MOHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10th Dec. , 1996 passed by Sessions Judge, Rajsamand convicting the appellant Mohan Singh of offence u/sec. 302 I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated that prosecution case is that on 3. 10. 94 at about 11:00 P. M. , P. W. 1 Kesar Singh lodged an oral First Information Report Ex. P1 at Police Station, Kelwada stating inter alia that at about 7:00 P. M. he was attracted by the out cry of his brother Mohan Singh from his house. He rushed to his house. He found that number of people had assembled there. On inquiry, P. W. 3 Ratan Singh disclosed that uncle Mohan Singh and his wife Babia Devi thrashed Pratap Singh by `kulhari'. He also stated that Mohan Singh gave a `kulhari' blow on the head of Pratap Singh. He was taken to the hospital by P. W. 2 Ram Singh, P. W. 9 Gopal Singh and P. W. 4 Kishan Singh. He succumbed to the injuries on the way. He also stated that a quarrel took place between Mohan Singh and Pratap Singh on the question of cutting of fodder. Police registered a case for offence under Section 302 I. P. C. against the appellant and proceeded with investigation. After usual investigation, police laid charge-sheet against appellant Mohan Singh and his wife Babia Devi for offence under Section 302 I. P. C.

(3.) WITH a view to consider the nature of offence, we may refer to the statement of P. W. 14 Dr. A. M. R. Andrews. He has stated that he conducted the post-mortem of the dead body of Pratap Singh and noted the following injuries:- (1) Wound 7. 5 "x1" horizontal left temple brain deep. He has proved the post-mortem report Ex. P12. In his opinion the deceased Pratap Singh died due to profuse bleeding from the wound. He also stated that the cause of death was clotting of blood in the skull and injury to temporal bone. A perusal of the post-mortem report shows that there is single injury. From the reading of the statement of Ratan Singh it appears that the incident took place on the spur of moment. In these circumstances, it cannot be inferred that the appellant intended to commit murder of Pratap Singh. He may be clothed with the knowledge that his act in all probability may cause death. He has not acted in a cruel manner. The blow was not repeated. Thus, his conviction under Section 302 I. P. C. is not sustainable. He is liable to be convicted for offence under Section 304 Part II I. P. C.