. Maya Tyagi remained sitting in the car while he was getting the puncture of the tyre repaired. One person in plain clothes came near the car and misbehaved with Smt. Maya Tyagi. In the meantime, the other persons, who had come in the taxi, came there and there was a fight between them and the person who had misbehaved with Smt. Maya Tyagi. Some persons then informed that the person with whom the fight had taken place was the SubInspector of P. S. Baghpat. All the persons who had come from Delhi then sat in the taxi and he tried to start it but it did not start. Then they got down from the taxi and three of them began to push it. The Police party then came there, but none of them fired. He then said that none of the accused present in court were in the Police party which had come to the place of occurrence at the time of the incident. It was also stated by him that the Police men, who had taken him to the Police Station after the incident, were also not amongst the accused. They had also made Smt. Maya Tyagi naked and taken her to the Police Station. He also received injuries at the time of the incident. His statement that none of the appellants were members of the Police party, which had come to the place of occurrence and had participated in the incident and had taken him to the police station and that there were five persons along with Smt. Maya Tyagi, who had come from Delhi with him, cannot be relied upon as he appears to have been won over. His evidence regarding the origin of the incident, however, appears to be reliable as it is supported by the version of the incident given by Smt. Maya Tyagi P\V 2 and Malkhan Singh PW 3. 30. Ishwar Singh PW 17 deposed that he is a resident of village Sakal. Patti. His evidence regarding the origin of the incident, however, appears to be reliable as it is supported by the version of the incident given by Smt. Maya Tyagi P\V 2 and Malkhan Singh PW 3. 30. Ishwar Singh PW 17 deposed that he is a resident of village Sakal. Patti. On 1861980 he had come to Baghpat from his village at about 10 a.m as he had to go to Delhi. As soon as he reached the Bus Stand at Baghpat one white ambassador car came there from Delhi and was parked near the shop of tyre repairer. Two or three persons got down from the car. He recognised Ishwar Tyagi amongst them as he was the soninlaw of Trilok Singh of his village and he had also attended the marriage of the son of Trilok Singh which he had also attended. While Ishwar Tyagi was talking at Baghpat crossing, shriek of a woman was heard coming from the car. Ishwar Tyagi then went towards the car where two persons were standing in plain clothes. There was a fight between them and Ishwar Tyagi threw one of them on the ground. That person told his companion that he should go to the Police Station and bring Police force with him. Members of the public, who had gathered, said that the SubInspector had been beaten and now let us see what happens. He told Ishwar Tyagi that he had not acted wisely in incurring enmity with the Police. The driver of the car then tried to start the car but it did not start. The car was then pushed. In the meantime 8 or 9 Police men came there and the person, who had been assaulted, joined them. The Police men were armed with guns, rifles and Dandas and they began to lire from their weapons. Two of the persons, who were pushing the car, received gun shot injuries and died. One of them tried to run, but he was also fired at and he also died. The Police party then took a search of the bodies of the three deceased and recovered cash from them. The persons who were killed did not have any fire arms or cartridges with them and had not fired at the Police party. Members of the public had also not thrown any brickbats. The Police party then took a search of the bodies of the three deceased and recovered cash from them. The persons who were killed did not have any fire arms or cartridges with them and had not fired at the Police party. Members of the public had also not thrown any brickbats. The Policemen then dragged down the woman who was sitting in the car and first snatched her ornaments and then tore her clothes and made her naked and took her forcibly to the Police Station, fn the meantime one person came on a motorcycle. He was informed by members of the public that he was Station Officer Gaur of P. S. Baghpat. He inserted a Danda in the vagina of the woman and said that she should be taken to the Police Station. The woman was assaulted and taken to the Police Station. The SubInspector of Police, who was first beaten, was not amongst the accused. He was informed that he had been subsequently killed. He, however, was unable to identify any of the appellants in court as the incident had taken place seven years earlier. It was stated by him that S. O. Gaur was also not amongst the accused. It appears that he has deliberately not identified the appellants in the trial court as it was admitted by him that the relations of the appellants had come to his village and had extended threats. It is true that his evidence regarding the participation of the appellants in the incident is of no value, but his evidence regarding the version of the incident appears to be reliable as it is supported by the evidence of Smt. Maya Tyagi PW 2, Malkhan Singh PW 3 and Roshan Lal PW 12. 