KHALEEL AHMED Vs. REHMAT BANO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by Babu Lal S/o Narayan and Nauratmal S/o Harji Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'appellants') against the judgment dtd. 22/6/2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kishangarh, District Ajmer in Sessions Case No.28/99 whereby the appellants were sentenced life imprisonment under Sec. 302 read with 34 IPC with fine of Rs.1000.00 each. In default of payment of fine, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The case as set up by the prosecution is that Jala Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'complainant') filed a complaint (Ex.P.6) dtd. 8/7/1999 stating that his cousin Bhanwar Lal (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') was working with Agrawat Marble Industrial Area, Madanganj, proprietary concern of Babu Lal. The deceased was employed there for last five days. On 8/7/1999 at 4:20 pm, Shyam Singh a co-villager informed the complainant that on allegation of theft the appellants were beating the deceased in the premises of Agrawat Marble with fan belt and patta. Since the godown of Shyam Singh was near the premises of Agrawat Marble, he went there and asked them not to beat him but they did not listen. Shyam Singh, Ramavtar, Darbar and Hari Ram saw the deceased was beaten, taken near the machine and was being pressurized to confess the theft. Later somebody informed that the deceased died having looped rope in his neck and injury marks on the body. During investigation, statements of Rameshwar and Birdhi Chand were recorded after two weeks and as per prosecution they were eye witnesses to the incident. The charge was framed u/s 302 read with Sec. 34 IPC. The prosecution examined twenty witnesses and exhibited twenty documents including photographs. In the statement recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. it was stated to be a case of false implication and also stated that the deceased committed suicide by hanging. The appellants were convicted, hence the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that PW-3 Darbar, PW-4 Hari Ram and PW-20 Ramavtar stated to be present at the spot by the complainant, were declared hostile. PW-7 Shyam Singh was also declared hostile. The contention is that deposition of PW-10 Rameshwar and PW-11 Birdhi Chand were not reliable and these were planted witnesses by the prosecution.