NAND LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant as well as Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

(2.) THE death of Pratap was homi -cidal which was proved as a result of the post -mortem report. According to which the injury which was caused on the head resulted in fracture of the skull bone which has resulted in death of Pratap. P.W. 1 Sumer Singh, P.W. 2 Mahaveer Singh, P.W. 3 Sita Ram and P.W. Mala Ram have all supported the prosecution case as eye -witnesses that blow of ˜lathi was caused by Nand Lal in the said scuffle referred to above.

(3.) MR . Garg learned counsel for the appellant has contended that from the prosecution evidence itself and other material placed on the record including the FIR the prosecution does not make out a case of murder against the appellant. It was urged that the injury was not caused with any sharp weapon to put any bodily harm to cause death of Pratap. It was a case even according to prosecution in which death has caused following a sudden quarrel which has taken place at the tea shop on account of settling some amount between Nand Lal and deceased, and as a result of which Nand Lal has given a single blow of ˜lathi on the head of deceased Pratap, which injury resulted in his death. He urged that the prosecution case does not travel beyond Part II of Section 304 I.P.C. and conviction cannot be held under Section 302 I.P.C.