31. Jagbir Singh PW 16 deposed that on 1861980 while he was proceeding from Syndicate Bank, Pilana to Baghpat via Tatora, he was informed that Policemen had killed three persons at Baghpat, who were attempting to commit robbery in the Syndicate Bank. He reached Baghpat at about 1.30 p.m. and went to the Syndicate Bank, but he was informed by the Manager of the Bunk that neither any dacoity was committed in the bank nor any attempt was made to commit dacoity in the Bank. Three persons had, however, been killed by the Police in front of the bank. He reached Baghpat at about 1.30 p.m. and went to the Syndicate Bank, but he was informed by the Manager of the Bunk that neither any dacoity was committed in the bank nor any attempt was made to commit dacoity in the Bank. Three persons had, however, been killed by the Police in front of the bank. He found two persons lying dead to the south of the road and one person lying dead of the southeast of the road. No fire arms or cartridges were lying near the bodies of the three deceased. He then went to the Tahsil. He was told by one person to go to the Police Station as there was one girl along with the ducoits who said that she belonged to his village Saka Patti and was going to Sakal Patti to attend the wedding of her niece. The marriage of the daughter of Kamal Singh PW 15 was to take place on that day. He then went to P. S. Bighpat and saw that girl who was naked. He did not know her name at that time. When he came to the gate of the Police Station ho was told by Malkhan Singh PW 3 of his village that the girl was Maya Tyagi sister of Kamal Singh Tyagi of his village and that he should try to get her released. He then sent Malkiian Singh by car to Saka Patti to inform Kamal Singh. Kamal Singh and many other persons of village Sakal Patti came to Baghpat on the same day at about 5.30 p.m. Maya was made to wear some clothes and was being taken to Meerut by the Police. People who had gathered there then began to shout that some persons should go with Maya otherwise she would be killed, fie then accompanied Maya to Meerut with the permission of the Police. Maya was taken in the Women Section of Dufferin Hospital at Meerut. He then returned from there at about 8 p.m. and on 2061980 ne got Maya released on bail. It was stated by him that he did not know Maya personally before the occurrence. His statement before the Commission that he knew Maya before the occurrence . His statement before the Commission that he know Maya before the occurrence is irrelevant and inadmissible in the trial. It was stated by him that he did not know Maya personally before the occurrence. His statement before the Commission that he knew Maya before the occurrence . His statement before the Commission that he know Maya before the occurrence is irrelevant and inadmissible in the trial. His statement before the Commission that he did not see the bodies of the three deceased at Baghpat is also irrelevant and no importance can be attached to it. His evidence that he sent Ma khan Singh by car to Sakal Patti to inform the relations of Maya Tyagi regarding the incident is supported by the evidence of Malkhan Singh PW 3. Nothing has been brought out in his crossexamination to shake his credit. In our opinion, his evidence is also reliable. 32. Kamal Singh PW 15 deposed that Maya Tyagi is his sister. She was married to Ishwar Singh Tyagi of village Talhata. On 1861980 they were ling from Delhi where they resided. His daughter Raj Bala was to be married to Ashok on that day (1861980). At about 2.30 p.m. on that day (1861980) he received information from Malkhan Singh PW 3 that Ishwar Singh Tyagi and his two companions were lying dead at Baghpat crossing and that Maya had been made naked and was beaten and taken to P. S. Baghpat. He along with some other persons of Sakal Patti then went oh a tractor to Baghpat and found three dead bodies lying at Baghpat crossing, which were covered with cloth. No weapon was lying near the bodies. The Policemen, who were present there, did not allow him to see the bodies. He was informed by the person who had gathered there that the bodies were of Ishwar and Vinod. He then went to the police station and saw Maya there. He was informed by persons who had gathered at the Baghpat crossing that the