SURAJMAL URF RAM SWAROOP Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the prosecution as per the first charge formulated by the trial court is that on the intervening night of 20th and 21st of September, 2010, in revenue estate of village Moja Tokaspura, murder of Ramphool Meena was caused with incised weapon like axe etc., and thus, five accused namely Shahnaz wife of Pappu Khan, Rodu Lal son of Gangaram, Surajmal @ Ramswaroop son of Kesari Lal, Onkar son of Ram Lal and Hajari son of Suwa Lal committed offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. The second charge was also formulated, wherein it was stated that since accused knew that Ramphool Meena was member of Scheduled Tribe, thus, they had committed offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called as 'SC/ST Act').

(2.) The accused appellants had denied above charges, hence, they were tried in Sessions Case No. 2/11. The prosecution to secure conviction of the appellants, examined twenty one witnesses, namely Jai Ram (P.W.1), Shyopal (P.W.2), Jyoti Tiwari (P.W.3), Sabu Lal (P.W.4), Kalyan (P.W.5), Dinesh Kumar (P.W.6), Mohan Lal (P.W.7), Bina Kumari (P.W.8), Amrit Mani (P.W.9), Bholi Bai (P.W.10), Chandrabhan Singh (P.W.11), Dr. Hari Prasad Lakwal (P.W.12), Bhanwar Lal s/o Ram Chandra (P.W.13), Bhanwar Lal s/o Jai Lal (P.W.14), Kumari Poorti Bai (P.W.15), Mahesh Punetha (P.W.16), Ram Sahai (P.W.17), Manak Lal (P.W.18), Rajesh Kumar (P.W.19), Chhotu Lal (P.W.20) and Prakash Kumar Sharma (P.W.21).

(3.) Thereafter, the statement of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused denied all incriminating evidence put to them. The prosecution besides oral evidence, has also proved on record documents Exhibit-P/1 to Exhibit-P/60. No defence witness was examined, however, defence relied upon statement of Bholi Bai and Manak Chand recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., as Exhibit-D/1 and Exhibit-D/2, respectively.