RAMJEEWAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY his judgment dated February 20, 1985 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur convicted the three appellants Ramjeewan, Shiv Karan and Mangi Lal under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/ in default of the payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment. By the same judgment, he also convicted them under Section 447, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to one month's simple imprisonment. The accused have come up in appeal and challenge their conviction.

(2.) PW 4 Kumari Indra is the daughter, PW 5 Smt. Baluri is the widow and PW 8 Hemaram is the son of the deceased -victim Kesa Ram Jat, aged about 42 years at the time of his murder. They are residents of village Paldi Vyasan, at the relevant time (January, 1984) they were living in a Dhani, which they had raised in their field as shown in site plan Ex. P 20. The deceased had's own Grams and Raida crops in his field. The appellants are also residents of the fame village Paldi Vyasan PW 9 Smt. Chuki is the mother of appellant Shivkaran. The remaining two appellants Mangilal and Ramjeewan are the cousins of Shivkaran. The prosecution case is that PW 9 Smt. Chuki, aged about 45 years, developed illegal intimacy with the deceased Kesa Ram Jat. Accused Shiv Karan, therefore, harboured ill -will against Kesa Ram. In the night between 27th and 28th January, 1984, Kesa Ram was sleeping in open on a cot on the extreme Northern side of the field which was nearly 200 yards away from his Dhani. PW 4 Kumari Indra, PW 5 Smt. Baluri and PW 8 Hemaram were sleeping in the Dhani. In the mid night, they heard the cries of Kesaram 'Maare Re Maare Re.' They got up and rushed towards him and found the appellants striking blows to Kesaram with the lathis Smt. Chuki (PW 9) was also present there. She too was not spared by the appellants and was inflicted injuries. Kumari Indra, Smt. Baluri and Hemaram started crying and seeing them, the appellants sped away dragging Smt. Chuki with them. These three witnesses went to Kesaram and found him dead. He had multiple injuries on his body and blood was oozing out from the injuries The blanket, quilt and the clothes of the deceased were found smeared with blood. PW 8 Hemaram went to his cousin Rugharam (PW 3) and told him that his father has been murdered. PW 3 Rugharam went to Nagaur where his father Sujan (PW 10) had gone for some private work. At about 9.00 or 10 00 a.m. Rugharam reached Nagaur on a bicycle, contracted his father Sujan (PW 10) and told him that Kesaram was murdered. Sujan advised him to go back to the spot and told that he would come in a bus Sujan (PW 10) reached the scene of the occurrence in the noon and found the deceased's widow, son and daughter weeping and crying. From there, he straight away went to Police Station, Khinvsar and verbally lodged report EX.P 11 of the incident at about 2.00 p m. The police registered a case under Section 302, IPC. The investigation ensued. The Station House Officer Shanker Lal (PW 12) arrived on the spot, inspected the site and prepared the site plan and the site inspection note. He also prepared the inquest of Kesaram's dead body. He found one lathi, one Odna and many other articles lying scattered around the dead body. He seized and sealed them. The post mortem examination of the victim's dead body was conducted at about 2.30 a.m. on January 29, 1984 by PW 6 Dr. J.K. Jalan, the then Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre Khinvsar The doctor noticed as many as seventeen ante mortem injuries on the victim's dead body, as mentioned in the postmortem report Ex. P. 7. In the opinion of Dr. J.K. Jalan, the death was due to coma, as there were multiple injuries over the body and on right leg fracturing the tibia febula bones with tearing muscles, nerves and blood vessels causing the severe haemorrhage and there was fracture of frontal bone tearing the membrane, brain material multiple) and cerebral blood vessels causing the service cerebral haemorrhage and death. The blood -stained cloths of the deceased were seized and sealed. The injuries of Smt. Chuki were also examined. Multiple injuries with fracture of radues were found on her person. The injury reports are Ex. P 13 and Ex. P 14. The appellants were arrested on February 17, 1984 and in consequence of the informations furnished by accused Ramjeewan and Mangi Lal, two lathis were recovered, one of which had stains of blood on it. On chemical examination, the cloths of the deceased and the lathi recovered at the instance of accused Mangi Lal were found stained with human blood. On the completion of investigation the police submitted a crime report against the appellants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur, who in his turn, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 447, 302/34 and 325/34, IPC against all of them, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed absolute innocence. They denied their presence on the spot of the occurrence and their, involvement in the murder of Kesaram. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused examined two witnesses. On the conclusion of the trial the learned Sessions Judge found the charges under Sections 447 and 302/34, I.P.C. duly proved against the appellants, but not under Sections 323/34 and 325/34 I.P.C. in respect of causing injuries to Smt. Chuki (PW 9). The appellants were consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very out -set.

(3.) MR . Doongarsingh did not challenge the opinion of Dr. Jalan (PW 6) relating to the cause of death of Kesaram. We have also gone through his statement and find no reasons to distrust his opinion. As per statement of Dr. Jalan seventeen ante -mortem injuries were found on the dead body of Kesaram with numerous fractures. His death was, thus, homicidal and in assailing the conviction, it was contended by Mr. Doongar Singh that PW 4 Kum. Indra PW 5 Smt. Baluri and PW 8 Hemaram had been wrongly treated as witnesses of truth by the trial Court. It was contended that they had not seen the incident and have falsely introduced themselves as ocular witnesses in order to implicate the appellants. It was argued that as per evidence of the prosecution witnesses, PW 8 Hemaram went to PW 3 Rugharam to apprise him of the incident. It is difficult to believe that had Hemaram seen the incident, he would have not disclosed the names of the miscreants to Rugharam PW 3, who is none but his own first cousin. PW 10 Sujan is the father of PW 3 Rugharam and the real brother of the deceased victim Kesaram. Sujan PW 10 on being apprised of the murder of his brother by Rugha Ram PW 3, came to the spot of the occurrence and found the three eye witnesses sitting near the dead body. It was argued that it is inconceivable that Sujan, without ascertaining the particulars of the incident from these three eye witnesses would straight -way go to the Police Station to lodge the report. In FIR Ex. P 11, neither the names of the assailants nor the names of the three eye witnesses have been mentioned. It was further argued that the three eye witnesses were present when the Investigating Officer inspected the site, prepared the site plan, site inspection note and the inquest report of the victim's dead body. But, none of them disclosed to the Investigating Officer that he had seen the incident and the miscreants who had killed their father or husband. The names of these eye witnesses and the names of the appellants are conspicuously absent in the inquest report, site plan and the site inspection note. These infirmities are vital and important seriously damage the prosecution case and destroy completely the claim of the eye witnesses to have seen the incident. The learned Sessions Judge failed to give due consideration to these infirmities and erred in accepting the evidence of the three eye witnesses at its face value. It was further argued that the story of extra -judicial confession of the accused persons was a pure fabrication and concoction. It was also argued that the only possible witness of the incident, if there could be any, was Smt. Chuki PW 9. But she turned hostile and lent no support to the prosecution. The conviction of the appellants was, therefore, wholly erroneous and unsustainable.