RAM HET Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 24.1.2012 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (Ex. Cadre), Mahoba in S.T. No. 115 of 2010 (Ram Het and others vs. State of U.P.), under Sections 302, 325 and 323 I.P.C., P.S. Charkhari, district-Mahoba, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellants have to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment; convicted for the offence u/s 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellants have to undergo one month R.I.; and also convicted for the offence u/s 323 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) In brief, the case of the prosecution starts from the FIR lodged by complainant Smt. Puniya wife of Kamta, resident of Mohalla-Soharyab, Kasba and police station-Charkhari, district-Mahoba, alleging therein that on 15.10.2010 at about 6:00 p.m. at the doorstep of Nathu Prajapati, her husband Kamta, son Hariram and daughter Jaidevi and she herself were attacked with lathi-danda by Ramhet and Rameshwar sons of Maiyadeen Prajapati, residents of Soharyab, Kasba-Charkhari and two other persons namely son of Balli and son of Jaggu, residents of Village-Salat. It was also mentioned in that report that her husband received injuries in his head and became unconscious and she had brought her injured husband to the police station. The chick report of the FIR was scribed by constable Dashrath Singh, G.D. entries were made. Initially the report was lodged under Sections 308 and 323 I.P.C. as Crime no. 1702 of 2010 and when death of the complainant's husband had taken place, Section 304 I.P.C. was also added. After lodging of the report the investigation started and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer had submitted chargesheet against four accused persons namely, Ramhet and Rameshwar sons of Maiyadeen Kumhar, Rajesh and Ramhetu son of Brij Lal. The cognizance was taken by the Magistrate and considering that the case was triable by the Sessions Judge, it was committed to the Court of session. The sessions court charged the accused under Sections 302, 308 and 323 I.P.C. Accused Ramhet son of Brij Lal was declared juvenile and his case was separated and sent to the Juvenile Justice Board and trial of three accused namely herein, Ramhet, Rameshwar and Rajesh commenced.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined nine witnesses. PW1 Puniya (informant), PW2 Jai Devi daughter of the complainant, PW3 Hari Ram son of the complainant, PW4 Dashrath Singh, PW5 S.I. Harbansh Singh (Investigating Officer), PW6 D.K. Sullere, PW7 Dr. Devendra Singh Rajpoot, PW8 Anurag Purwar and PW9 Ram Sukh Verma.