MOTI SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi dated 28.2.1980 whereby he has convicted the appellant Moti Singh u/s. 148 and sentenced him to two years R.I., u/s. 324 IPC to 1 year R.I., u/s. 323 I.P.C. sentenced him to six months R.I. 324/149 IPC sentenced each of them to one year R.I. 307/149 I.P.C. sentenced him to 7 years R.I. with a fine of Rs. 200/ - in default of payment of fine to undergo further three months R.I. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has also convicted the appellants Shambhu Singh, Bhanwar Singh, Ratan Singh, Hajra and Shiv Singh u/s. 147 and sentenced them to 1 1/2 years R.I., u/s. 323/149 sentenced each of them to 6 months R.I., u/s. and u/s. 307/149 sentenced them to seven years R.I. with a fine of Rs. 200/ - each, in default of payment of fine to undergo further three months R.I.

(2.) MR . S.R. Singhi learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the conviction of the appellants except the conviction u/s. 307 IPC and submitted that no case u/s. 307 is made out and none of the accused could be convicted u/ss. 307/149 IPC. He has submitted that as per the prosecution story Moti Singh was armed with an axe but there is no injury of axe on the person of Arjun Singh. If the intention of the accused was to murder Arjun Singh he could have attacked by sharp side of axe which was readily available. As per the finding of the trial court on the basis of evidence the injuries mentioned in Ex. 6 could be caused by blunt portion of the axe. In view of this no case u/s. 307 IPC is made out. He has further submitted that at the best it is a case of free fight and there can be no question of forming an unlawful assembly when both the parties have sustained injuries. He has also submitted that there was no enmity between the injured party and the appellants Moti Singh and Sambhu Singh and the incident took place on the spur of moment and more than 15 years have passed. That apart the parties have entered into compromise stating that they will maintain good relations and peace. He has placed reliance on Wahid Khan Vs. State of Raj. (1), Hari Narain Vs. State of Raj. (2) and Mahesh Chand and Anr. Vs. State of Raj. (3).

(3.) MR . S.K. Vyas, learned Public Prosecutor has not disputed the facts.