Police had made her naked and beaten her and taken her to the Police Station. When he saw her, she was wearing clothes. She was taken in his presence by the two Constables in a motor vehicle to Meerut. He then returned to his village Sakal Patti and performed the marriage of his daughter. He thereafter went to Meerut and sent telegram (Ext. Ka. 71) to the Home Secretary. When he saw her, she was wearing clothes. She was taken in his presence by the two Constables in a motor vehicle to Meerut. He then returned to his village Sakal Patti and performed the marriage of his daughter. He thereafter went to Meerut and sent telegram (Ext. Ka. 71) to the Home Secretary. It is noteworthy that his statement that Maya Tyagi was his sister and was married to Ishwar Singh Tayagi deceased and that the marriage of his daughter Raj Bala was to be performed on the day of occurrence and he was informed regarding the incident by Malkhan Singh PW.2 on that day and that lie did not find any weapons lying near the bodies of the deceased has not even been challenged in crossexamination. Nothing has been brought out in his crossexamination to shake his credit. In our opinion, his evidence is reliable and furnishes strong corroboration to the testimony of Smt. Maya Tyagi PW 2 that she and the three deceased were coming to Sakal Patti from Delhi to attend the wedding of Raj Bala when the incident took place at Baghpat. 33. Sushil Kumar PW 19 deposed that he was working as a photographer since about a year before the occurrence. On the day of occurrence he was called by the Police of P. S. Baghpat and he went to the place of occurrence (Baghpat crossing) in the afternoon and remained there till the evening and took photographs. He found three or four dead bodies lying there and he took their photographs. Narendra Singh S. I. took those photographs and some negatives which were clear from him. Some negatives, however, remained with him. Thereafter the C.I.D. Inspector met him and he gave those negatives to him. The C. I. D. Inspector had paid him Rs. 8 and had taken the negatives and the photographs, which he had taken on 1861980, from him on 1511981. The receipt for the payment of Rs. 8 to him is Ext. Ka92. The Photographs, which he had taken at the place of occurrence, are material exhibits 147 to 151. The positive prints of negatives material exhibits 147 and 148 are Exts. 6 and 7, which were prepared by him. While he was taking the photographs he was told by the police that the surroundings of the place where the deed bodies are lying should also come in the photographs. The positive prints of negatives material exhibits 147 and 148 are Exts. 6 and 7, which were prepared by him. While he was taking the photographs he was told by the police that the surroundings of the place where the deed bodies are lying should also come in the photographs. The photographs did not show that any weapons were present near the bodies. He denied the suggestion that the photographs, in which firearms were seen lying near the bodies of the deceased were not given by him to the C. I. D. Nothing has been brought out in his crossexamination to shake his Credit. In our opinion, his evidence is reliable. P. S. Negi Dy. S. P. PW 13 deposed that on 1861980 at 4 p.m. he reached P. S. Baghpat. He found one woman, who gave out her name as Sudesh and one man, who gave out his name as Roshan, there. Both were injured. Later on he came to know that the name of the woman was Maya. Roshan had returned from the hospital and his injuries had been examined. He sent Maya to the hospital along with Jagbir Singh Advocate. Maya did not talk to hi in, but Roshan did. It was wrong to say that he had sent Jagbir Singh along with Maya Tyagi as she had told him that there was danger to her life at the hands of the Police. He talked to the appellants, who were his subordinates and were known to him. They told him that there was an encounter between them and miscreants, in which some miscreants were killed. A report under Section 399/ 402,I. P. C. had been registered at the Police Station by Narendra Singh S. I. coaccused. The chik report relating to the said case appeared to have been written by Kashi Ram appellant on 1861980. He recognised the handwriting and signature of Kashi Ram. The said chik report was marked Ext. Ka. 69. He was not aware that a final report had been filed against Maya Tyagi and Roshan in the aforesaid case. In his crossexamination, it was stated by him that he had received information regarding the incident at 2.30 p.m. at Police Office, Meerut, that three miscreants had been killed in an encounter with the Police and one woman and one man had been arrested. In his crossexamination, it was stated by him that he had received information regarding the incident at 2.30 p.m. at Police