PYARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated June 30, 1978 whereby the learned lower court has held the accused-appellant Pyara Singh guilty of the offence under s. 326 I. P. C and has sentenced him to three years' rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default, to undergo two monies' rigorous imprisonment. He has also been held guilty of the offence under s. 27 of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are that: P. W. 3 Avtarsingh, P. W. 4 Jaisingh, PW. 5 Ajayabsingh, P. W. 8 Shankersingh and accused-appellant Pyarasingh are the real brothers. THEy belong to village 5 C. C. in District Sri Ganganagar. It is alleged that they have some land in District Firojpur in Punjab and, therefore, P. W. 8 Shankersingh has shifted to Firojpur and he was cultivating the land there. THEy owned 15 killas of land in village 5 CC. Although, this land was in their joint Khatedari in the revenue records but for the sake of convenience, Pyara-Singh who was living separately from them has been given exclusive possession of three killas bearing Nos. 1, 10 and 12. THE remaining four brothers were cultivating the rest of the 12 killas jointly although, as stated earlier Shankersingh was cultivating the joint land at village Kaliyawala in Firojpur (Punjab ). THEre was some dispute about the share of land allotted to Pyarasingh by mutual agreement. Certain disputes arose amongst the brothers which have resulted in certain court cases. It is alleged that on 18-6-1975 at about 1 30 P. M. Ajayabsingh, Avtarsingh and Jaisingh were to water their field in the regular course when their turn came. THEy were to receive water at 1. 30 P. M. on that day and so. they went to the filed in the early hours of the morning at about 7 or 8 A. M. and were cleansing the Khala (Water course) so that water may easily be taken in their fields. When they came to the field to clean the Khala, it is alleged that accused Pyarasingh was moving in killa No. 22 of square No. 1 armed with a rifle. His son Nandsingh, his brother-in-law Iqbal Singh and his son-in-law Jaggasingh were sitting on the boundary of killas No. 9 and 10. It is alleged that out of these three accused-persons, Iqbalsingh was armed with a rifle and Nandsingh and Jaggasingh were armed with pistols. THEse three brothers Avtarsingh Jaisingh and Ajayabsingh started cleansing the water course. At that time, Pyarasingh fired from his rifle. THE shot first hit the wall of the water-course and then it hit Avtarsingh on the left side of his mandible. It is alleged that Pyarasingh then exhorted bis son, brother-in-law & son-in-law to fire at these persons, whereupon, all the three accused-persons fired about 10-15 shots with the weapons which they were having with them but it appears that none of those shots have hit any of these three persons who were cleansing the water-course. On hearing the sound of gun-fire, it is alleged that Pahalwansingh, Laxman and Shankersingh came from the village, which is locally called Chak and they challenged these accused-persons whereupon, these three persons who were sitting on the boundary of Killas Nos. 9 and 10 went in killa No. 22 where Pyarasingh was present. After that. Pahalvansingh, Laxman and Shankersingh first bandaged the wounds of Avtarsingh and then took him to the Govt. Hospital, Padampur where his injuries were examined by Dr. B. M. Chaudhary. THE injury report has been marked Ex. P. 1. X-ray examination of the injury was also advised. THE X-ray plates have been marked Ex. P. 44 and 15. THE X-ray reading report discloses the fracture of the left lower jaw. THE X-ray reading report has been marked Ex. P. 2. THE report of the incident was lodged at Police Station, Padampur by an eye witness i. e. P. W. 4 Jaisingh. This first information report which was lodged at 10. 30 A M. on that very day has been marked Ex. P. 3. One bullet was recovered from the wound of Avtarsingh and that was seized in bottle by the Doctor. THE bottle was handed over to the Police. Its seizure memo has been marked Ex P. 5. THE blood stained clothes of the injured were seized vide memo Ex P. 6. THE site was inspected and the site plan and site inspection memo have been prepared. THEy have been marked Ex. P. 7 and Ex. P. 7a respectively. Accused Pyarasingh was arrested vide memo Ex. P 8. THE other three accused persons were arrested vide memo Ex. P. 9 to 11 respectively.

(3.) MR. S. K. Mathur, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that accused-appellant Pyarasingh initially was moving in Killa No. 22. He was not sitting at a particular place. A moving man can also move to Killas No. 8 and 9 and can fire from there. All the three alleged eye witnesses have categorically stated that the first shot was fired by accused Pyarasingh from the boundary of Killas No. 8 and 9 and, therefore, the learned lower court was perfectly justified in holding the accused-appellant Pyarasingh guilty of the offence, of the above said two offences. He has further submitted that shifting of the venue is only a minor contradiction and it hardly affects the case of the prosecution on merits. |