JAMAN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision against an order of conviction of the petitioners Jaman Singh and Manohar Singh under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code made by the learned Extra Magistrate, Neem-ka-Thana, dated 15th June, 1954, The accused petitioners were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each. The appeal by the accused was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar, by judgment dated 23rd March, 1955.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution is disclosed by the evidence of P. W. 1, Roor Singh, who stated that on 29th November, 1946, the witness and Nathia went to Kothi Debaraweli and while they were returning, the accused Jaman Singh and Manohar Singh accompanied by several others, met them, in the way and shot at them with the result that Roor Singh was injured by a gun shot on the right hand and Nathia was injured by another gun-shot on his right hand. The accused denied the charge and said that they were themselves the subject of an assault by guns by Roor Singh and his companions. The learned Extra Magistrate came to a finding that both parties seemed to be bent upon fighting with each other, and used gun shots, in which both parties were injured. He accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. The same judgment was upheld on appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel contended that of the 10 prosecution witnesses, 3 important ones, viz. , Nathia P. W. 2, P. W. 3 Kheman and P. W. 3 Bhairum were not called for cross-examination after charge, and, therefore, their statements could not be read in evidence. It was urged that there should be evidence that these witnesses were not available before their previous statements could be considered as evidence for the purpose of founding the conviction. It was urged that if the evidence of these three witnesses was not taken into consideration the material on record would be insufficient to sustain the conviction.