STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MUNSI RAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has filed this appeal against the judgement of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (2), Hanumangarh dated 31-8-78 by which the accused-respondents Munshi Ram and Mukhtiyar Singh were acquitted of the offence punishable under section 302, I. P. C.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that deceased-victim Indraj s/o Jaimal was working in his field situate in Rohi Mauja Chelasani district Ganganagat at about 10.00 or 11.00 A. M, on 25-8-(954. The accused went to that field and remained standing at some distance from Indraj. Accused Munshi Ram had a gut with him while accused Mukhtiyar Singh had a sword in his hand. Accused Munshi Ram fired a -.hot with his gun at Indraj which hit him on the back on left lumber-region. Indraj fell down. Thereafter the other accused Mukhtiyar Singh went to him and inflicted a number of blows with his sword. PW 3 Arjun and PW.4 Kheta, win were ploughing their field had witnessed the occurrence. When both the accused persons went away, these two witnesses went to Indraj and found him lying inti pool of blood. Indraj did not survive and passed away after some time. PW 3 Arjun went to PW 2 German and apprised him of the incident. PW 2 German thereupon went to Police Station, Nohar and verbally lodged report Ex. P 2 of the occurrence at about 8. 15 P, M. on 25-3-1964. The police registered a case and proceeded with investigation. The Station House Officer arrived at the spot and prepared the inquest of the victim's dead body. The post mortem examination of the victim's dead body, was conducted at about 10.20 A. M. on 26-8-64 at the spot by PW 1 Dr. S. N, Verma, the then Medical Officer In charge. Government Dispensary, Nohar. The post mortem examination report prepared by him is Ex. P I. As many as 7 incised wounds and one gun-shot wound were .found on the victim's dead body. The gut shot wounds were as follows:

(3.) We have heard the learned Public Prosecutor and M/s Bhagwati Prasad and Bhagwan Adwani, learned counsels for the accused respondents under the Legal Aid Scheme. We have also carefully gone through the record on the judgment of the Court below.