RAMJI ALIAS RAMJILAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by three appellants, namely Ramji @ Ramjilal - appellant No.1, Roshan - appellant No.2, and Ranvir Singh - appellant No.3. However, during the pendency of this appeal, Roshan - appellant No.2 and Ranvir Singh - appellant No.3 have expired. Therefore, this appeal abates qua them. Hence, the appeal on behalf of Ramji @ Ramjilal - appellant No.1 needs to be decided by this Court.

(2.) The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 23.12.1983 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bharatpur, whereby the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 399 IPC and has sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment and has imposed a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, and has directed him to further undergo a period of six months of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. He has also convicted the appellant for offence under Section 392 IPC and sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 500/-, and further to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. Furthermore, the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC and has been sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and also directed to further undergo a period of six months of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. The appellant has also been convicted for offence under Section 148 IPC and has been sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment. Lastly, he has been convicted for offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 04.07.1982, at about 3:00 AM one Lekhraj (P.W.4) reported to the A.S.I., Mr. Dhan Singh (P.W.13), that an incident had taken place around 9:30 PM, on 03.07.1982. According to the complainant, one Govind (P.W.1) had gone to answer the call of nature. While he was answering the call of nature near village Banji, he noticed eight to ten persons who were carrying guns and country-made pistol and were planning to commit dacoity in the village. Govind (P.W.1) came back to the village and informed the villagers that those eight to ten persons were planning to commit dacoity in the village. While he was informing the villagers, the culprits entered into the village and started firing at the villagers. According to him, the complainant and his brother Rajendra bravely confronted the dacoits. When the dacoits were busy in loading the revolver and guns, they were attacked by the complainant and his brother and were caught hold of by them. During the affray, a bullet hit Rajendra. However, subsequently other villagers also gathered and attacked the dacoits. In order to retaliate, the dacoits fired at the villagers. Maharaj Singh was injured. The complainant claims that he snatched a gun from one of the dacoits. Due to the attack made by the villagers, the dacoits fled. He further claims that Rajendra and Maharaj Singh were taken to the hospital. However, on the way, Rajendra succumbed to his injuries. He further claims that both live bullets and used cartridges were discovered. While, they were going to the police station to report the matter to the police, they were again attacked by the dacoits. He further claims that the dacoits who were caught, were killed and their corps were left in the village. He further claims that when the police reached the village, the dacoits fled away. Lastly, he states that the dacoits were seen in full moon light. On the basis of the report, the police had chalked out a FIR for offence under Sections 399, 402 and 307 IPC and started investigation. Subsequently, the appellants were arrested and charge-sheets were filed against them. The charges for offences under Sections 148, 307, 149, 399 and 395 were read against them. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined eighteen witnesses and submitted forty-three documents. The defence, neither examined any witness, nor submitted any documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant No.1, Ramji alias Ramjilal, as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal before this Court.