STATE OF HP Vs. MOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide order dated 7.7.2010, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were initiated against respondent-accused No. 2 Lachhman Singh. The requisite proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has since been published in daily Hindi news paper `Amar Ujala' in its issue dated 26th August, 2010 for the date fixed i.e. 7th September, 2010. However, despite the said respondent-accused has failed to appear before this Court, accordingly, he is declared as proclaimed offender. The appellant-State shall take requisite steps under Section 83 Cr.P.C.

(2.) The present criminal appeal has come-up for consideration after leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted, in reference to the impugned judgment dated 19.12.1995, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nahan, Sirmour District (H.P.), in Sessions Trial No. 1-N/7 of 94, whereby respondents-accused have been acquitted for the offences, under Sections 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in reference to FIR No. 139/93, dated 17.7.1993.

(3.) Accused-respondent No. 2 Lachhman Singh has been declared proclaimed offender, therefore, the present criminal appeal shall adjudicate the case of respondents- accused No. 1, 3 and 4. The prosecution case in brief is that on 17.7.1993, at about 9.00 P.M. Amin Chand son of Atma Ram had gone to the balcony of his house to wash his hands after taking meal and noticed that in front of his house respondent- accused Naresh, in a naked condition, was urinating and Amin Chand asked him that urinating in such a condition towards the house of others was highly objectionable and he should be ashamed of behaving like that. Respondent-accused Naresh retorted that he would repeat the act in future also. As such, Amin Chand called Piare Lal, Jagmohan, Vinod and Krishan Lal to assist him in making the respondent-accused to understand that he should not indulge in any such objectionable behaviour in future. It is alleged that Piare Lal, Jagmohan etc. reached there and tried to suggest Naresh but instead of agreeing to the suggestion respondent-accused insisted that he would kill Amin Chand and his family members and thereafter remaining respondent-accused also came there and respondents-accused Mohan Lal armed with Axe, Naresh armed with a sword, Lachhaman with Kudali and Manga Ram was having a brick bat whereas respondent-accused Mohan Lal gave two blows of axe on the head and the right upper leg of Babu Ram, however, on intervention of Vinod, Jagmohan etc. the respondents- accused ran away from the spot. Babu Ram, injured, was medically examined and on investigation, respondents-accused were charged for the aforesaid offence and the case was committed to the Sessions Court.