RAJENDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment of learned District and Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated 17-12-81, where by he sustained the conviction of accused petitioner under s. 25 of Indian Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo three month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine, further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE facts, in short, are that on 20-4-80 at 2 a. m. Budharam (P. W. 1) reported at Police Station, Ghamoorwali that in Murabba No. 34 of 62 NLP land measuring 2 bighas and 12 biswas was allotted to Ram Pratap. He is nephew of Ram Pratap. Ram Pratap had given him power of attorney in respect of that land and he has cultivating it. A suit was filed by one Hari Ram and in that suit allotment of land in the name of Ram Pratap was cancelled. He went in appeal against that order and stay order was obtained but inspite of the stay order, tehsildar gave possession of this land to Ram Narayan. On 19-4-80, when turn for water came for irrigation, he along-with Shri Ram and Pritam Singh went to the field at about 8. 40 p. m. Ram Narayan, his sons Rajendra and Vinod were already there. Budhram and the persons alongwith him started to irrigate the land. Ram Narayan came and struck} a 'celley' blow to Budhram and Rajendra fired pistol shot at the instance of Ram Narayan. That shot injured Pritam Singh and Shri Ram and they ren away. On report, a case under sec. 307 read with sec. 34, IPC and underasec. 25, Indian Arms Act was registered. Accused Rajendra was arrested on 20- 4-80 and pistol was recovered at his instance. After completion of investigation, challan was put up in the Court of Munssf and Judicial Magistrate, Padampur, who committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar. THE learned Sessions Judge has acquitted accused Rajendra of the offence under Section 307 IPC and acquitted Ramnarayan and Vinod of the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 but found accused petitioner Rajendra guilty under Section 25, Indian Arms Act. He convicted him under that Section and sentenced him to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. Being dissatisfied with the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, accused petitioner has filed revision petition in this Court.