PRABHU LAL AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Seven appellants before us have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bundi for the offences under Sections ( 302,147 and 148 and sentenced as follows : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_74_LAWS(RAJ)8_19941.html</FRM> Against this conviction and sentence made on 9.4.1993, the appellants have preferred this appeal.

(2.) The facts in brief, according to the first information lodged by PW. 1 Nanhe Khan are that on 26.8.1990 at about 11.00 or 11.30 in the morning, he along with Mumtaj and Liyakat were going to village Ranipura for doing some iron assignment. Mumtaj was ahead while he and Liyakat were on bicycle. In the way when they crossed Nahar Node (a place so known as at one time Lions used to come to drink water in this nallah), the seven accused came there armed with gandasi, kulhadies, spear and lathies. They were hiding behind bushes and they came out on seeing Mumtaj, they attacked with the aforesaid weapons. At the same time saying that he was one to plough and sow the fields, finish him so that he forgets sowing field. Details have been given as to which accused used which weapon. The accused came towards these two persons also, but they ran away towards village Ramsar. In the evening they reached the village Bherupura and gave information about the incident to the Up-sarpanch Kalulal and Ward Member Mohammed. They went to the site and found dead-body of Mumtaj leaning against the trunk of the tree and the infromant was of the view that the accused persons had made him sit in this position. As for the quarrel it was given out that the dispute was about the land of Samsuddin, litigation about which was pending in Bundi. The deceased Mumtaj was the nephew of Samsuddin, hence he was killed to take revenge.

(3.) This report was handed over to the SHO Police Station Dablana next morning at the site when he reached there at about 6.00 a.m. According to the prosecution two persons, namely Nanhe and Liyakat are eye-witnesses to the incident. These two persons have not received any injuries. According to them the incident occurred at about 11.30 a.m. but after that they did not return to the home village but went to another village and for the first time told about this incident at about 7.00 p.m. From there they went to the site and at about 10.00 p.m. they proceeded to Bundi to lodge the report. Before lodging the report they contacted one advocate Sokat Ali and then went to the Kotwali Police Station at Bundi. As the incident had occurred under the jurisdiction of Dablana a wireless message was sent to that Police Station and the time shown in this wireless Ex. D/5 is 12.40 a.m. This wireless says that the incident occurred tonight meaning thereby on the night of 26.8.1990. Further, it has been pointed out that the names of the accused have not been mentioned in this wireless message. PW 1 Nanhe had gone to Bundi along with others, but surprisingly he did not go to the Kotwali but remained with someone else and those who went to Kotwali stated that they were not eye witnesses. On that day it so happened that the SHO Police Station Dablana was at Bundi and he was contacted and informed about the incident and all of them arranged a jeep and travelled to the village Bherupura. In the jeep Nanhe PW 1 also accompanied. He had also got the first information report Ex. P/1, scribed by Ishaq at Bundi but this report was handed over to the SHO Police Station Dablana only in the morning when they reached at the site. PW 1 Nanhe has stated that when the panchanama of the clothes of the deceased was prepared then the persons present gave out that somebody had killed Mumtaj. At that time also he did not give out the names of the accused.