VIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment since they both arise out of the judgement dated 4.9.1997 delivered by the Learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No.3 of 1996 whereby he found the accused Vijay Kumar guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 304, Part-II, IPC. The remaining three accused namely Kamleshwar, Pawan Kumar and Rajinder Singh were convicted for having committed an offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, accused No.1, Vijay Kumar was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.7000/- and in default of payment of fine, the accused was directed to undergo further simple imprisonment for six months. The remaining three accused were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in case of default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. Appeal No.403 of 1997 has been filed by the accused challenging their conviction and sentence. Appeal No.105 of 2000 has been filed by the State and it is prayed that the accused should be convicted of having committed an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that on 3.3.1995, a `Barat' of one Surinder Kumar, son of Bidhi Chand of village Farnol went to the bride's village Agwin. THE deceased, Bimal Kumar and PW/2 to PW/4 namely Sunil Kumar, Vinod Kumar and Ashwani Kumar respectively were the members of the `Barat'. THE 'Barat' reached village Agwin at about 7.30 to 8.00 p.m. THEreafter, the tea was served to the members of the 'Barat' by the family members and friends of the bride. Among the persons doing the service were the four accused.

(3.) THEREAFTER, Bimal Kumar was lifted by PW/2 to PW/4 and was taken to the Dera. There was a van already parked at the Dera. Bimal Kumar was put in the van by Vinod Kumar (PW/3) and Ashwani Kumar (PW/4) whereas Sunil Kumar, complainant remained behind at the Dera. Next morning, Sunil Kumar came to know that Bimal Kumar had expired. The father of Bimal Kumar was also a member of the wedding party but he could not be informed about the occurrence by PW/2, Sunil Kumar since he was sleeping at some other place. It is also alleged that PW/2 to PW/4 suffered injuries in the occurrence.