GOPAL PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant applications for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellants-Banwarilal S/o Girraj Prasad, Jitendra Kumar S/o Damodarlal, Naresh Kumar S/o Damodar, Kishor Kumar S/o Govind Prasad, Mukat S/o Mishrilal, Brahmadev S/o Mukat Bihari, Gopal Prasad Son of Girraj, Govind Son of Tikam Ram, Tilu Alias Khem Chand Son of Babulal, Nandan Alias Devendra Son of Tikam Ram, Guddu Son of Ramesh Chand, Rajendra Prasad Son of Girraj Prasad and Girdhari Lal Son of Tikam Ram in pending appeals filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dtd. 25/3/2025 In Sessions Case No. 29/2012 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST (POA) Act Cases), Bharatpur whereby appellants were convicted for offence under Ss. 148, 341, 323, 324, 325 and 307 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. and sentenced accordingly.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellants while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that 14 accused have faced trial and out of which one was died but remaining 13 accused were convicted by the Trial Court without assigning their role and Involvement in the Incident. He further submitted that a cross "Case was also registered, wherein the Trial Court has acquitted 8 Persons and aggrieved from judgment of acquittal in cross-sessions case No. 68/2017 arising out of same incident criminal appeal No. 901/2025 Is filed by Rs.appellant Mukut Bihari. He further submitted that Initially these appellants were charged under Sec. 447 I.P.C. but the Trial Court has acquitted them on the ground that there is a land dispute between the parties and revenue suit is pending. He further referred evidence of prosecution and submitted that at the time when these appellants were ploughing, cultivating and cutting the crop, the complainant party has assaulted them which is sufficient to show that complainant was aggressor. He also referred the evidence and submitted that this is a case of free fight wherein the Trial Court has not assigned injury upon injured to any specific accused and convicted all appellants with aid of Sec. 149 I.P.C. He further submitted that as per evidence the incident has taken place on a joint land wherein stay was operating and complainant party have taken law in their hand. He further submitted that no weapon was recovered by IO, during investigation. He further referred the statement of injured Chironja, Revanta, Hari and submitted that all witnesses are interested witnesses. He further referred the medical of accused persons and submitted that prosecution has not explained in uries. He further referred the evidence and prosecution story and submitted that assault by fire arm was assigned to Narayan and none of the appellants were charged for use of fire arm, He further submitted that the injury under Sec. 307 I.P.C. was assigned to Narayan who was not arrayed as an accused by police. He further submitted that an application under Sec. 190 Cr.P.C., and another under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. was filed by complainant but both Gopal Prasad & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan Thro' P.P. 2025(2) Cr.L.R. [Raj.] 849 were dismissed and persons who was charged for causing Injury under Sec. 307 I.P.C. was not brought to face trial. At last, he submitted that all appellants were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time.

(3.) Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for complainant. He submitted custody certificates and same are taken on record. Learned Counsel for complainant has submitted that the theory of police was not belleved by the Trial Court and this is not a case of free fight rather appellants have assaulted injured complainant party and there were total 9 injured and all of them had supported the case of prosecution. He also submitted that the injuries sustained by injured were found to be grievous and dangerous to life.