SUBHASH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants two in number, were accused on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, No. 2, Jhunjhunu, who vide judgment dated April 2, 2003 convicted and sentenced them as under:- Subhash Chandra and Maha Singh: U/s. 302/34 IPC: Both to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/ -. Maha Singh u/s. 325 and Subhash Chadra U/s. 325/34 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 100/ -. U/s. 323 IPC: Both to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 100/ -. U/s. 341 IPC: Both to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 100/ -. In default of payment of fine further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days for each section. Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case as unfolded during trial is as under:- On December 16, 2001 informant Vijay Pal (Pw. 1) submitted a written report (Ex. P-1) at Police Station Khetri stating therein that on the said day around 6. 30 AM while his brother Ashok Kumar was going to well for watering the field and reached in front of the house of Subhash Chandra, at that time Maha Singh, Shanti Devi, Narendra, Pushpendra and Maya Kaur armed with Jellies, Lathis and Iron-pipe surrounded Ashok Kumar and opened assault. Subhash Chand thrust Jelly in nostrils of Ashok Kumar and threw him on the ground. On hearing ruckus, informant and Sarkaur Devi rushed to the place of incident and tried to intervene, but the informant was also beaten up. As a result of injuries Ashok Kumar lost consciousness and he was removed to Narnaul hospital and SMS Hospital Jaipur, where he died. His body was subjected to inquest proceeding and postmortem examination. THE informant further stated that on account of land dispute the accused were inimical and belaboured Ashok Kumar. On that report a case under sections 341, 323, 144, 148, 149 and 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded, appellants were arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2 Jhunjhunu. Charges under sections 302/34, 325, 325/34, 323 and 341 IPC were framed against the appellants, who denied the charge and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 11 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Crpc, the appellants claimed innocence. Three witnessed were examined in defence. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated above.

(3.) THE prosecution case is founded on the evidence of Vijaypal (Pw. 1), Smt. Sarkaur (Pw. 4) and Hari Singh (Pw. 3 ). Vijaypal is the brother whereas Sarkaur is the mother of deceased and it is contended by learned Senior counsel that since Vijaypal and Sarkaur are highly partisan witnesses being closely related to the deceased, their evidence should be discarded. We are unable to agree with the learned Senior Counsel. Relationship is not a factor to affect the credibility of a witness. A witness is normally to be considered independent. Ordinarily a close relative would be the last to screen the real culprit and falsely implicate an innocent person. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made.