RAYEES AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals arose from the common judgment dated 14.2.1997 passed by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in ST No. 639/1996 and therefore, they are hereby decided with a common judgment.

(2.) THE present appeal is preferred by the appellants being aggrieved with the judgment dated 14.2.1997 passed by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in ST. No. 63 of 1996 whereby, the appellant Rayees @ Achche Chacha has been convicted of offence under Section 307 of I.P.C and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/ - while the remaining appellants have been convicted of the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and similar sentence was inflicted on them as was recorded against the main accused Rayess @ Achche Chacha. In default of payment of fine six months rigorous imprisonment in addition was imposed. Facts of the case in short, are that, on 20.9.1995 the complainant Hanif (PW5) resident of Kachhi Sarai, Station Bazariya, Bhopal went to have a cup of tea at the hotel of one Aftab along with his friends Abdul Azim (PW6) and one Farukh. At about 10.30 p.m, while he was talking with his friends, the appellant Noor Mohammad along with other appellants came to the spot. Noor Mohammad and Rayees @ Achche Chacha each had a sword in their hands. The appellants Shabir and Nasir held Hanif and Noor Mohammad gave a blow with the sword to kill Hanif but, Hanif raised his hand and therefore, the fingers of his right hand were cut. Thereafter, the appellant Rayees pierced Hanif's abdomen with sword. Hanif fell down on ground and thereafter, the appellants ran away. The complainant Hanif went to the Police Station, Station Bazariya, Bhopal and lodged the FIR Ex.P/7 within 20 minutes of the incident. He was sent for his medico legal examination. Dr. Rakesh Kumar Jain (PW1) at Hamidia Hospital, Bhopal examined complainant Hanif and gave his report Ex.P/1. He found that Hanif had two incised wounds, one was in his abdomen and second was in his right hand and therefore, he referred the complainant Hanif to RSO, General Surgery, Dr. Snehlata (PW3) who, was working as RSO, General Surgery, examined the complainant Hanif and found that he had two incised wounds:

(3.) THE appellants abjured their guilt. They did not take any specific plea but, they have stated that they were falsely implicated in the matter. However, in defence Mohammad Farukh (DW1) and Syed Yasin Ali (DW2) were examined.