HANSIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this judgment dated May 21, 1980, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi convicted the accused Unia under sec. 302 and the remaining two Hansiya and Sadiya under sec. 302/34, IPC and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. They have come up in appeal to challenge their conviction and sentence.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased-victim Indersingh was an elder brother of PW 2 Daljeet Singh and lived in village Meerpur which is nearly two miles away from village Wilangiri district Sirohi. In the early hours of 1-11-78 (the next day of Deepawali) Inder Singh left his house on a bicycle to go to village Dodewa. On his way when he reached Wilangiri, one of the wheels of his bicycle got punctured. He contacted Rama (PW 6) and with his help got the puncture repaired. Rama and Inder Singh proceeded together on the road leading to village Kalandari. Rama was holding the bicycle. When they covered a few paces on the road, the three accused-appellants accompanied by five more persons viz. , Sadiya, Goma, Chima-niya, Tariya and Hatta (co-accused but acquitted ) came from behind armed with lethal weapons. Accused Unia had a Khunt (sharp edged instrument of cutting), Goma had a Bewla and the remaining six had lathi. They encircled Indersingh and started striking blows to him with their weapons. Indersingh fell down. The miscreants then lifted him and took him towards the house of Goma. PW 6 Rama tried to intervene but could not. He got frightened and went away putting the bicycle outside the house of Dharma Bhil. Pw 2 Salamsingh, who was in the house of Dharma, alongwith Dharma Bhil, Kana and Chamna Rajputs situate nearby, seeing the occurrence came out and asked the accused not to do so Tariya threatened him with dire consequences in case he dared to come out. Salam Singh immediately went to Meerpur and apprised the victim's brother Daljeet Singh ( PW 1 ) of the incident at about 9. 00 or 9 30 A. M. Daljeet Singh boarded the bus, reached Police Station Anadara and verbally lodged report Ex. P 1 of the occurrence at about 11. 45 A M. The police registered a case and proceeded with investigation. The Station House Officer Shri Jagdish Singh (PW 9) arrived at the place of incident and inspected the site. He took the blood-stained soil from the various places where the victim was belaboured and his dead body was found. The Investigating Officer prepared the site plan and the inquest report of the victim's deadbody. PW 5 Dr. D. C. Bapan, the then Medical Officer Incharge, Government Dispensary, Anadara was called on the spot. He performed the autopsy of the victim's deadbody at about 4. 00 P. M. on the same day. The Doctor found the following injuries:- External : (1) An incised wound 6 x 1 c. m. x bone deep situate on the scalp 2-1/2 c. m. above the left eye brow, laleral end and was 9 c. m. above the left external ear. (2) Incised wound 4 x 1/3 c. m. x bone deep horizentally situated just above the left eye brow. (3) Lacerated wound 1/2 x 1/2 c. m. just below the medial end of right eye brow. This was also bone deep. (4) An angular lacerated wound 1-1/2 x 1/3 c. m. on upper arm and lower arm 3/4 x 1/3 cm. x bore deep around the lateral angle of right eye. (5) Lacerated wound 1/2 x 1/3 c. m. x bone deep just 1/2 c. m. on the left side of nation. (6) Lacerated wound 1/2 c. m. x 1/3 c. m. x bone deep at the base of right alaenasi. (7) A punctured wound 1/2 c. m. x 1/3 c. m. opening in the mouth, 1-1/4 c. m. below the lateral to the left angle of mouth. (8) Lacerated wound 1-1/4 x 1 c. m. x bone deep situate on the left side of chis 2-1/2 c. m. below the left angle of mouth. (9) Lacerated wound 2 cm. x 1/3 cm. x bone deep 1-1/2 c. m. below the chin on the mid line. The wounds of injuries No. 8 and 9 were connecting and opening in the mouth. (10) Upper left incisor was missing with fresh wound socket. (11) Upper and lower jaw both fractured at multiple places with all teeth present except one incisor. (12) Two oblique bruises 13-1/2 x 2 c. m. and 13 x 2 cm. situated side by side on (he right side of chest, 3 cm. below the right nipple. (13) Bruise 7 cm. x 11/2 cm. just below the left nipple. (14) Bruise 5 cm. x 2-1/2 cm. situated on the anterior side of left shoulder. (15) Abrasion 3 c. m. x 1 cm. with 1/2 x 1/2 cm. x bone deep lacerated wound in the centre, situated on the left side of tibin at the junction of upper 2/3 and lower 1/3 of leg. (16) Lacerated wound 1/2 x 1/2 cm. just below the left tibial tuberosity. (17) A linear abrasion 3 cm. long on the shin of right tibia. Internal : Cranium and spinal cord- Scalp, skull and vertebrae-fractures present as mentioned in injuries No. 2 and 3 (external ). Heart- Right side contained little blood and left side was empty. Both lungs were healthy and pale. Stomach and its contents-There was little fluid present. Both instestines were empty. Liver, splees and kidney were healthy and pale. Bladder was empty. Fractures and dislocations-Both frontal bones, masal bones, orbital bones right, upper and lower jaw were having multiple fractures.

(3.) TAKING the first contention, it can be said without the least hitch that the prosecution has alleged no motive as to why the victim was done to death by the appellants. It is really curious that murder was alleged to have been committed by the appellants without any motive. PW 1 Daljeetsingh, who is a real brother of the victim, nowhere stated that there was any bad-blood between the victim and the accused. However, the absence of motive has no material bearing when there is direct evidence showing the complicity of the accused in the commission of the offence. Motive is not an ingredient of the offence of murder and when there is direct evidence of eye witnesses, motive recedes to the background. But at the same time, absence of motive is always a circumstance for assessing the evidence adduced to prove the guilt. Absence of motive does require that the evidence of the eye witnesses has to be very closely, carefully and cautiously examined. Since no motive has been alleged in the instant case, the fact will have to be kept in mind while scrutinising and evaluating the prosecution evidence.