MANGI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE three appellants. Mangi Lal (A-1 ). Rampal (A-2) and Madan Lal (A-3) have filed two different appeals challenging the same impugned judgment dated 1. 10. 2001 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Ajmer whereby the Learned Trial Court has convicted Mangi Lal of offence under Section 302 IPC and has sentenced him to Life Imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 1000/- and to further undergo a sentence of three months of simple imprisonment in default thereof. THE learned Trial Court has also convicted Rampal and Madan Lal for offence under Section 324 IPC and has sentenced them to three years of R. I. and imposed a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and to further undergo a sentence of three months of simple imprisonment in default thereof. Since the two appeals arise out of the same judgment, they are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 1. 2. 98, the police recorded the statement of the injured, Bhagchand (P. W. 2) while he was admitted in the Jawahar Lal Nehru Hospital at Ajmer. In the statement, Bhagchand claimed that "he and his family members are agriculturist by profession. THEir farm is near the "danga" which is next to the land belonging to the government. On the vacant land, he and his family were piling up wood for the purpose of burning it, but his neighbor, Mangi Lal objected to it. In the morning, he and his father, Suraj Karan, carried some wood on the cart to be emptied at the vacant land. However, when they reached the place, Mangi Lal, his three boys, his wife, the wives of two of his children, and his daughter were waiting for them. THEy were armed with "kulhari" (axe) and "lathi" (wooden sticks ). THE moment they reached the place, the accused persons mercilessly assaulted his father and him. When his brother. Kailash, rushed to their rescue, the accused persons also assaulted him. THE incident occurred around 2:00 PM. After the assault, they all ran away. He has lost his earnings and his watch. If they have carried them, he doesn't know. Prabhu's son Dilip and Ugma's son Ram Niwas have carried the injured to the hospital. He is badly injured in the head. "

(3.) ACCORDING to P. W. 10, Dr. R. K. Mathur, when he examined the deceased prior to his death, he noticed five wounds: a lacerated wound vertically placed on the forehead 4 cm x 1 cm scalp deep, bleeding. Haematoma 6 cm x 4 cm in the left temporal-parietal region. Haematoma 7 cm x 5 cm on the right parietal region. Contused swelling on the right arm and lastly contused swelling on the right forearm. ACCORDING to Injury Report (Ex. P. 43), all these injuries were caused by blunt weapon. The existence of these injuries has also been corroborated by P. W. 1, Dr. P. K. Saraswat, who conducted the post-mortem on the deceased on 2. 2. 98. There were three injuries on the head. However, according to him, these three injuries could be caused by a single impact. The cause of death was due to coma as a result of injuries on the head. Clearly, the death was homicidal. Although, Bhag Chand (P. W. 2) does claim that the deceased was hit by a sharp edged weapon, P. W. 3,kailash, clearly states in his cross-examination that Mangi Lal hit the deceased on his head with a "lathi". Kailash is, therefore, corroborated by P. W. 10, Dr. R. K. Mathur, by the Injury Report of the deceased (Ex. P. 43), by P. W. 1, Dr. Saraswat and by Post-Mortem Report (Ex. P. 1 ). Thus, Suraj Karan had died due to a single injury caused by Mangi Lal on his head.