ABDUL ZABBAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, three in number, were placed on trial before the learned Special Judge, Special Court (Communal Riots and Man Singh Murder Case) Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 1/1997. Learned Judge vide judgment dated September 7, 1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:- (1) Abdul Mannan, (2) Afzal and (3) Abdul Zabbar: U/s. 302/149 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment. U/s. 324/149 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. U/s. 148 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment one year. U/s. 449 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment. All sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case as unfolded during trial is that on December 9, 1992 informant Satya Narayan (PW. 7) submitted a written report with the Police Station Malpura stating therein that on the said day at 11. 15 AM an unruly mob came from the side of Hathai and members of the mob started throwing stones towards the house of informant. Few members of the mob entered the house from back side and attacked the informant. Afzal, Mehboob, two brothers of Noor Tractorwala, Syed Zabbar Ahmed Tractorwala, Abdul Mannan, Hanif, Islam, Bada Bhaiya were the members of the mob armed with knives, Pharsi, Sword and Lathis. THEy inflicted injuries with Sword, lathis and Pharsis on the person of Govind Narayan, the father of informant. Hari Narayan, the uncle of the informant was also beaten up with Sword and Pharsi. Govind Narayan and Hari Narayan were recovered to the hospital where they were declared dead. Police Station Malpura registered a case under sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 336 and 302 IPC and investigation commenced. Initially on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed only against accused Hanif and Mehboob. Learned Special Judge (Communal Riots & Man Singh Murder Case) Jaipur proceeded with the trial of the case bearing Sessions Case No. 1/1994 and acquitted Hanif and Mehboob vide judgment dated August 12, 1997. THE investigating officer thereafter filed another charge sheet against three appellants and two other accused Firoz and Anwar. THE Learned trial Judge vide order dated March 21, 1998 discharged co-accused Firoz and Anwar. THE trial against the three appellants was however proceeded. Charges under sections 449, 149, 302 alternatively 302/149 and 324 and 324/149 IPC were framed against the appellants, who denied the charges and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 7 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellants claimed innocence and examined four witnesses in defence. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3.) THE super structure of the prosecution case is founded on the testimony of Mahesh (PW. 4), Kanhaiya Lal (PW. 5) and Satya Narayan (PW. 7 ). A look at the judgment dated August 12, 1997 rendered in Sessions Case No. 1/94 demonstrates that while acquitting co-accused Hanif and Mehboob, learned trial Judge disbelieved the evidence of Mahesh, Kanhaiya Lal and Satya Narayan and observed that they were not the witnesses of sterling worth. THE said judgment of learned trial Judge was affirmed by the High Court. Placing reliance on the judgment of learned trial Judge, it is contended on behalf of the appellants that since the evidence of Mahesh (PW. 4), Kanhaiya Lal (PW. 5) and Satya Narayan (PW. 7) did not inspire confidence qua the co-accused Hanif and Mehboob it could not be relied upon against the appellants. THE contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that acquittal of co-accused Hanif and Mehboob in separate trial is a relevant fact and the judgment dated August 12, 1997 rendered Sessions Case No. 1/94 is admissible in evidence.