STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. NARSING LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment of Sri Sankatha Rai, Additional Sessions Judge Sirohi dated 17 -3 -1976 by which he acquitted the accused -respondent Narsing Lal under Sections 307 324 and 323, IPC. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus.

(2.) IN the morning of April 3, 1975, Lal Singh PW 2 went to the well of the accused to take bath along with his brother -in -law Sohan Singh. There was long standing enmity between the families of the accused and Lal Singh PW 2. The accused hurled abuses and forcibly turned out Lal Singh therefrom. On return from the well, he narrated the story of his insult to other members of his family. At about 7.30 p.m. the same day, when he was returning from his well to his house, Kesar Singh PW 10, uncle of Lal Singh PW 2 enquired from the accused for his said conduct. The accused stopped his bullock cart and started belabouring Kesar Singh PW 10 from the 'Jatru' of his cart. He ran his bullock cart on the body of Kesar singh after he fell down on the ground. Mohan Singh PW 7 brother of Lal Singh PW 2 was also injured when he intervened. Kesar Singh became unconscious due to injuries received by him. The injured Kesar Singh was immediately shifted to Government hospital, Takhatgarh. Dr. Jaswant Singh Bhandari PW 8 attended him and he sent his memo Ex. P 1O to the Station House Officer, Takhatgarh, intimating that Kesar Singh PW10 had been admitied in the hospital in injured condition. On its receipt, the SHO, Takhatgarh, Swaroop Narain, PW 11 recorded the FIR Ex. P 10 -A on the basis of the said memo, came to the hospital and commenced investigation After investigation, a challan under Sections 307, 223, 324 and 325, IPC was filed against the accused in the Court of the Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, Bali who committed the accused to the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi.

(3.) , It has been contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has seriously erred in rejecting the testimony of Lalsingh PW 2 and injured Mohan Singh PW 7 and Kesar Singh PW 10 on the ground that they were interested witnesses, these witnesses fully supported the prosecution story, Mohan Singh PW 7 and Kesar Singh PW 10 received injuries in the said occurrence and this guaranteed their presence at the time of occurrence. He further contended that the statement of Mst. Badna PW 1 was not carefully and cautiously read by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. He lastly contended that the learned Additional Sessions Judge was not right in rejecting the testimony of the prosecution witnesses on the ground that they failed to explain the injuries of the accused Narsinglal,