SHYAMLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Sess. case no. 67/83 the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur while acquitting the appellants under Section 307 or 307/169, I.P.C., convicted them under Sections 148, 324, & 325/149, I.P.C., & sentenced to undergo 6 months RI with a fine of Rs. 200/- one year RI and one year RI with a fine of Rs. 300/- respectively.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants contended that in the case at hand challan against seven persons was filed but after trial, the trial Court found that only two persons - present appellants actively participated in the incident and further found that the inflictors upon the injured persons were five or more than five but according to the injuries found on the persons of the accused persons & the version given out about the events of incident, their presence at the place of incident in comparison to the prosecution version about the events & the place? of incident cannot be deemed. Taking the aid of the aforesaid findings of the trial Court, learned counsel for the appellants wrangled that no case under Section 147, or 148, or 149, I.P.C., is made out and, therefore, the conviction to the appellants out of seven charged persons, under Section 324, & 325, with the aid of Sections 148, or 149, I.P.C., is erroneous.

(3.) Having considered the point raised and perused the judgment of the trial Court, I find that initially, the report was lodged involving 17 persons in the commission of the crime but after usual investigation, 10 persons were left out by the investigating officer according to whom, articipation of 10 persons as per the material on record, was not proved made out prima facie by the prosecution and similarly the trial Court also found that the participation of seven persons ncluding the appellants could not have been established and proved beyond reasonable doubt in the prosecution evidence and it found the participation of five persons in view of the nature of the injuries and its numbers on the person of the injured, Raghuvir, as doubtful and the presence of those five persons who have been acquitted has not been proved at the place of incident.