RAMRAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAMRAJ S/o. Panchu; Kailash S/o. Ganpata and Rameshwar S/o. Dayram were nominated as accused during investigation of FIR No. 191/2003 registered at Police Station Hindoli, district Bundi for offences under Sections 341, 323, 394 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Vide impugned judgment dated 24.08.2005, Court of Additional Sessions Judge(Fast Track) No. 2, Bundi(hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') held the appellants to be guilty of offences under Sections 302/34, 323/34 and 397/34 IPC. Having convicted the appellants for the above said offences, the Trial Court vide order passed on the same date sentenced the accused -appellants as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_158_LAWS(RAJ)1_2015.htm</FRM>

(2.) CRIMINAL proceedings were set into motion on presentation of written complaint (Exhibit P -36) by Suresh Chand Mundra(P.W. 19). Said written report was presented before Ghanshyam(P.W.22), S.H.O., Police Station Hindoli, district Bundi. In the written complaint(Exhibit P -36) presented by Suresh Chand Mundra(P.W.19), it was stated that Hari Prakash Mundra S/o. Ramrai Mundra, brother of complainant Suresh Chand Mundra(P.W.19) daily used to commute to Basni where he was running a stone crusher. The deceased used to reach stone crusher at Basni at about 9.30 A.M. and return every day at 7.00 P.M., after production of crusher was stopped. Normally, he used to undertake return travel journey between 7.30 P.M. to 8.00 P.M. On 19.06.2003, on the day of occurrence, he left the stone crusher at 8.15 P.M. Due to cutting of telephone cable, telephone at stone crusher had gone out of order. For repairing telephone line between NH -12 and turn towards stone crusher, five persons namely Ram Kumar, Dharma Bheel, Shiv Dayal, Bardha Bairwa and Rodu Raigar were deputed to check D.P.(Digital Point, a box on the road side poles). When they reached near the site where the DP(junction box of telephone) was installed, three unknown persons started throwing stones, due to which, noise was raised. All three persons ran towards side of Denakheda. They were chased for some time. All three persons were aged between 25 to 35 years. One of them was wearing black pant and white shirt. When those three persons were chased, one of them again pelted stones and then, all three persons ran towards three different directions. Due to pelting of stones by these persons, Ram Kumar S/o. Shri Raju Bheel suffered an injury on foot. After those persons had left, all of them reached at the spot for checking D.P. and they found that telephone line had been disconnected. The spot from where stones were pelted was inspected. At a nearby distance, one Moped was lying fallen. Seeing the Moped being fallen, on search, it was found that brother of the complainant was lying in a pool of blood. After seeing him, it was realized that a shot had been fired at him from a country made pistol. From the person of deceased one gold chain weighing three Tolas along with one gold ring weighing 11/2 Tolas were removed and Rs. 15,300/ - received by the brother from the contractor were found missing. Finding brother in injured condition, Bajrang Parashar, Accountant at crusher brought the injured on tractor bearing number RJ -06 -R -1938 to Deoli at Mahesh Nursing Home where he was checked up. Dr. Kalpana, owner of nursing home, referred brother of the complainant to Government hospital. Doctor of Government hospital after examination declared Hari Prakash Mundra to be dead.

(3.) ON the complaint, as already stated, case was registered for offences under Sections 341, 323, 394 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Police had conducted investigation. On the basis of evidence gathered during investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of competent jurisdiction against the appellants for their prosecution. The Court of concerned Magistrate committed charge sheet filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C. with the accused to the Court of Sessions and the case was entrusted to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge(Fast Track) No. 2, Bundi for trial. The trial court charged the appellants for offence punishable under Sections 302/34, 323/34 and 397/34 IPC.