DULICHAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision by Dulichand, Deokinandan, Phundilal, Onkar, Ramu, Mangu, Kanhaiya Jat, Kanhaiya Brahman, Laxman, Birda and Rampratap accused all residents of village Nimoda, Police Station Atru for the quashing of their commitment to Additional Sessions Judge, Baran, under secs. 302, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT has been argued by Mr. V. P. Tyagi on behalf of the applicants that the learned Committing Magistrate has not followed the provisions of sec. 213 of the Criminal Procedure Code inasmuch as he has not recorded the reasons for commitment. IT was further argued that the prosecution evidence did not implicate all the accused and that there was no particular evidence against Lachman, Mangulal, Kanhaiyalal Brahman and Ramu which could be sufficient for the commitment. IT was argued that there was the evidence only of the solitary witness Kalu, P. W. 8 against Kanhaiyalal Brahman and Harka only against Kanhaiyalal Brahman and of Kalu, Onkar and Harkha against Ramu. IT was argued that none of these witnesses identified any of these four accused at the identification parade, and therefore, their conviction against these four accused was of no value. As regards Devkinandan. it was argued that the evidence against him is that he, with folded hands, requested the deceased not to send the cattle to cattle pond and that in the first information report he was not specifically mentioned, but all that was said was that a person of the likeness of son of Champa Lal was in the assembly who had come to attack Nanuram.