SUBHASH AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, the learner Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant in the present application filed under Sec. 389 Code Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and gone through the judgment dated 8.8.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), No. 2, Hanumangarh Camp at Nohar in Sessions Case No. 48/2008 (42/2008) whereby the accused-appellant Subhash S/o Birbal Das and Kanchan Kumar @ Kalu S/o Sohan Lal, along with other co-accused persons, have been convicted for offences under Sections 307/149, 323/149, 326/149, 447 and 148 Indian Penal Code, with rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 2000.00, in default to further undergo three months' simple imprisonment; for offence under Sec. 307/149 Indian Penal Code with rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 3000.00, in default to further undergo six months simple imprisonment; for offence under Sec. 326/149 Indian Penal Code, with rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 72000.00, in default to further undergo four months simple imprisonment; for offence under Sec. 323/149 with rigorous imprisonment for three months and for offence under Sec. 447 Indian Penal Code with rigorous imprisonment for one months. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Learned counsel for the accused-appellants vehemently submitted that this false case has been lodged against the accused-appellants and other persons and the learned Court below committed grave illegality' in passing the impugned judgment and order. It is also submitted that on the basis of evidence on the record, no case for offence of attempt to murder is made out against the accused-appellants. The learned Court below has erred in not believing the defence version. According to the First Information Report, eye-witnesses namely Ramswaroop along with Pat Ram, Manipal and Mana Ram were there but the prosecution has not examined above independent witnesses. So, the story of the prosecution is highly doubtful. There are contradictions in the statements of witnesses and the F.I.R. also.

(3.) It is also submitted that co-accused Ramswaroop S/o Radha Krishan, Sohan S/o Birbal Das and Jaipal S/o Radha Krishan have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 21.9.2012 and case of the present accused-appellants is not distinguishable with the above co-accused-appellants. Learned counsel further submitted that out of nine persons accused by' the prosecution, four persons have been acquitted by the learned trial Court and part story of the prosecution has been disbelieved and only five present accused-appellants have been convicted, without assigning any' cogent reason. He further stated that seven injuries were sustained by injured Ramswaroop one injury was by sharp edged weapon while other by blunt weapon and injury No. 6 on his left leg has been found to be grievous in nature while other injuries are simple in nature. The injured Lalchand has sustained eight injuries and all injuries to him are found simple in nature, as per PW-7 Dr. Hanuman Singh Nehra.