RUGNATH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have preferred the aforesaid Criminal Appeal before this Court, dissatisfied with the judgment dated 28-3-1997, rendered in sessions Trial No. 216/95, by II Additional Session Judge, Shajapur, thereby convicting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302/34, 324/34 and 323 IPC and sentencing each of them to suffer life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer 1 month SI for offence under Section 302/34 IPC, and to suffer 3 years RI for under Section 324/34 IPC and 6 months RI for the offence under Section 323/34 IPC. All the sentence were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE factual matrix of the prosecution case, as put forth before the trial Court in the charge sheet, is that on 24-8-1995 at 11. 00 a. m. Complalnant (PW 1) Badrilal resident of village Dhanora, was going with bundle of grass. When Badrilal reached in front of the house of Surat Singh, appellant Babu balal was coming from the opposite direction having lathi and Darata in his hand, he deliberately dashed Badrilal, thereafter, abused him and also scolded him saying that he would not able to see whether he was blind. Thereafter, babulal caught hold of the neck of Badrilal and threw him in side the toilet of surat Singh. Appellant Babulal raised alarm upon which other appellants rugnath, Ramesh and Kailash reached over there. They also beat Badrilal by kicks and fists. At that juncture, Heera Lal, father of Badrilal reached over there and asked the appellants as to why they were assaulting Badrilal. All of a sudden appellant No. 4, Ramesh caught hold of Heera Lal and appellant No. 2, Babulal dealt blows by Darata (hard and sharp object) above the waist at left side of the stomach. He also caused injury by Darata on the right side of cheek of Heera Lal. Injuries started severe bleeding. Heera Lal fell on the ground and became unconscious. At this moment, Jagdish (PW 2) brother of complalnant Badrilal also reached over there. He too was assaulted by lathi by appellants No. 3 and 1 kailash and Rugnath. (PW 2) Jagdish snatched sickle from appellant No. 2, babulal. It is, further stated in the First Information Report that Badrilal and his father deceased Heera Lal acted in their defence because of which appellants babulal and Rugnath also sustained injuries. The incident was witnessed by onkar and Ibraim residents of the same village and other villagers were also assembled on the scene of occurrence after hearing cries. Deceased Heera Lal was taken to the police station in a tractor where Badrilal (PW 1) lodged report ex. P/1. Injured persons were sent for medical examination. The deceased was attended by Dr. (PW 9) A. R. Hawadiya, who found him dead and performed autopsy. This doctor has also examined Badrilal (PW 1), Jagdish (PW 2) and anarbai (PW 3) as well as appellants Rugnath and Babulal. After necessary investigation, appellants were charge sheeted for the offence as mentioned hereinabove.

(3.) THE appellants have denied the charges. Defence of appellant rugnath is one of false implication because of enmity whereas appellants ramesh and Kailash pleaded alibi and according to appellant No. 2 Babu @ babulal, he was suffering from fever and was going to Sarangpur for treatment. He was beaten on the way by deceased Heera Lal, Badrilal (PW 1) and (PW 2)Jagdish by lathi and Darata. Appellants were tried by the Trial Court and found them guilty for the offence as mentioned hereinabove.