RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was prosecuted under Section 302 IPC in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Alwar, in Sessions Case No. 33/87. THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, after completion of the trial held the appellant guilty under Section 302 IPC for committing murder of Harbhajan vide judgment dated 28. 3. 89 and sentenced him life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/ -. In case of default of payment of fine, the appellant was awarded further RI for one month. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid conviction and sentences, the appellant preferred an appeal through jail. Mr. Sajjan Singh Naruka was appointed Amicus Curiae by the Court.

(2.) THE incident took place on 28. 11. 77 at about 10 am. THE report of the incident was launched by Genda S/o Bhurelal P. S. Malakhera, on the same day at 5. 45 pm. THE prosecution case as given out in the report is that at about 10 am. Harbhajan S/o informant's brother Ram kishan had gone towards the jungle with his cattle. His daughter Ms. Moorti (PW 2) was also with him. At about 11, Ms. Moorti returned home weeping and informed that Harbhajan was murdered by the appellant Ram Kumar with a 'farsy' in the field of one Balia Sweeper. It was also stated in the report that the co-accused Chaju was also there with a 'lathi'. It was then stated in the report that Smt. Dhapa, Smt. Singari Goojri and Smt. Shyama Dhoban were working in the field of Balia at that time and they have seen this incident. On getting this information, the informant Genda went to the field of Balia where he found Harbhajan with injuries on his person. Harbhajan was alive, but unconscious. He also found Smt. Singari, Smt. Dhapa, Smt. Shyama, Ram-kishan, Rampal and Ramprasad present there. THE injured Harbhajan was taken to hospital for treatment in a camel cart, but he died in the way. THEreafter the informant went Alwar and lodged the report.

(3.) PW 5, Dr. Prahlad Swaroop Agarwal conducted the post-mortem of the dead body. He found the following injuries on the person of the deceased: ckgjh 1 dvk gqvk ?kko nkfgus ?kqvus o Vkax ij tks iwjh rjg dkvdj flqz dqn [kky ls tqm+k Fkk] os blh ds lkfk rgen Hkh blh LFkku ij dvk gqvk Fkka 2 dvk gqvk ?kko 8x3&1@2 lseh- x ekal is'kh lhus ij cka;h rjq] ftlds lkfk cfu;ku o 'kvz Hkh dvh gqbz Fkha 3 dvk gqvk ?kko 4x1&3@4 lseh- x ekal is'kh nkfgus da/ks ds ihnsa 4 gsekvksek 4x3 lseh- nkfgus rjq flj ij van:uh % ckgjh pksv uecj 1 ds uhps nkfgus ?kqvus dh gfm~m;kw dvh gqbz Fkha ekal isf'k;ksa esa jdr tek gqvk Fkka The doctor further opined that the cause of death was due to excessive bleeding and shock on account of injury No. 1 and other injuries. In cross-examination, he stated that the depth of injury Nos. 2 and 3 have been written upto muscle deep and that both these injuries were simple in nature.