DANA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE three appellants, viz Danaram, Ransingh and Jhandu were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar along with two other accused (since acquitted) in connection with an occurrence which took place on June 5, 1971 at 9 A. M. at village Rohi Paldi in the field of Budhram and a fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of the payment of which each of them was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. All the three appellants were acquitted of the remaining charges THE two accused viz. Mst. Bhaga and Mst. Dakori tried along with the appellants were acquitted of all the charges framed against them.

(2.) THE prosecution story as disclosed at the trial is that the fields of the accused Danaram and Budhram injured are adjacent to each other. On June 5, 1971 all the five accused persons formed an unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to take forcible possession of the field and commit the murder of Hemraj and others. In prosecution of this common object accused Danaram aimed himself with 'lathi', Ransingh and Jhanduram armed themselves with axes and Mst. Bhaga and Mst. Dakori armed themselves with 'lathis'. All of them came together to the field of Budhram and inflicted injuries on the person of Hemraj, Nihala and Budhram as a result of which Hemraj met instantaneous death. First information report of this occurrence was lodged at the Police Station, Bhadra on June 5, 1971 at 7 pm. THE distance between the police station and the place of occurrence is 15 mites. THE autopsy on the dead body of Hemraj was performed by PW. 6 Dr. Gopaldas THE postmortem report is Ex. P. 2. Nihala and Budhram were also clinically examined by PW. 6 Dr. Gopaldas for their injuries. THE injury reports are Ex P. 4 and Ex P. 5 respectively. All the accused appellants were arrested by the Police on June, 6, 1971. On the same day Ransingh expressed his desire to get the blood-stained axe recovered from the place of its concealment. In consequence of this information a blood-stained axe was got recovered by the Police at the instance of the accused from the 'bhakhal' of Ransingh. THE recovery memo is Ex. P. 14. THE recovered axe was sent to the Chemical Analyst and Serologist, who found it to be stained with human blood. THE report of the serologist is Ex. P. 22. On June 12, 1971 Jhanduram expressed his desire to get the blood-stained axe recovered from the place of its concealment, THE information memo is Ex. P. 20. In consequence of this information a blood stained axe was recovered at the instance of the accused vide Ex P. 16. It was also found to be stained with human blood by the serologist vide Ex P. 22. Accused Danaram expressed his desire on June 12, 1971 to get the bloodstained 'lathi' recovered from the place of its concealment. THE information memo is Ex. P. 19. In consequence of this information a blood stained 'lathi' was recovered vide Ex. P. 15 but as -he blood found on the 'lathi* was disintegrated the serologist could not express his positive opinion regarding the nature of blood, and as such this recovery cannot be of any avail to the prosecution.

(3.) FROM the above discussion it is clear that whenever a court is confronted with a question whether the offence is murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder on the facts of a case, it will be convenient for it to approach the problem in the three stages. The question to be considered at the first stage would be whether the accused has done an act by doing which he has caused the death of another. If so, whether that act of the accused amounts to culpable homicide as defined in Sec. 299, I. P. C. If the answer to this question is prima facie found in the affirmative the stage for considering the operation of sec. 300, Penal Code is reached. This is a stage at which the court should determine whether the facts proved by the prosecution bring the case within the ambit of any of the four clauses of definition of murder defined in sec. 300. I. P. C. If the answer to this question is in negative the offence would be culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under the first or second part of sec. 300, I. P. C. depending on whether the second or the third clause of sec. 299 is applicable If the answer is positive but the case comes within any of the exceptions enumerated in sec. 300, I. P. C. , the offence would still be culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under S. 304, I. P. C.