BHAGSINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh has convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Sandur Singh (PW. 2) lodged the first Information Report at Police Station, Hanumangarh Town on 7 -7 -1977 at 12 P.M. It was submitted by him that there was a dispute about the land between the parties. It was alleged that Gurdayal Singh, the father of the accused, was murdered, prior to the occurrence and Bachan Singh, the brother of the informant, was prosecuted in the court. It was furtner alleged that case against the Bachan Singh under Section 302 IPC was pending at the relevant time. With this background, it is alleged that Kapoor Singh and Hajoor Singh were at their field and the father of the complainant went to give them a packet of break -fast. He heard the firing at about 9 A.M. and he ran towards his field and found that nearby the field of Jwala Singh a fire was shot towards his father. His father fell down nearby the drain and the second fire was also shot at once. It was further alleged that one man was accompanying Bhagsing. It was further alleged in the FIR that on has raising cries, the second man fired towards him, but missed. He has further suborned that his younger brother Hajoor Singh ran towards the village after the first fire and his elder brother Kapoor Singh ran towards the other side. His father was shifted from the place of occurrence on the road, which is nearby their house. He went to arrange for a jeep. While he was returning he found his brother and mother carrying the injured in the hut. He shifted them in the jeep and went to the hospital. Just after arrival at the hospital, his father Thana Singh expired. I his FIR has been lodged at 12 in the noon just after three hours of the occurrence. An autopsy was conducted by PW 8 Mr. Paras Jain, rte has stated that Thana Singh was brought in the hospital in peripheral circulatory failure and he was gasping within minutes, he collspsed in hospital at 10.40 A.M. He found the following injuries on the person of the deceased -

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant does not dispute the fact that the death of deceased Thanasingh was homicidal in nature. Learned Counsel for the appellant also submits that none of the three eye -witnesses were present at the time of the occurrence and appellant Bhag Singh has been implicated falsely for the reason that both the parties were enmical to each other and the brother of the complainant parly Bachan Singh is facing the trial under Section 302, IPC, for the murder of the father of the present appellant. I earned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that all the three eye -witnesses are interested party and their brother is facing the trial under Section 302, IPC, and for this reason, they are implicating the present appellant and they are not independent witnesses. He has further submitted that nearby the place of occurrence there are fields of a number of persons and their presence cannot be ruled out. He further submits that in the month of July, generally the agriculturists are found at their fields in the morning. He has pointed out Ex.P/3 the site memo and has submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place in Murabba 24 belonging to Jwala Singh. He further submit? that nearby the Murabha No. 24, there is a abadi and the presence of the persons of the locality cannot be ruled out. That on the western side of the the field of Jwala Singh, there is a Murabba No. 23 belonging to the accused party. Adjacent to Murabba No. 23 belonging to the accused party, there is a Murabba No. 32 belonging to the deceased on the southern side. Learned Counsel for the appellant has also pointed out that as per side memo Ex.P/3, the blood was found at point 'F' 'H' and 'C' He has also invited our attention to the point 'W' which is said to be a house of the deceased. Point 'H' in the site memo has been shown as Kotha. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the blood was found at points 'F' 'G', 'N' and 'M'. He further pointed out that there is an allegation that the accused Bhag Singh went from Kotha 'H' and, thereafter, he fired a shot. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution has failed to explain as to how the blood was found at points 'F' and 'N' He submits that looking to the site memo that there is every possibility that the incident might have taken place in a different way and the appellant might have been named because of enimocity which was between them and their family. Learned Counsel for the appellant has also invited our attention to the statement of PW 6 Ratan Singh. He has pointed out that Ratan Singh has stated that he asked his father about the incdent and, thereafter, his father told him that Bhag Singh has shot him down He has also invited our attention to the other Roint of the statement of Ratan Singh in which Ratan Singh has stated that after him, Kapoor Singh and Sindur Singh have also asked his father about the incident and he has specifically named the person, who has fired shot towards him. Thus, Mr. Garg, learned Counsel for the appellant, tries to make out a case that, if it was a case in which three sons of the deceased, namely, Sindur Singh (PW 2), Hajoor Singh (PW 4) and Kapoor Singh PW 9) were really the eye witnesses then there was no question of asking the deceased about the name of the assailant. He further points out that only on the basis of the statement of Ratan Singh (PW 6), who is also the son of the deceased and who is also enmical with the appellant, the testimony of the three eye -witnesses should be rejected.

(3.) WE have given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties. The first information report has been lodged on the very day at 12 in the noon. Distance from the place of occurrence is 14 kms. FIR was forwarded by the investigating agency on the same day and it was received in the court on the very day. Name of the accused -appellant Bhagsingh has been mentioned and specific part has been assigned to him. Thus, the FIR, which has been lodged at the earliest opportunity and received in the court at the earliest, narrates the first version of the occurrence in which it has been specifically mentioned that present appellant Bhagsingh fired shot at the deceased.