MADANI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant who is a widowed sister of Sohanlal and Vishwapal who were the co-accused before the trial Court took her trial along with her brothers under S. 302 read with S. 34, I.P.C. and also under S. 324, I.P.C. on the allegations that on 6-6-80 at about 5.00 p.m. they all caused the death of the deceased Murlidhar and also caused injury to another by name Rameshwar It is stated in the evidence that Sohanlal was armed with a lathi and the appellant was armed with gandasi (FO). The occurrence was due to a dispute over the enjoyment of a piece of land. There were 8 injuries on the deceased of which injuries Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are said to have been caused by gandasi and all of these injuries are attributed to the present appellant. In respect of this incident the first information report was lodged at 6.00 a.m. on 7-6-1980. The police registered a case on the first information report Ex. P1, inspected the scene of occurrence, recorded the statements of the witnesses and filed the charge-sheet against the appellant and two of her brothers.

(2.) P.W. 17, Medical Officer conducted the post-mortem over the dead body of the deceased and opined that injuries Nos. 5, 7, 8 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Be it noted that injury No. 7 was an irregular contusion, injury No. 8 was a contusion on the back of left side of the chest of the deceased. These two injuries. namely, injuries Nos. 7 and 8 are attributed to Sohanlal. To substantiate the charges the prosecution examined PWs. 10, 18, 19 and 20 as eyewitnesses. All the accused denied the offence when questioned under S. 313, Cr. P.C. The trial Court acquitted Vishwapal and convicted the appellant and her brother Sohanlal under S. 302 read with S. 34, I.P.C. and sentenced both of them to undergo imprisonment for life and also convicted the appellant under Ss. 324 and 33 read with 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs. 50 and four months rigorous imprisonment and for 4 months rigorous imprisonment respectively. Sohanlal was also convicted under S. 324 read with S. 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and further convicted under S. 323 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months with a direction that all sentences to run concurrently.

(3.) Hence on being aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court the appellant and Sohanlal preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court for the reasons assigned in its judgment altered the conviction of the appellant into one under S. 302. I.P.C. (simpliciter) and affirmed the sentence of life imprisonment and in addition that it has also confirmed the conviction u/ S. 324 and the sentence of imprisonment for one year but the High Court set aside the conviction of the appellant under S. 323 read with S. 34, I.P.C. and the sentence of imprisonment imposed therefor.