PRITHVI MINOR Vs. MAM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the common judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Criminal Death Reference No. 1 of 1995, Criminal Appeal Nos. 201 of 1995, 169 of 1995 and 146 of 1995 by which the High Court was pleased to acquit respondents 1 to 4 who had been found guilty of charges under Section 302 r/w Ss. 307 and 460 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC"). The appellant in Crl. A. No. 1844-46 of 1996 is a person aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused, being closely related to the deceased persons. Criminal Appeal Nos. 3036-38 of 1996 are at the instance of the State of Rajasthan impugning the same judgment of the High Court.

(2.) Prithvi, the appellant in the above set of appeals, at the material time when the incident occurred, was aged about 13 years. He used to reside, along with his cousin-sister deceased Kumari Lali, with his uncle, deceased Hansraj and Aunt, deceased Mahadi, in village Kotputali. Hansraj and his elder brother Gheesa, both sons of Dhonkal, were residing in adjoining houses in village Kotputali. Hansraj was married to Mahadi, the sister of Suraj (PW-34) and Rameshwar (PW-35). Hansraj had no issues and, therefore, he desired to bring up and kept with him Hardan (PW-5), the son of the his brother Gheesa. For some reason, Hansraj was annoyed with Hardan and threw him out of his house. He, thereafter, allowed Prithvi (PW-31), who was the son of his brother-in-law Surja (PW-34) and Lali, the daughter of his brother-in-law Rameshwar (PW-35) to live in his house. Respondent No. 1-Mam Raj, s/o Bhagwana, r/o Village Naurangpura; respondent No. 2-Jai Ram, s/o Bhagwana, r/o Village Naurangpura; respondent No. 3-Rameshwar, s/o Ghisa, r/o Village Kuhara; and respondent No. 4 -Bharta, s/o Sohanlal, r/o Village Khatoti, are all close relatives of Gheesa. Mam Raj and Jai Ram are the brothers of Gheesa's wife; Rameshwar is the father-in-law of the younger brother of Hardan and Bharta is Gheesa's sister's son. Hansraj had certain agricultural land, which he desired to give away to Prithvi in preference to Hardan. On this account, the respondents were angry with Hansraj and on some occasions, prior to the date of occurrence, threatened him with serious consequences if his agricultural land was not given to Hardan and if he failed to turn out Prithvi and Prithvi's Cousin Lali from his house. Hansraj, however, refused to comply with these demands despite the threats.

(3.) On the night of 14th/15th August, 1993, Hansraj and Prithvi were sleeping on charpais outside the house of Hansraj. Mahadi and Lali were sleeping on charpais in the courtyard inside his house. The case of the prosecution is that in the dead of the night, between midnight and 1.00 A.M. the four respondents came to the spot armed with lathis in their hands. Rameshwar gave a lathi blow on the head of Prithvi, but since he was sleeping with his hand over his head, the lathi immediately hit his hand as a result of which he got up and saw the respondents Mam Raj, Jai Ram and Bharta giving lathi blows to Hansraj. Prithvi attempted to raise an alarm whereupon all the four accused gave him lathi blows on his head, eye, hand and other parts of his body. Respondent No. 2-Jai Ram thereafter stated to the other respondents that all the victims had died and that they all should run away from the spot. Accordingly, the respondents ran away from the spot.