SHAHID Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, five in number, were accused on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun City in Sessions Case No. 4/2001 (83/98 ). Learned Judge vide judgment dated July 10, 2001 convicted and sentenced the appellants (for short `the accused') as under:- (1) Shahid, (2) Ayub and (3) Yunus: U/s. 148 IPC: Each to suffer six months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer fifteen days simple imprisonment. U/s. 302 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment. (4) Yusuf and (5) Suleman: U/s. 148 IPC: Each to suffer six months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer fifteen days simple imprisonment. U/s. 302/149 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer six months simple imprisonment. Substantial sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case as unfolded during trial is that a written report was lodged by informant Mohd. Usman on September 2, 1998 with the police station Hindaun City to the effect that at 9 PM on the said day the informant and his brother Mohd. Hanif (now deceased) were coming back after closing their shop. When they reached near Hirnakush well, the accused who were armed with knives made assault on Mohd. Hanif. On hearing hues and cry Hakim Shah, Noor Mohd. and Mohd. Aziz came rushing and saw the incident. At the time of inflicting injuries the accused were saying sarcastically that not only the share in the house, they were giving entire house to Hanif. Mohd. Hanif, who was badly injured, removed to the hospital where he was declared dead. Police Station Hindaun City registered a case under sections 147, 148, 341 and 302 IPC and investigation commenced. Dead body of Mohd. Hanif was subjected to postmortem, other necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses under section 161 Cr. P. C. were recorded and the accused were arrested. After usual investigation the charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun City, who framed charges under sections 148 and 302 alternatively 324/149 IPC. THE accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 15 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence and examined two witnesses in defence. On hearing final submissions the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.

(3.) COMING to the prosecution evidence we notice that the informant Mohd. Usman (Pw. 6) is the real brother of the deceased. In addition to the testimony of Usman the prosecution examined three more witnesses viz. Hakim (Pw. 1), Mohd. Khan (Pw. 3) and Mohd. Aziz (Pw. 4), who claim to have seen the incident. Mohd. Usman (Pw. 6) in his deposition stated that on the day of incident around 8-9 PM when he along with his elder brother Mohd. Hanif were returning after closing their clinic, they found five accused near Harnakush well. All the five who had knives in their hands started inflicting knife blows indiscriminately on the person of Hanif. They were telling that not only the share, they were giving Hanif full house. Hearing shrieks of informant Noor Mohd. , Hakim and Mohd Aziz came rushing and saw the incident. After some time Hakim took Hanif to Hospital on scooter. Usman was subjected to lengthy cross examination and attempt was made to establish that many dacoity cases were pending against Hanif, but Usman declined to have knowledge about the pendency of cases against Hanif. Usman categorically denied this suggestion that the deceased was ever admitted in hospital or was subjected to medical examination before his death. This suggestion was also negatived by the witness that Naim and Salim found Hanif lying in an injured condition in front of the shop of Tunda Patangwala and they took the Hanif on the scooter to hospital. Usman further deposed that although the accused wanted to attack both the brothers but he somehow saved himself, therefore the injuries could only be inflicted to Hanif. Hakim (Pw. 1) deposed that when he was standing near betel shop situated near Harnakush well, he heard shrieks of Usman. He immediately rushed to the place from where alarm was raised. He then saw accused Suleman and Yusuf holding Hanif and Yunus, Ayub and Shahid inflicting knife blows on the person of Hanif. Testimony of Hakim gets corroboration from the evidence of Mohd. Khan (Pw. 3) and Mohd. Aziz (Pw. 4 ).