BHANWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the accused appellant challenging the judgment dated 20.2.1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh in Sessions .Case No. 2/97 convicting the appellant for offence under section 302 Penal Code to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default to further undergo 3 months S.I. on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal and as also canvassed before me.

(2.) With the assistance of the learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor, we have scrutinised the record and reappreciated the evidence on record.

(3.) The prosecution story as it emerge from reappreciation of the evidence on record is that; on 19.9.1996 in the morning, the complainant's family was working in their field. At about 7.30 a.m. the accused party without any cause assaulted them. The accused party was armed with Farcy, Kulhari and lathies. In the assault, one Gopal Ram was seriously injured and thinking that he has died, the accused persons lifted him and threw him in the dry well, then the accused left the field. With the help of others who had, by then reached the spot, taken up the injured from the well and later on he died. Injuries were caused by to other witnesses also who were members of the complainant's family. Immediately, first information report was lodged, investigation was conducted and accused persons were accosted and arrested. The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses to prove its case that the accused were responsible for murdering Gopal Ram and injuring Champa Devi and another. The learned trial Judge on appreciation of this evidence came to the conclusion of guilt and proceeded to convict the accused Bhanwar Lal under section 302 Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. The learned Judge, however, found the evidence insufficient for convicting the other accused persons. He, therefore, proceeded to acquit them. It is this order of conviction of Bhanwar Lal which is challenged in this appeal on the following grounds :