JAGAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal impugns the judgment dated October 28, 2002 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun City rendered in Sessions Case No. 63/2001 (27/99) whereby the six appellants (herein after to be referred as `accused'), who are the members of one family, have been convicted and sentenced as under:- (1) Jagan Lal: U/s. 302 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 148 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. U/s. 447 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. U/s. 326/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 323/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. U/s. 3/25 Arms Act: To suffer simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/- , in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment. (2) Ramkesh: U/s. 302/149 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 148 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. U/s. 447 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. U/s. 326/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 323/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. U/s. 3/25 Arms Act: To suffer simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment. (3) Ramji Lal: U/s. 302/149 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 148 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. U/s. 447 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. U/s. 326 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 323/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. (4) Mangal, (5) Roop Narayan and (6) Beerbal: U/s. 302/149 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 148 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. U/s. 447 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. U/s. 326/149 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 323 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution story as pictured during trial runs like thus:- On October 29, 1998 a written report was submitted by Laxman (Pw. 2) at the police station Gadhmora to the effect that at about 7. 00 AM the accused persons came in a tractor to the field of his father in law to uproot the standing crop. On being objected by the complainant party the accused Jagan and Ramkesh opened fire that hit Mangal and Sanwaliya. THE women also sustained pellets injuries. THE incident was narrated by Sanwaliya to the informant. THE Police Station Gadhmora on the basis of said report registered the case under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 307 IPC and 3/25 & 3/27 Arms Act and investigation commenced. During investigation Mangal died and the case was converted into one under section 302 IPC. After usual investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun. Charges under sections 148, 447, 302, 302/149, 307/149, 326/149, 323 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act were framed. THE accused denied the charges and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 22 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the accused claimed innocence and stated that at the time of the incident the land in question had been in the possession of the accused party and they had sown mustard crop over it. THE incident occurred when the complainant party tried to take possession of the land. In support of defence version one witness was examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the accused as indicated herein above.

(3.) THE structure of the prosecution case is founded on the testimony of Bhart Bai (Pw. 3), Mohani (Pw. 5), Dhan Bai (Pw. 7) and Sanwaliya (Pw. 8) who sustained injuries during incident. Bhart Bai in her deposition stated that she had sown mustard crop on the agricultural land belonging to Jagan S/o Jinsi her father in law. On the date of incident accused Jagan T. T. , Ramkesh, Ramji Lal, Roop Narain, Beerbal, Mangal and Birju came to the field to uproot the crop. Jagan T. T. was armed with gun, Ramkesh had gandasi and small gun, Birju, Ramjilal, Beerbal, Roop Narain and Mangal were respectively having gun, Gandasi, lathis and Karwadis. On seeing them coming to the land when Bhart Bai, Mangal, Mohani, Sanwaliya and Dhan Bai protested Jagan T. T. opened fire that hit the head of Mangal as a result of which he fell down. Ramkesh then inflicted gandasi blow on the head of Mangal and also opened fire that hit the chest of Mangal. Birju opened fire that hit the left hand of Bhart Bai. Ramji Lal gave Gandasi blow on the back of Sanwaliya. All the injured were were removed to the Hospital Karauli. Mangal and Sanwaliya were referred to Jaipur where Mangal succumbed to the injuries. Testimony of Bhart Bai gets corroboration from the statements of Mohani, Dhan Bai and Sanwaliya.