PURAN RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Puran Ram has preferred this appeal against the Judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar on 29.8.90 whereby he was convicted under Sec. 304 read with Sec. 34 Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years' and pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months'.

(2.) On 21.10.1979, Kishana Ram had lodged the report Ex.P.1 with police station, Ghamudwaii stating therein that he had been informed by one Moman Ram that at about 6 PM, Puran Ram, Rewant Ram, Bishna Ram and one more person had attacked Dana Ram, his father-in-law with Gandasis and Lathis. In the FIR, it was stated that on receiving this information, he went to the spot alongwith Moman Ram where he found Dana Ram lying on the ground having injuries on his head and back. It was further stated in the FIR that his brother in law Puran (Son of deceased) had some altercation with the wife of accused Puran Ram some 8-9 days back. On this report, a case under Sec. 307 Penal Code was registered. After sometime Dana Ram died and, therefore, Sec. 302 Penal Code was added. After the post-mortem examination of the body of Dana Ram and usual investigation, the police submitted challan against 4 persons. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sec. 302 Penal Code against the accused persons. The prosecution examined PW-1 Moman Ram, PW-2 Kashi Ram, PW-3 Kishan Ram, PW-4 Dr. R.P. Punia, PW-5 Devi lal, PW-6 Bahadur Ram, PW-7 Puran Ram, PW-8 Sriraj Ram, PW 9 Munshi Ram (Station house officer), PW-10 Lalchand, PW-11 Sukhdeo Singh, PW-12 Shatrugan, PW-13 Bishna Ram, PW-14 Babulal and PW-15 Sh. R.K. Jain (MJM, Sriganganagar). The accused in their statements recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.PC denied having committed any offence. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties acquitted three accused of all the offences, but convicted Puran Ram for offence under Sec. 304 read with Sec. 34 Penal Code and sentenced him as above. Hence this appeal.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that when out of the 6 eye witnesses, four had not supported the prosecution case, the learned Sessions Judge has committed error in convicting the accused on the basis of the evidence of two witnesses PW-2 Kashi Ram and PW-5 Devi lal who are father and son. He took me through the statements of the witnesses and urged that no reliance could be placed on their testimony. Mr. Garg, further submitted that the FIR was recorded after the death of Dana Ram, but police has shown its recording at 8.20 p.m. and by this, it should be found that the investigation was tinted. He pointed out that factum of enmity between accused and deceased has not been established on record. On the other hand, the learned Public prosecutor appearing for the State has tried to support the judgment of trial court.