Office, Meerut, that three miscreants had been killed in an encounter with the Police and one woman and one man had been arrested. He went to Baghpat and on reaching the place of occurrence he found three persons lying dead and pistols and cartridges were lying near the dead bodies. We are, however, not prepared to accept this as no injuries were found on any Policeman or any member of the public' If the three deceased were armed with firearms and cartridges, it is difficult to believe that they would not have fired at the Police party when they wore being fired at. It is noteworthy that he was declared hostile and was crossexamined on behalf of the prosecution. The statement of Dr. K. K. Singhal PW 5 is not of any importance as it is a mere opinion obtained by the investigating authority for the purposes of investigation. The defence of the appellants, as mentioned earlier, has been stated by Ram Giri appellant in his statement under Section 323 Cr. P. C., which was adopted by ail the other appellants except Sant Singh and Subhash. Apart from this, there are a number of documents, which have been proved by Bhagwat Singh Head Constable (PW 21) to have been written by Sashi Ram appellant, namely, G. D. Entries Exs. Ka158,159,160 and 162. Kashi Ram appellant has also admitted that these entries are in his handwriting and it has been stated by him that they were written at the instance, of Narendra Singh S. I. It is mentioned in G. D. Entry (Ext. Ka158) No. 18 of P. S. Bhaghpat recorded at 12.30 p.m. on 18619SO that information had been received from an informer that Ambassadar Car No. U. P. G. 6005 in which there were six men and a woman had stopped at Baghpat crossing and the men who were in the car were talking amongst themselves and saying that the woman should be left behind and they should commit robbery thereafter. On receipt of this informa tion S. 1. Narendra Singh S. I. Sheo Kumar Gupta and Head Constable Kashi Ram proceeded to the place of occurrence. In G. D. Entry (Ext. On receipt of this informa tion S. 1. Narendra Singh S. I. Sheo Kumar Gupta and Head Constable Kashi Ram proceeded to the place of occurrence. In G. D. Entry (Ext. Ka159) No. 19 of P. S. Baghpat recorded at 1.30 p.m. on 1861980, it is mentioned that Kashi Ram, Head Constable had come to the Police Station and had given information that miscreants were found in the car regarding which information had been given earlier and exchange of gunfire had taken place between the Police and them. There was insufficient Police force and arms at the place of occurrence. On receiving this information Rakesh Kumar, Constable No. SOS armed with a rifle and 30 cartridges, Jamadar Singh S. I. armed with a pistol and cartridges, Kashi Ram, Head Constable armed with a rifle and 30 cartridges for himself and one rifle of the S. O. for Narendra Singh S. I., Anaud Giri Constable armed with a rifle and 30 cartridges, Rakesh Constable No. 702 armed with B. B. L. gun and cartridges and Subhash, Sant Singh and Pratap Singh Constables and Ram Giri S. I. armed with Lathis left for the place of occurrence. In G. D. Entry (Ex. Ka. 160) No. 20 of P. S. Baghpat recorded at 2. p. m. on 1861980 it is mentioned that S. I. Narendra Singh, Head Constable Kashi Ram, Constable Anand Giri had returned to the Police Station along with Roshan Lal son of Ram Chandra and Smt. Sudesh wife of Rajesh who had been arrested under Sections 399/402 and 307,I. P. C. and 25/27 Arms Act. The aforesaid two persons had also received injuries at the time of their arrest. On a search being taken nothing was recovered from Roshan Lal. Both the afosesaid persons were lodged in the Police lookup. A report under Sections 399/402/307, I. P. C. and 25/27 Arms Act had been lodged against Roshan Lal, Smt. Sudesh, Brijbir, Prahlad and three others who had been killed and whose names were not known. In G. D. Entry (Ext. Ka162) No. 22 of P. S. Baghpat recorded at 3.15 p. m. On 1861980 it is mentioned that Jamadar Singh, Rakesh Constable No. 808, Subhash Chandra and Sant Singh constables have returned along with their weapons to the Police Station. In the wireless message (Ext. Ka. In G. D. Entry (Ext. Ka162) No. 22 of P. S. Baghpat recorded at 3.15 p. m. On 1861980 it is mentioned that Jamadar Singh, Rakesh Constable No. 808, Subhash Chandra and Sant Singh constables have returned along with their weapons to the Police Station. In the wireless message (Ext. Ka. 91) Sent at 2.05 p. m. on 1861980 from P. S. Baghpat to the District Magistrate and S. S. P. Meerut and all S. Os. of the District, which was received by Ved Prakash, S. I. (P. W. 18) at 1.50 p. m. on 1861980 and has been proved by Ved Prakash (P. W. 18) to be in the handwriting of Kashi Ram appellant and under his signature, it is mentioned that on 1861980 and encounter had taken place between the Police and miscreants at Baghpat crossing. Suddenly, in Which three of the miscreants had been killed and some miscreants had run away. A Magistrate should be sent to the place of occurrence immediately. One ambassador car No. U, P. G. 6005 had been recovered from the miscreants. Inquiry was being made regarding the identity of the persons who had been killed. One man and one woman had been arrested alive. 