STATE OF M P Vs. HARIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/State has preferred this petition under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against judgment dated 06/10/2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kannod, District-Dewas in Sessions Trial No. 73/2010, whereby the respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9 have been acquitted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 427, 147, 148 and 307/149 of the IPC; whereas remaining respondents have been acquitted for commission offence punishable under Sections 294, 427, 147 and 148 of the IPC.

(2.) As per prosecution case, on 23/01/2010, complainant-Sunil lodged a report alleging that at about 21:00 hrs., he alongiwth Paramram Jaat, Gokul Jaat and Nandkishore Jaat were going to Kumangaon from their village by Alto Car and he was driving the car. The vehicle of the accused was parked infront of Shobharam's house, when complainant asked the accused to through away the vehicle from the road, then there took an altercation between the respondents and complainant party and respondents abused them. At that time respondent No.1- Hariram came there and assaulted the Paramram by axe, due to which he sustained injuries on his head and arm. Thereafter, the respondents followed Parasram, when his relatives came over there, then respondent No.7-Shankar assaulted one Baba Ramdin and respondent No.2- Ramnarayan assaulted to Ramnarayan. Other respondents beated to Mohan. On the basis of that complaint police registered FIR bearing Crime No. 28/2010 against the respondents for commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 427 and 307/34 of the IPC.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor for the applicant/State submits that the trial Court has convicted the respondents/ accused persons namely, Hariram, Ramnarayan, Satyanarayan @ Kandri, Shankar and Gajanand for commission of offence punishable under Section 307/149 of the IPC, however, other accused persons have been acquitted from the aforesaid offence. It has come in the FIR as well as in the statements of prosecution witnesses, that the respondents have constituted unlawful assembly and during the prosecution of the common object of the assembly, they assaulted the complainant party because of which they sustained injuries, therefore, all the members of the unlawful assembly are equally responsible for the act of member of the assembly. However, even assuming that the accused persons have constituted unlawful assembly and in furtherance of the common object of the assembly, they have assaulted the complainant side, due to which they sustained injuries, the trial Court has committed error in acquitting the respondents namely, Imratlal, Kailash, Laxminarayan, Rajesh and Brijesh for commission of offence punishable under Section 307/149 of the IPC. Under these circumstances, learned Public Prosecutor prays for grant of leave to appeal against judgment of acquittal.