HANUMAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7. 8. 1980 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar convicting the appellant Hanuman of offence under Sec. 302 I. P. C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-and in default of payment to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is as follows: On 18. 11. 1979 at about 3. 00 P. M. P. W. 1 Om Prakash and deceased Lalchand went to the field of deceased Lalchand to see the cotton crop. THEy stayed for half an hour at the Dhani of Ram Pratap Bishnoi where accused Hanuman was also sitting. After some time both of them went to the field and returned back to Dhani. At that time also Hanuman was sitting there. THEy were sitting in front of the house of Tiku Ram, Lalchand asked Tiku Ram to bring radish. It was tied on the carrier of the cycle. From the house of Tiku Ram, they proceeded on cycle towards their village. Accused Hanuman also followed them. At that time P. W. 2 Patram and P. W. 3 Brijlal were also at the Dhani of Ram Pratap. THEy were followed by accused Hanuman. When P. W. 1 Om Prakash and deceased Lalchand had gone, just about one bigha from the Dhani accused Hanuman challenged Lalchand saying ``. . . ewnksa dks rko nsys. . . . ''. Lal Chand turned back to look at the accused, accused Hanuman fired the pistol at him which hit below the left side of the ribs. THE accused after firing ran away. Lalchand fell down. Om Prakash made a cry saying ``lalchand has been killed''. THE further case of the prosecution is that the accused Hanuman ran through the Dhani of Ram Pratap which was witnessed by P. W. 2 Patram and P. W. 3 Brijlal. At that time the pistol was in the hand of the accused. P. W. 1 Om Prakash went to the village and informed his brother P. W. 6 Vishnu of the incident P. W. 6 Vishnu immediately rushed to the place of incident. Om Prakash thereafter informed the wife of Lalchand. THEreafter he went to the village thereby ``3y'' and arranged a tractor of Nakshetra Singh. Number of villagers had assembled at the placed of occurrence by that time. P. W. 6 Vishnu seeing the Lalchand told Om Prakash that he has died. Leaving one Sahiram and P. W. 6 Vishnu on the spot, Om Prakash approached P. W. 5 Ramchandra. THE entire incident was narrated to him and thereafter P. W. 5 Ramchandra and P. W. 1 Om Prakash went to the Police Station for lodging the First Information Report. THE police report was registered as Ex. P1 at Police Station, Ganganagar at 11. 45 P. M. P. W. 15 Gopal Ram, S. H. O. , Police Station, Ganganagar informed P. W. 13 Bhopal Singh, Dy. S. P. and proceeded to the place of incident. He prepared the inquest. THE dead body was sent for the post-mortem. THE accused was arrested on 22. 11. 1979. THE Pistol was recovered in pursuance of the information given by the accused. After usual investigation the police laid a chargesheet against the accused appellant for offence u/s. 302 I. P. C.

(3.) P. W. 1 Om Prakash has narrated the incident as given in the First Information Report. There is a lengthy cross examination, but nothing has been elucidated to discredit the testimony of this witness. P. W. 2 Patram has stated that in village Chak 2y he had gone to Brijlal P. W. 3 for taking medicine as he was suffering from fever. He also stated that Brijlal used to give treatment for petty diseases. The house of Brijlal is near to the house of Tikuram. When he reached there in the afternoon near the house of Tikuram, deceased Lalchand, Om Prakash and accused Hanuman were standing. Lalchand had asked Tikuram to bring radish, which were lateron tied on the carrier of the cycle. Lalchand and Om Prakash left towards their Dhani on a bicycle. They were followed by accused Hanuman. They had just travelled just for about 1 Bigha or 1 1/2 Bigha, he heard of the pistol fire. He also heard the shouting of Om Prakash saying that Lalchand has been killed. He saw Hanuman running away from their side a pistol in his hand. He tried to inquire from him but the did not respond.