ARJUN AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants Arjun, Bhagwan Sahai (Sons of Girdhari) and Birdu, Sardara (Sons of Prabhat) alongwith Girdhari and Ramkaran (acquitted by the trial-court) were prosecuted in case F.I.R. No. 108/1991 dated 28th Oct., 1991 registered at Police Station, Virat Nagar, Jaipur Distt., Jaipur, for having committed offence punishable under Sections 147,148,149, 452,323,324 and 302 Penal Code and after trial four accused appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 302/34,452 and 323/34 Penal Code and each one of them was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 under Sec. 302/34 IPC, to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00, under Sec. 452 Penal Code and to undergo 3 months' simple imprisonment, under Sec. 323 read with S. 34 Penal Code with the direction that all the sentences shall rim concurrently. The prosecution story in short is as under:-

(2.) At about 10.00 p.m. on the night of 27th Oct., 1991, Revad (Deceased), alongwith his son Sampat (PW 7) and the ladies of the house, was sitting in his house, when the four accused appellants accompanied by Girdhari, Ramkaran, besides Bhomaram came to the spot. They were armed with 'Lathis' and on coming to the spot started assaulting the deceased and Sampat, besides the ladies of the house. During this assault the appellants and their companions caused fractures on the legs of the deceased besides causing injuries on his head and other portions of the body. They also assaulted Sampat (P.W. 7) and the ladies of the house. With a view to save his life Sampat (P.W. 7) went to the Police Post of Village Mer, where Constable Hanuman Sahai (P.W. 1), met him. He brought Hanuman Sahai (P.W. 1) with him to the spot and with his help removed his father in a jeep to Virat-Nagar Hospital where on examination the Doctor declared him dead. S.H.O. Sohan Lai (P.W. 16), the 1.0. on receipt of the information, reached the hospital where a written report (Ex.P. 7/A) was produced before him by Sampat Ram (P.W. 7), the contents of this report disclosed the commission of cognizable offences. After making endorsement at the foot thereof, the I.O. sent it to the Police Station for registration of the case and on the basis of this report (Ex.P. 7/A), first information report No. 108/1991 was registered at Police Station, Virat Nagar. In the hospital the I.O. took into possession the clothes of the deceased from the hospital. The LO. came to the spot and prepared site plan (Ex.P. 8), at the instance of Sampat Ram (P.W. 7), Behari (P.W. 13) and Kalu Ram (P.W. 11). He found blood lying at point 'B' which is the hut of Chhotu Regar and took into possession the blood and blood stained earth. The I.O. recorded the statements of the witnesses and after completing the investigation came to the conclusion that Bhoma Ram was not there at the spot and filed challan against the appellants besides Ramkaran and Girdhari. After the case was committed to the learned trial Court, the charges were framed against the appellants and the above said two co-accused and were read over to them and all of them pleaded not guilty to the same and claimed to be tried.

(3.) During trial, the prosecution examined Hanuman Sahai, Kamli, Rameshwar, Dr. Ramsharan, Dr. Surendra Kumar, Smt. Prabhati, Sampat Ram, Dr. Gopal Yadav, Banwari, Bhairoolal, Kaluram, Smt. Nanchi, Beharilal, Nansraj, Smt. Rukma, I.O. Sohanlal, Prabhulal, Hajarilal, Smt. Shravani and Jagdish as P.W. 1 to P.W. 20 respectively. When examined under S. 313 of the Crimial P.C. the appellants and the above said co-accused denied the allegations made against them and stated that they had been falsely implicated. In their defence, they produced Mangilal, Sualal and Duniial as D.W. 1 to D.W. 3 respectively. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence produced by the parties the learned trial court found that the case against Ramkaran and Girdhari had not been proved and consequently acquitted them and finding the appellants guilty of the offences mentioned above, convicted and sentenced them as noted above. Feeling aggrieved, the accused appellants have approached this Court by filing this appeal.