INDRA RAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Sec. 374 of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved of the judgment dtd. 23/2/1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 54/1990 (69/1989-old), whereby he has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 323 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year. He has also been directed to deposit a compensation of Rs.10,000.00 to be disbursed to the father of the deceased.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the case are that on 22/5/1989 at 6.30 p.m. Keshuram S/o Khemaram resident of Kuchor Angooni submitted an oral information at the Police Station Napasar, District Bikaner to the effect that the complainant and his brothers Mani Ram and Surja Ram came back from Bikaner at about 2.30 p.m. and were purchasing vegetables etc. at Napasar Market. At about 4.30 p.m., Indraj S/o Hari Ram Jat, country made liquor contractor, was going from Bus Stand towards Kilchu Road. Mani Ram went to him for liquor and asked him to give a quarter from his shop, for which Indraj asked for Rs.15.00, upon which Mani Ram told that earlier only Rs.9.00 was charged for the same. An altercation took place on this issue. Indraj pushed and made him fall on the ground and kicked him on head and other vital parts. The complainant and Surja Ram intervened and took Indraj in control. Hari Ram and Mohan Lal also came there. Mani Ram became unconscious. He was taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead. On the aforesaid information, FIR No. 18/1989 was registered and after usual investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the appellant for the offence under Sec. 302 of the IPC.

(3.) The learned Trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offence under Sec. 302 of the IPC and upon denial of guilt by the accused, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, as many as 10 witnesses were examined and 12 documents were exhibited. Thereafter, an explanation was sought from the accused-appellant under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied the prosecution allegations and claimed to be falsely implicated in the case. 5 documents were exhibited in defence. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned Trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence under Sec. 323 of the IPC vide judgment dtd. 23/2/1995, which is under assail before this Court in the instant appeal.