38. All the above mentioned documents have been proved to have been written by Kashi Ram appellant and are admissible under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act. 39. In G. D. Entry No. 18 (Ext. Ka. 158) of P. S. Baghpat recorded on 1861980, it is mentioned that information was received from an informer that some miscreants had come on a car which had stopped at Baghpat crossing and on the basis of that information Narendra Singh, S. I. coaccused and Sheo Kumar Gupta and Kashi Ram appellants went to the place of occurrence. Out of these three persons only Sheo Kumar Gupta was armed with a revolver. This is clearly in conflict with the statement of Ram Giri appellant made in the trial court, which was adopted by all the remaining appellants except Sant Singh and Subhash. It was stated by Ram Giri appellant that information had been received that the gang of Ishwar Tyagi was coming by car from Delhi and on receiving this information Narendra Singh, S. I. alone proceeded to Baghpat crossing. It was stated by Ram Giri appellant that information had been received that the gang of Ishwar Tyagi was coming by car from Delhi and on receiving this information Narendra Singh, S. I. alone proceeded to Baghpat crossing. If actually information had been received regarding the arrival of a gang of dacoits, it is difficult to believe that only Narendra Singh, S. I. or a few Policemen would have gone from the police station to Baghpat crossing. Normally would have expected that a fairly large Police force would have gone from the Police Station on receiving such an information. The statement of Ram Giri appellant made in the trial court and G. D. Entry (Ex. KaI58) are thus unreli able. G. D. Entry No. 19 of P.S. Baghpat of 18619oO (Ext. Ka.l59) mentions the departure of the Police force consisting of all the appellants except Sheo Kumar Gupta variously armed from the Police Station Baghpat crossing at 1.30 p. m. According to the wireless message, written by Kashi Ram appellant at L30 p. m., the entire incident was over and three miscreants had been killed and two had been arrested alive. It is thus obvious that G. D. Entry (Ext. Ka. 159) regarding the departure of most of the appellants from P. S. Baghpat at 1.30 p. m. for Baghpat crossing before the incident is incorrect. Further the defence case regarding an encounter between the Police force and the miscreants is falsified from the fact that no injury was received by any of the members of the Police force or any member of the public at the place of occurrence, information alleged to have been received at the Police Station from an informer that a gang of miscreants was coming to commit robbery is also falsified from the fact that Smt. Maya Tyagi P.W.2 who was alleged to have been arrested at the time of the incident after being beaten was found to be carrying a pregnancy of five months. It is difficult to believe that a group of persons would have a woman with them in an advanced stage of pregnancy if their object was to commit robbery. The evidence of Malkhan Singh PVV3, Kamal Singh P. W. 15, Jagbir Singh P. W. 16 and Sushil Kumar P. W. 19 shows that no firearms or cartridges were found lying near the bodies of the deceased. The evidence of Malkhan Singh PVV3, Kamal Singh P. W. 15, Jagbir Singh P. W. 16 and Sushil Kumar P. W. 19 shows that no firearms or cartridges were found lying near the bodies of the deceased. This also indicates that the three deceased had not fired at the Police party at the time of the incident. It may be mentioned that recovery memos Exts. Ka.,83, Ka. 85 and Ka. 87, which relate to the recovery of English revolver No. 06938 of .38 bore, containing two empty cartridges and three live cartridges, and four live cartridges lying near the body of Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased, a country made gun .12 bore and five live cartridges and two empty cartridges lying near the body of Rajendra Datt Gaur deceased and a countrymade pistol and three live cartridges and two empty cartridges lying near the body of Surendra Singh deceased, which are alleged to have been prepared by S. I. Narendra Singh and Sheo Kumar Gupta appellants on 1156180 are also clearly unreliable for if these three deceased had fired from their weapons at the time of the incident, one would have expected that some injuries would have been received either by the