BHANU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals; one by the State and the other by the accused -persons arise out of the same judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar on May 24,1975, where by, the learned lower court has acquitted accused Sultan and Dhonkal of all the offences with which they were charge by giving them the benefit of doubt. It has, however, held accused Bhanu guilty of the offence under Section 304 Part II, IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. He was also convicted under Section 447 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of one month. Accused Surjaram and Hajari were convicted under Sections 447 and 323 IPC and Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati were convicted under Section 447 IPC. However, looking to the circumstances of the case in which the offences were committed and having regard to the character of the accused and in the absence of any previous conviction recorded against them, the learned lower court has granted them the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act. It has, however, acquitted all the accused -persons of the offences under Sections 302 and 302/149 IPC. Aggrieved against this judgment the Stale has preferred appeal against all the 7 accused -persons including Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati with the prayer that all the accused, persons should have been convicted of the offence under Sections 302 or 302/149 IPC. It may be staged here that the State's appeal was not admitted against Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati but it was, however, admitted against accused Hajari, Sultansingh, Bhanuram, Surjaram and Dhokalram. The accused Bhanu, Hajari, Surjaram, Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati have also preferred appeal against their conviction.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly stated are; that one Sheolal Jat resident of Hanumangarh town had certain fields. Existing in his khatedari bearing Khasras No. 128/277 and 127/278. Sheolal had three daughters from his first wife Mst. Dhapu. Their names are Mst. Shanti, Mst. Saraswati and Mst. Girdawari. After the death of Mst. Dhapu, he married to Sona Devi. Mst. Sona Devi brought with her one son who was born to her by her earlier wedlock. She gave birth to one daughter Bhagwati, after her marriage with Sheolal. It is alleged that after the death of Sheolal, Mst. Sona Devi came in possession of his land and out of this land, she sold killas No. 19 to 22 of field bearing Khasra No. 128/277 and killas No. 3,4,5 and 7 of Khasra No. 127/278 situated in village Chak 18 HMH for a sum of Rs. 20,000/ - by a registered sale -deed Ex. P 33 and handed over possession of these 8 killas to the purchaser Sardar Malsingh son of Sardar Suchhasingh Jat sikh resident of Hanumangarh. This sale deed was executed on January 28,1974. It is alleged that Malsingh and his sons cultivated Killa No. 7 and sown Guwar crop in that killa of field bearing Khasra No. 127/278. On the date of the occurrence i.e., May 23, 1974, Malsingh's son Kripalsingh was in that field. At about 10 of 11 a.m. his niece Mst. Pappi aged about 10 years brought his meals. He then went inside the Kotha and started taking his meals. At that point of time, Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati came to Killa No. 7 and tried to destroy the Guwar crop soon by the complainant party. Kripalsing then came out of his Kotha and requested these ladies not to do so, whereupon, these ladies started abusing. It is alleged that accused Dhonkalram, Surjaram, Hajari, Bhanu and Sultansingh were hiding themselves in the Khala situated near that field. It is alleged that accused Sultansingh and Dhonkalram were armed with guns. On seeing this, Kripalsingh went inside the Kotha. Mst. Pappi, however, went and informed Mukhtiarsingh who was in their Dhani. Mukhtiarsingh immediately rushed to the spot and when he reached Killa No. 7, two fires were shot at him by accused Dhonkal and Sultansingh. However, he was not hit. Mukhtiarsingh fell himself down. Thereafter, all the accused -persons came out and accused Hajari, Surjaram and Bhanu started beating him with lathies and Gandasis. Accused Hajari and Surjaram had Gandasis with them whereas accused Bhanu was carrying a lathi with him. Mst. Shanti and Mst. Saraswati were also present at the spot. Sardara Singh who is father in law of Kripalsingh and Mukhtiarsingh also came at the spot and tried to intervene but the accused -pesons did not desist from beating. Mukhtiarsingh who became unconscious after receiving injuries on his head, was then shifted to Hanumangarh Hospital, where his injuries were examined and he was also treated for his injuries by Doctor Parasmal Jain. Later, he was shifted to Sriganganagr Hospital, where he died on May 27, 1974 at about 6.40 p.m. His post mortem was conducted by Dr. Ramlal Goyal. Certain recoveries were effected on the information of the accused -persons after their arrest and after usual investigation, the case against the accused -persons was challaned in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hanumangarh, from where, it was committed for trial to the court of Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar. The learned Sessions Judge charged the accused -persons as under:

(3.) IT may be pertinent to mention here that the principal accused in the case i.e. accused Bhanuram has died. An application has been filed by the learned Counsel for the accused Bhanu that accused Bhanu has died before about 3 years. This fact was not controverted by the learned Public Prosecutor or the learned Counsel appearing for the complainants and therefore the appeal against accused Bhanu abates.