KISHANSINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand, dated 28- 4-1989, whereby the learned Judge has held the accused-appellants Kishansingh, Bhomsingh and Sawaisingh guilty of the offence under Sections, 302, 460 and 323, IPC and, has, however, acquitted them of the offence under Section 307, IPC. For the offence under Section 302, IPC, each one of them has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 200.00. For offence under Section 460, IPC, each one of them has been sentenced to undergo 3 years' rigorous imprisonment together with fine of Rs. 100.00- and, for offence under Section 323, IPC, each one of them has been sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment. All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine of Rs. 200.00, they have been ordered to undergo 6 months' simple imprisonment each and for default in payment of fine of Rs. 100.00, they have been ordered to undergo 3 months' simple imprisonment each.

(2.) The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are - that on 24-3-1986, Daulsingh Rawat, resident of Baar, Tehsil - Bhim, lodged a written report before the S.H.O., Police Station, Bhim, whereby he infornted the Police that somebody has cruelly beaten Roopsingh and his wife Mst. Dakhu, in the night intervening between 23rd and 24/03/1986, on account of which Mst. Dakhu died and Roopsingh is still alive, though injured. He has suspected that this must be the act of one Sawaisingh, who is son-in-law of Roopsingh, and his brothers, because, for quite some time enmity existed between Roopsingh and his son-in-law Sawaisingh and his family because Roopsingh was not sending his daughter-Kesar with Sawaisingh to whom she has been given in 'Nata'. It is alleged Mst. Dakhu's dead body was lying near the well of Roopsingh whereas Roopsing is lying in a nearby field in an injured condition. On further investigation by the Police, it was stated by Dhaulsingh in the F.I.R. that both these persons have been beaten with lathis. He has informed the Police that on 23-3-1986, at about 9.00 a.m. certain persons assembled on the 'choki' of Udaisingh. They were Udaisingh son of Tulsasingh, Kishansingh son of Dungarsingh, Kishansingh son of Devisingh, Laxman Singh son of Mansingh, Ratansingh son of Devisingh and Sawaising son of Devisingh. Sawaisingh was armed with lathi and Udaisingh was saying that he will go to jail but he will kill the family of Roopsingh. On this report, a case under Sections 302, 307 and 149, IPC was registered. The site was inspected and site-inspection memo Ex. P 2 along with site-plan was prepared. The house where the occurrence has taken place was also inspected and the site-inspection memo Ex. P 4 and the site-plan were prepared. The blood-stained soil was also collected from the place of occurrence and inspection-memo Ex. P 5 was prepared. Certain golden ear-rings were also found in the house of Roopsingh and recovery memo about this inspection was prepared, which is on record as Ex. P 6. The inquest memo of Smt. Dakhu is Ex. P7 on record. On the information of accused Sawaisingh and Kishansingh, the weapons (stick-wooden -'bordi') were recovered. The recovery memos were prepared and are on record as Exs. P 8 and P 9. The report of post-mortem examination of Mst. Dakhu has been marked as Ex. P 10 and the injury report of Roopsingh has been marked as Ex. P 13 and his X-ray report as Ex. P 14. It was found that he had a linear fracture of right parietal bone. He was admitted in the Government Hospital, Beawar. The sticks were recovered on the information and at the instance of the accused persons have not been sent for chemical or geological examination.

(3.) After usual investigation, the Police filed challan against these accused persons in the court of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bhim from where they were committed for trial and the trial was held by Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand. All the accused persons were charged for offences under Sections 302, 307 and 460, IPC. The accused persons did not plead guilty to the charges and claimed trial where the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses in the case. Statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 3l3,Cr. P.C. They did not admit any of the allegations made against them and, therefore, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge after hearing both the parties, held them guilty of offences under Sections 302, 323 and 460, IPC and sentenced them as mentioned above. They, however, were acquitted of the charge under Section 307, IPC and hence, this appeal by them against the order of conviction and sentence, passed againt them.