STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RATAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals are directed against the judgment dated 29-11-88, passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Pratabgarh, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted ac cused-appellants Ganpat Lal and Jag Ram for the offence under Sections 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment of life; but acquitted them and the other co-accused, viz., Ratan Lal, Man Singh, Rod Chand, Madan Lal, Dal Chand, Kanhaiya Lal and Amrit Lal of the offences under Sections 148 and 302/149, I.P.C.

(2.) Appellants Ganpat Lal and Jag Ram, along with accused Ratan Lal, Man Singh, Rod Chand, Madan Lal, Dal Chand, Kanhaiya Lal and Amrit Lal, were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Pratabgarh, for the offences under Sections 148 and 302/149 I.P.C. The case of the prosecution is that all the aforesaid nine accused formed an unlawful assem bly with a common object to kill Bal Kishan and in furtherance of that common object, on 14-11-86, at about 8.00 p.m. near the house of Laxman Balai in village Achalpura, they inflicted injuries to Bal Kishan by Kulhari, Knife, Gupti, Khuntli and Lathis. According, to prosecution case, Bal Kishan had borrowed voke and wooden leveller from Laxman Balai. On the relevant day, he. went to the house of Laxman Bala to return the same and after returning the yoke when he was returning from the house of Laxman Bala, accused-appellant Ganpat Lal, who was sitting near the fire (Dhuni), asked Bal Kishan why he had got his fodder eaten by the cattles. Bal Kishan denied, this allegation, whereupon accused Ganpat Lal caught-hold of him and inflicted injury by a Gupti on his stomach. Accused-appellant Jag Ram inflicted injury by a Lathi, which hit on the hand of Bal Kishan. Accused Ratan Lal tried to inflict injury to Bal Kishan by a lathi but he himself fell down on the ground. Accused Kanhaiya Lal Dal Chand, Rod Chand, Man Singh, Amrit Lal and Madan Lal, who were hiding themselves behind a bullock-cart, came there and inflicted injuries to Bal Kishan by Kuntli and Lathis. Accused Kanhaiya Lal, who was having a Kulhari with him, inflicted injuries from the right side of the Kulhari, which hit on the leg of Bal Kishan. Bal Kishan succumbed to these injuries. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined thirteen witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge, after trial, acquitted all the accused, except accused-appellants Ganpat Lal and Jag Ram, of all the offences and convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants for the offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and acquitted both these accused ap pellants of the offences under Sections 148 and 302/149 I.P.C. It is against this judgment dated 29-11-88, acquitting accused Ratan Lal and others of the aforesaid offences that the State has preferred D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 151 of 1989 (State v. Ratan Lal) while the accused-appellants have preferred D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 267 of 1989, (Ganpat Lal v. The State of Rajasthan). Accused-appellants have, also, preferred D. B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 85 of 1990 (Jag Ram and another v. The State of Rajasthan) through Jail. As all these three appeals arise out of the common judgment, we are, therefore, deciding all these three appeals by this com mon judgment.

(3.) It is contended by the learned Public Prosecu tor that the learned Sessions Judge was not justified in disbelieving the statements of PW 5 Amrit Lal and PW 6 Fateh Lal as well as the statements of other eye witnesses so far as the acquittal of the accused of the offences under Sections 148 and 302/149, IPC is concerned. According to the learned Public Pros ecutor from the evidence produced by the prosecu tion the formation of unlawful assembly and the common object of that unlawful assembly to murder Bal Kishan stand proved beyond reasonable manner of doubt and the learned trial Court was not justified in acquitting the accused of these offences.