Police party or some members of the public. Mam Chand D. W. 1 deposed regarding the involvement of Surendra Singh son of Prem Singh resident of village Chola P. S. Kotvvali Dehat in Crime No. 40/75 under Section 3 2, I. P. C. and the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him therein on 2941987. It was also deposed by him that Surendra Singh was involved in case No. 90A/76 under Sections 147, 148 and 307, I. P. C. and chargesheet was submitted against him in the aforesaid case, which was pending. Even if the evidence of Mam Chand is accepted, it is of no value. The defence version that an encounter had taken place between the Police party and miscreants in which the three deceased were killed is thus unreliable. Although G. D. Entries Exts. Ka. 158 and Ka. Even if the evidence of Mam Chand is accepted, it is of no value. The defence version that an encounter had taken place between the Police party and miscreants in which the three deceased were killed is thus unreliable. Although G. D. Entries Exts. Ka. 158 and Ka. 159 contain a wrong version of the incident the departure of the appellants for the place of occurrence at the time of the incident is mentioned therein which, in our opinion, is reliable as it is difficult to believe that some other Policemen would have gone to the place of occurrence before the incident and the names of the Policemen who in fact did not go to the place of occurrence before the incident would have been mentioned In the G. D. entries. It is true that the departure of Rakesh Constable No. 702 is noted in the General Diary of 1761SSO, but this return is not noted, the departure of Sant Singh constable is noted in the General Diary of 1861980 at 6.30 a. m., but his return is not noted and the departure of Sheo Kumar Gupta S.I. is noted in the General Diary of 1761980 at 10p.m., but his return is not noted. Incur opinion, no importance can be attached to three omissions as it is mentioned in G. D. Entry No. 19 Ext. Ka. 159 that they left the Police Station for the place of occurrence at 1.30p.m. on 1861980, which shows that they must have returned to the Police Station earlier. It is true that the name of appellant Pratap Singh is not mentioned in the list of officers posted at P. S. Baghpat in G. D. Entry No. 6 Ext. Ka. 110, but in view of the fact that he was one of the constables who took the deadbodies of the deceased to thedoctor for postmortem examination, it appears o was attached to P. S. Baghpat, G. D. Entries Exts, Ka158 and Ka159 thus furnish strong corroboration to the evidence regarding the identity of the appellants given by Smt. Maya yagi P. W.2 and Malkhan Singh P. W. 3 in the trial court and establish their participation in the incident. Moreover, the Statement of Ram Giri appellant, which was adopted by Sheo Kumar, Jamadar Singh and Kashi Ram appellants, also shows that these four appellants proceeded the place of occurrence before the incident. Moreover, the Statement of Ram Giri appellant, which was adopted by Sheo Kumar, Jamadar Singh and Kashi Ram appellants, also shows that these four appellants proceeded the place of occurrence before the incident. It may be mentioned that the lenient of Ram Giri, Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram and Jamadar Singh, appellants that they chases some of the miscreants who had run away from the place of occurrence also appears to be unreliable as the evidence of Smt. Maya Tyaei P. W. 2 and Malkhan Singh P. W. 3 indicates that there were only three deceased and Roshan Lal and Smt. Maya Tyagi who had come to Baghpat crossing in the ambassador car. It is true that Smt. Maya Tyagi had Mated' in her statement to the investigating officer that apart from her husband there were four persons in the car along with her, but this appears to have been stated by her under some confusion as it was clearly stated by her in her examinationinchief that there were only three men, namely, the three deceased, apart from the driver along with her in this car. The statement of Budul Rai P.W. 6, the ballistic expert, that four empty cartridges, recovered from the place of occurrence according to G. D. Entry No. 26, which were sent to him, were fired from the three rifles of P. S. Baghpat, which were sent to him shows that three rifles were uses by the Police party at the time of the incident. The fact that some of the appellants were armed with lathis is established from the lathi injuries received by Smt. Maya Tyagi P. W. 2 and Roshan Lal P. W. 12. 