SUKHDEV AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Five accused appellants have been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Kota, in Sessions Case No. 161/1989, under his judgment dated 17.8.90, for offences u/s. 302 r/w Sec. 149 IPC and each of them has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further suffer one month's imprisonment. The imprisonment already undergone by each of the accused appellants has been ordered to be set off by the learned trial court.

(2.) The occurrence took place on 9th October, 1989 at about 3 p.m. and as per the prosecution case on that day and that time, Bhanwar Lai (deceased) was sitting at the house of Radheysham (PW-8), in village Chheepdara, Police Station Sultanpur. The four accused appellants - Sukhdev, Laxman, Babulal and Mahaveer are said to have come armed with weapons. Sukhdev and Laxman are said to have been armed with Gandasis, Babulal with a Dhariya and Mahaveer with a sword. All of them came from inside the house of Laxman accused appellant and they came to the house of Radhey Shyam and Sukhdev is said to have exhorted the other accused appellants that Bhanwar Lai be killed. On this all the four abovenamed accused appellants gave blows with their respective weapons to Bhanwar Lai. At this stage, it is alleged that the fifth accused appellant Shyam Mohan came out of the house of Mahaveer, armed with a Gandasi, and caused blows on the head of Bhanwar Lal, and thereafter the accused persons made their escape. The occurrence is said to have been witnessed by Devilal (PW -3), the real brother of the deceased Bhanwar Lal and by Radhey Shyam (PW -8), Babulal (PW -10), Bheru Lai (PW -9) and PW - 1 Mangilal. So far as PW - 1 Mangi Lai is concerned, he does not support the case of the prosecution and he was declared hostile.

(3.) The trial court placing reliance on the case of the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the accused appellants, as aforesaid. Before the trial court, the plea of the accused persons was of bare denial. The accused appellants examined Mahaveer Prasad as DW-1, though on the date of the occurrence Mahaveer (DW-1) was not present in the village. They also examined other witnesses in order to show that the place of occurrence could not have been visible from the public way from where few witnesses namely PW -10 Babulal and PW - 9 Bherulal are said to have witnessed the occurrence.