HASAN KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Convicted for offences under Secs. 325/149 Penal Code and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment, and imposed with a fine of Rs. 2,000.00, and directed to further undergo six months of simple imprisonment in default thereof, convicted for offences under Secs. 323/149 Penal Code and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment, and convicted for offence under Sec. 147 Penal Code and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment and imposed with fine of Rs.100.00 and directed to undergo fifteen days of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof, vide judgment dt. 09.08.1990, passed by the Additional District & Sessions judge Nagaur camp Deedwana, the appellant, Plasan Khan, has challenged the same before this Court.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 09.03.1988, Alam Khan (P.W. 10) submitted a report before the police, wherein he claimed that one Kasam Khan had taken his son, Babu Khan, to his house as there was to be a "Nangal" (inauguration of the house) on 10.03.2008. Next to the house of Kasam Khan, the house of Kailash Agrawal was also under construction. At the relevant time, Niyaz Mohd. and Kailash Agrawal were present at he house of Kailash Agrawal. From the house of Kasam Khan, Babu Khan went to the house of Kailash Agrawal and had his meals there. Subsequently Kailash left his house. Thereafter, Niyaz Mohd. also left the place. Around 11 P.M. when Babu Khan left the house, he was attacked by seven or eight persons. Amongst these persons was Hasan Khan (the appellant before this Court). All these persons were armed with lathis. When Babu Khan shouted for help. Pukhraj and Girdhari rushed to his rescue. On the basis of this report, a formal FIR was chalked out for offence under Sec. 147. 341, 323 IPC. However, during the course of investigation, offences under Secs. 325, 325 read with Sec. 149 Penal Code and under Sec. 307 read with Sec. 149 Penal Code were added. Subsequently, the charge sheet was submitted only against the appellant and not against anyone else.

(3.) In order to support its case, prosecution examined fourteen witnesses and submitted few documents. The defence neither examined any witness, nor submitted any document. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal before this Court.