JAGSIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated 2. 11. 1984 whereby he convicted accused appellant under section 302 I. P. C; and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 150/ -. The accused appellant was also convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the prosecution case are that one Chhinder Singh went to police station, Chunawadh with Todasingh on 23. 9. 1983 and lodged first information report of the incident at 4 A. M. with the allegation that on 22. 9. 1983, Smt. Kuldeep Kaur, resident of 13g Chhoti had gone to the handpump situated in the school to fetch water in her pitcher. Ranasingh went there and did not allow her to take water from the handpump and removed the handle of the handpump, Thereafter some hot words were exchanged between them. Smt. Kuldeep Kaur returned back to her home but at that time her husband Chhinder Singh and brother-in-law Jasmail Singh were at the field and when they returned at 6 P. M. she narrated the story. At this Chhinder Singh advised her to take it lightly as Ranasingh was just like her father-in-law. It was further alleged that in the same night when after dinner they were preparing for going to bed, at about 9. 30 P. M. Jagsir Singh armed with pistol came to the roof of his Kotha and started hurling abuses and then came to the roof of the Kotha of Chhinder Singh. He fired his pistol in the air which did not hit anyone. At this all tried to rush towards the Kotha. Rana Singh armed with double barrel gun also came there abusing them and told Jagsir Singh to kill them by uttering the words. . . . " At this Jagsir Singh fired at them. In the mean while, Smt. Ranjeet Kaur deceased asked her family members to go inside the Kotha but she could not shut the door. The shot hit the stomach of Smt. Ranjeet Kaur. She fell down and later on died. Jagsir Singh alongwith Ranasingh went on abusing from his own Kotha and thereafter switched on the tape recorder. Thereafter the accused went in the street and started abusing. Due to terror the complainant party remained inside the house. However, on getting a chance, Kuldeep Kaur was sent to the house of Devraj Panch but he was not available in his house. After getting information from his wife that he had gone to the field of Nabsingh's field, and narrated the story to Debraj and retuirned to her house. Thereafter Jasmail Singh went to his brother-in-law's house at Village Ghirghavali and brought Totasingh and his brother-in-law. He went to inform the police along-with Tota Singh. On his report police registered a case and went to the site and started investigation. Site plan Ex. P.-2 and site inspection memo Ex. P.-2a were prepared and tape-recorder alongwith the casettes was recovered. Pachyatnama of the dead body Ex. P-3 and inquest memo Ex. P.-4 were prepared and the dead body was sent for post mortem. The accused-appellant Jagsir Singh and Ranasingh were arrested on 23. 9. 1983 vide Ex. P-10 and 11. Pistol, two empties and two live cartridges were recovered on 29. 09. 1983 at the instance of accused appellant Jagir Singh and a twelve bore double barrel gun was recovered at the instance of Ranasingh. The Investigating Officer sent the gun and the pistol in a sealed packet for-chemical examination. On completion of usual investigation the police submitted the challan before the learned Magistrate. First Class, Sri Ganganagar, who committed the case for trial to the court of Sessions Judge, Sri Gangangaar on 24. 4. 1984. The learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar framed charges against the accused appellants under Section 302 I. P. C. and 27 Arms Act. The accused-appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution has examined 9 witnesses and filed 22 documents to establish the case. The accused in their statements denied the allegations. No defence witness was examined. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted Rana Singh but found the case well established against accused appellant Jagsir Singh and convicted and sentenced him as mentioned above, hence he has prepared this appeal.

(3.) THE point for determination is whether the shot could not have been fired in the manner it is alleged and whether there was not sufficient light and due to obstruction of trees and wall, it was not possible for the witnesses to see the person who fired the shot. In order to deal with these points it would be proper and useful to discuss the relevant evidence briefly.