MOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are three out of sixteen accused who faceda trial on a charge under four heads for offences under S. 147, Section 302 read with S. 149, S. 325 read with S. 149 and section. 323 read with S. 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The three appellants were further charged with an offence under S. 392 of the code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge who held the trial acquitted one of the accused named Kanchan Singh of all the charges while the other fifteen were convicted of an offence under S. 325 read with S. 149 of the Coda and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a year and a fine of Rs. 100. 00 each, the sentence in default of payment of fine being rigorous imprisonment for two months. Three of the accused other than the appellants were convicted of an offence under S. 302 read with S. 149 of the code and were sentenced to imprisonment for life. The substantive sentences of imprisonment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The convicts filed an appeal which was decided by a division bench of the High court of Rajasthan through its judgment dated 9/08/1973, along with a cross-appeal and a petition for revision of the order of the trial court filed by the State. Accepting the State appeal in part, the high court held that the three appellants were guilty of an offence under section 302 read with S. 149 of the Indian Penal Code but that no other offence was made out against them except one under S. 147 of the Code. The sentences awarded on these two counts were imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for six months respectively. Out of the three accused sentenced to imprisonment for life by the trial court, one named Charan Singh, was acquitted of the charge in its entirety while the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed on the two others by the trial court was upheld. No offence whatsoever was held to have been brought home to any of the remaining ten accused so that the appeal filed by the convicts was accepted insofar as they were concerned.

(3.) It is the judgment of the High court that is being challenged in this appeal under S. 2 (a) of the Supreme court (Enlargement of criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970.