STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. PEMA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Thia Appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 30.4.1991 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pali (for short 'the Trial Court' hereinafter) in Sessions Case Nos. 51/87 and 27/88, whereby the Trial Court has acquitted the accused-respondent from the offence punishable under Section 302 and in the alternative from Section 302/34 I.P.C.

(2.) Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this Appeal, are that PW-1-Prem wife of Ladu Ram had submitted a written report on 17.5.1987 to the Station House officer, Police Station, Sojat, District-Pali, inter alia, alleging therein that on 16.5.1987, her son Munna went to Bera Navadia for watching upon crops, whereas her husband went to some other village in connection with marriage. In the evening of 16.5.1987 at about 4.00-5.00 P.M., accused-Pema son of Bhopal, resident of Dhandheri-ki-Dhani brought her son Munna, who was sitting on camel in between Pema and Ladu Singh and after reaching in front of her house, all of them alighted from the camel and Pema was saying that he would kill Munna and when she asked him about the reason, then he did not disclose anything and caught hold of Munna and dragged him towards the well, thereupon she ran to rescue Munna but in vain, and Pema threw him into the well. She raised the cries when Mangla and Panchi came there and with the aid of rope, Mangla went down into the well and brought Munna out of it, however, that time, Munna died. She further alleged that Pema and Ladu Singh fled pay from there on the camel. It is stated that as the husband of the complainant was out of station, the report could not be filed immediately.

(3.) On receiving this report, police had registered F.I.R. No. 98/87 at Police Station, Sojat, District-Pali for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 302/34 I.P.C. and started investigation against the accused-respondent. After impletion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the accused-respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 302/34 I.P.C. iter committal the case, the Trial Court framed the charges against the accused-respondent for the aforesaid offences.