43. The question that remains to be considered is whether the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly when the three deceased were fired at and Smt. Maya Tyagi P. W.2 was assaulted and made naked and Roshan Lal P.W. 12 was also assaulted. It appears that information regarding the beating of Narendra Singh, S. I. at Baghpat crossing by Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased must have been conveyed to P. S. Baghpat by someone immediately after the incident and the appellants variously armed came from the Police Station to take revenge of the humiliation caused to S. I. Narendra Singh who was second officer of the Police Station. The fact that they fired at the deceased immediately on their arrival clearly indicates that the object of the assembly was to commit the murder of the three deceased in retaliation of the beating given by Ishwar Singh Tyagi deceased to S. I. Narendra Singh. The fact that Smt. Maya Tyagi was made naked and assaulted and taken to P. S. Baghpat from the place of occurrence indicates that she was the root cause of the incident. All the appellants were, therefore, members of an unlawful assembly and were guilty of the offences of which they have been convicted by the trial court. Coming to the question of sentence, we are of the opinion that the sentence of death awarded to Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram, Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh son of Wiladhar Sharma, Auand Giri and Jamadar Singh appellants under Section 302/149, I. P. C. appears to be excessive as it is not established from the medical evidence or the evidence of the ballistic expert as to which of them had actually fired at the three deceased and caused their death. Ends of justice would be met by reducing the sentence of death awarded to them to life imprisonment. The fine awarded to all the appellants under various sections under which they have been convicted appears to be unjustified and deserves to be set aside. Criminal Appeal No. 183 of 1988 is accordingly allowed in part. The conviction of Sheo Kumar Gupta, Kashi Ram, Rakesh son of Ranjit Singh, Rakesh Son of Wiladhar Sharma, Anand Giri and Jamadar Singh appellants under Section 302/149,I. P. C. is upheld, but the sentence of death awarded to them thereunder is reduced to imprisonment for life. The conviction of the appellants under Section 201,I. P. C. and the sentence of seven years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 218,I. P. C. and the sentence of three years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 120B I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 120B I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld. The conviction of the appellants under Section 323/149 I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 500 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Sections 354/149, I. P. C. and the sentence of two years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 2GOO awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 148, I. P. C. and the sentence of three years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 1000awarded to them thereunder is set aside. All the sentences shall run concurrently. The appellants are in jail. They shall serve out of sentence awarded to them. The reference made by the learned Judge for confirmation of the sentence of death is rejected. Criminal appeal No. 168 of 1988 is also allowed in part. The conviction of Pratap Singh, Ram Giri, Sant Singh and Subhash appellants under Section 302/149, I. P. C. and the imprisonment for life awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 5000awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 201, I. P. C. and the sentence of seven years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants um Section 218, I. P. C. and the sentence of three years R.I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under lection 120B, I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. 1. awarded to them thereunder is upheld. The conviction of the appellants under Section 323/149, I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. 1. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the sentence of Rs. 5()0a\vardcd to them thereunder is set aside. awarded to them thereunder is upheld. The conviction of the appellants under Section 323/149, I. P. C. and the sentence of one year R. 1. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the sentence of Rs. 5()0a\vardcd to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 354/149, I. P. C. and the sentence of two years' R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, but the fine of Rs. 2000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. The conviction of the appellants under Section 147, I. P. C. and the sentence of two years 'R. I. awarded to them thereunder is upheld, hut the fine of Rs. 1000 awarded to them thereunder is set aside. All the sentences shall run concurrently. 49 The appellants are on bail. They shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the sentences awarded to them. Order accordingly