PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22-10-94, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellants for the offences under Sections 307/34, 341 and 504, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 307/34, I.P.C.; one month's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 341, I.P.C. and six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 504, I.P.C.

(2.) Accused-appellants Pawan Kumai, Mukesh and Megh Raj were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, for the offences under Sections 307, 323, 341 and 504 read with Section 34, I.P.C. The case of the prosecution is that on 27-8-91, at about 11.30 p.m., P.W. 1 Chananiya - a worker working in a liquor shop was going to his house. In Mohalla Momasar Bas, accused Pawan Kumar, Mukesh, Megh Raj and one Vinod were sitting. They were taking liquor. On seeing Chananiya, accused Pawan Kumar called him, he went near them, where upon he was asked whether he would like to take liquor, whereupon Chananiya replied that he does not take liquor. On this, accused Pawan Kumar asked him why he was speaking loudly, whereupon Chanan iya told that it was his house. Thereafter the accused gave beatings to him by fisty-blows on his stomach. Chananiya felt pain and went his house. Next day he went to the hospital and at the hospital, at 7.45 p.m., his statement was recorded. Thereafter he was re ferred to P.B.M. Hospital, Bikaner, where he was attended and operated by P.W. 11 Dr. Chandra Prakash. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined eleven witnesses. Out of these eleven wit nesses, P.W. 1 Chananiya - the injured-, P.W. 2 Mangi Lal, P.W. 3 Todar Mal, P.W. 4 Budha Ram, P.W. 6 Bablu and P.W. 7 Shiv Ratan, are the eye witnesses but P.W. 3 Todar Mal, P.W. 4 Budha Ram, P.W. 6 Bablu and P.W. 7 Shiv Ratan have not supported the prosecution case and were declared hostile. In the cross-examination they have denied every part of their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr. P.C. and, therefore, their evidence is of no avail to the prosecution. The evidence of the eye witnesses is sought to be corroborated by the evidence of three doctors, viz., P.W. 5 Dr. A.B.L. Mathur, P.W. 8 Dr. K. L. Maru the Radiologist and P.W. 11 Dr. Chandra Prakash, who attended Chananiya on the next day any opined that the injuries received by injured Chananiya were simple in nature. According to P.W. 5 Dr. A. B. L. Mathur, the Radiologist, no grievous injury was found on the, person of injured Chananiya but P.W. 11 Dr. Chandra Prakash has stated that though there was no corresponding injury on the person of Chananiya but on opening the stomach he found the condition of Chananiya serious and if he would not have been attended and operated by him then the injuries would have proved fatal. P.W. 9 Raghuveer Singh was the Station House Officer, who signed the charge-sheet and P.W. 10 Mallu Ram was the A.S.I. who went the hospital, recorded the statement of Chananiya and on the basis of which the F.I.R. was registered. He, also, con ducted the investigation in the case.

(3.) The prosecution case rests upon the statements of the two eye-witnesses, viz., P.W. 1 Chananiya - the injured - and P.W. 2 Mangi Lal. P.W. 1 Chananiya has stated that at about 13-14 months before, at about 11.00/11.30 p.m., he was going to his house. In Mohalla Momasar Bas of Sri Doongargarh, near a water-pond, at some distance of the house of Gopi, the accused were taking the liquor. Accused Pawan Kumar asked him to come to his side. He did not go there whereupon the accused surrounded him and forced him to take liquor. He denied to take the liquor whereupon the accused hurled abuses to him and started beating him. A lengthy cross-examination has been conducted with the witness but nothing could be elicited which could have shaken the veracity of the statement of this witness. The evidence of this injured witness stands corroborated by the evidence of P.W. 2 Mangi Lal, who is, also, an eye-witness and supported the prosecution case. From the evidence of these two eye-witnesses, which is supported by the medical evidence, the giving of the beatings by the accused persons to P.W. 1 Chananiya stands proved.