RAJU ALIAS KURSHU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been received by Post through Jail against the judgment dated 15-5-2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar District Sri Ganganagar. The appellant Raju alias Kurshu has been found guilty under Sections 307, 326, 324, I.P.C. For the offence under Section 307, IPC, the appellant has been awarded seven years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months" R.I. Under Section 326, IPC, he has been awarded three years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500.00 and for non payment of fine, he has been ordered to further undergo R.I. for three months. For the offence under Section 324, IPC one year's R.I. and a fine of Rs. 200.00 and one month's R.I. has been ordered, if the amount of fine is not paid.

(2.) The prosecution story, in brief, is that the accused was employed as a labourer to work in the field of injured Harbans Singh. On 16-2-1999 at about 7.30 p.m. both were in the field, the water from the canal was to be brought for irrigating the crop standing in the field of the complainant and the duty of the accused was to strengthen the water-course. The injured Harbans Singh, while supervising the water-course reprimanded the accused for being negligent in strengthening the water - course and the accused allegedly attacked Harbans with "kassi" and caused injury to him. Harbans Singh became unconsious on the spot and the accused dis-appeared from the scene. After sometime, PW 2 Sukhchain Singh and PW 3 Karma were able to see Harbans Singh lying unconsious and they informed PW 1 Lakhbir Singh (brother of Harbans Singh) about the fact, who went to police station, Sri Vijaynagar and lodged the F.I.R. Ex.P/1. A case under Section 307, IPC was registered and investigation started. On 23-9-1999 the accused was arrested and ultimately a challan under Section 324, 326 and 307, IPC was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sri Vijaynagar fromwhere the case was committed to the said trial Court. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. The prosecution side examined as many as 15 witnesses in support of its story. The statement of the accused-appellant were then recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. and he denied everything. No defence evidence was led by the accused. The learned trial Court then, heard the arguments and delivered the judgment as indicated above.

(3.) I have heard the learned Amicus Curiae on behalf of the accused -appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and have perused the record of the trial Court.