HANDOO Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25th June, 1984, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deeg, (Bharatpur), in Sessions Case No. 10 of (984, by which he convicted the accused -appellants under Sections 302/149, 323/149, 148 and 147, IPC; and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302/149, IPC and to pay a fine of Rs 200/ - and in default to further undergo an imprisonment for two months. The accused -appellants were also sentenced to undergo 9 month's rigorous imprisonment for committing an offence under Section 323/149, IPC. They were also sentenced to undergo a imprisonment for two years for committing an offence under Section 148, IPC. The accused -appellants were also sentenced for committing an offence under Section 447, IPC and to undergo imprisonment for two months (RI). All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass and may be stated thus. There is an agricultural field bearing Khasra No. 357, which was allotted to the accused party and it is alleged that subsequently this was allotted to the complainant party. Another field bearing Khasra No. 538 is situated along with field Khasra No. 537. It is alleged that Khasra Nos. 537 and 538 are comprised in one track. The prosecution story further is that on 5th October, 1983, at about 6.00 p.m. the complainant party went to cultivate their land bearing Khasra No. 538. It is alleged that 11 accused persons, viz. Dhundhal, jharmal, Kasim, Juharu, Hanif (Juhar's sons), Zabar Khan, Handu, Yakub, Baner Khan, Ibrain and six other persons, namely Umar Khan, Satari, Rozdar, Baney Singh Sheru and Ashu came from the field Khasra No. 537 and made an attack on the complainant party. They belaboured and assaulted the complainant party. It is alleged that Dhundhal received lathi blows, Kasim and Jharmal also received simple injuries. Dhundal died. Jhuharu lodged FIR on 5th October, 1983 at about 10.00 a.m. The Police registered a case against the accused under Sections 147, 148, 447, 302 read with 149 IPC and challan was filed in the Court against the accused -appellants. The other accused are facing trial in the lower Court. The accused -appellant denied their complicity in the offence.

(3.) SHRI Jagdeep Dhankar, learned Counsel for the accused -appellant submitted that the finding of the learned trial Court is unjustified as no case is made out against the accused -appellants for which they were charge -sheeted.