LEKH RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the accused appellants being aggrieved of the judgment dated 27.05.1994 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.86/92 by which, they were convicted and sentenced as below:-

(2.) Shri H.S. Kharlia, learned senior advocate assisted by Shri Digvijay Singh, representing the appellants urged that the trial court has clearly held in the impugned judgment that the complainant party was the aggressor. They went to the field of the accused with a clear design to dispossess them and to cultivate the same. The accused were working in the field at the time of the incident and they resisted this illegal attempt of the complainant party and had a right to raise arms in defence. Shri Kharlia further urged that the deceased Ram Pratap was, as a matter of fact hired by the other members of the complainant party, for show of force so as to oust the accused persons from the field in question and that mere his presence at the field, gives an indication of the criminal intent of the complainant party itself. He thus, urged that in this background, rather than simply toning down the charge attributed to the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC to one under Section 304-I IPC, the accused ought to have been acquitted in totality. His alternative submission was that the accused-appellant Lekh Ram who has been convicted for the offence under Section 304-I IPC and sentenced to five years RI, deserves to be released on the sentence already undergone by him, which is nearly three years. On these grounds, Shri Kharlia implored the Court to accept the appeal and reduce the sentences awarded to the accused-appellant Lekh Ram. Regarding the other accused-appellants, Shri Kharlia candidly conceded that they have already served out the sentences awarded to them by the trial court and thus, this appeal to their extent may simply be disposed off as infructuous. In support of his contentions, Shri Kharlia, placed reliance on a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bagadi Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2003 AIR SCW 6692.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by Shri Kharlia and urged that the complainant party was unarmed when they went to the field in question in a bonafide attempt to cultivate the same. The accused took to arms without any cause or provocation and killed one man and caused hurt to others in a totally high handed manner. He submitted that the trial court has already acted with leniency while toning down the charge attributed to the accused to Section 304-I IPC from that of Section 302 IPC and thus, no further leniency is called for on this aspect.