PINTOO ALIAS KAMAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CAN the Court depend solely on the probity of investigation? can criminal justice be made casualty for the wrongs committed by Investigating Officer ? these are the pivotal questions springing up for consideration in the instant appeals, which have been preferred against the judgment dated December 13, 2004 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast track) No. 3 Bharatpur Camp Bayana by pintoo alias Kamal Kishore, Susya alias lokesh and Kalua alias Koshal Kishore, who were convicted and sentenced as under :-Susya alias Lokesh : u/s. 302, IPC : to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Pintoo alias Kamal Kishore and Kalua alias Koshal Kishore : u/s. 302/34, IPC : both to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. BACKGROUND FACTS :

(2.) THE prosecution story is woven like this :-On September 17, 1999 around 6. 45 p. m. informant Prem Shankar (P. W. 9) submitted a written report (Ex. P. 15) at police Station Bayana stating therein that on September 17, 1999 around 5. 00 p. m. while his cousin Lakhan was busy in the main market Bayana in inspection work of the employees of Municipal Council, he was surrounded by Susya alias Lokesh, Pintoo alias kamal Kishore, Laddu alias Mool Chand, dinesh, Kalua, Satish and 2-3 other persons, who were armed with weapons. Pintoo and Kalua, in order to strike terror in the market opened fire in the air. Laddu alias mool Chand pulled Lakhan from his collar and rest of the persons also caught hold of lakhan. It was then stated in the report that susya alias Lokesh made fire from his Katta at Lakhan, hitting Lakhan on the left side of the abdomen. It was also stated that the informant and his friends namely Mahendra and Rakesh Tiwari witnessed the incident, as they were purchasing some articles from the nearby shop in the market. After the firing, the miscreants fled away. Informant and his companions removed injured Lakhan to hospital in a rickshaw from where, since the condition of injured Lakhan was serious, he was referred to Bharatpur. On the basis of said report, a case was registered for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 307, IPC. The investigating agency embarked upon investigation of the impugned crime. During the course of investigation injured Lakhan succumbed to his injuries, resulting in addition of an offence under Section 302, IPC. The dead body of deceased was subjected to post mortem examination. After doing the needful, charge sheet came to be filed only against Pintoo, dinesh and Satish, in the Court of concerned magistrate. However, appellants Susya alias lokesh as also Kalua alias Kaushal Kishore were not charge sheeted by the police. The case was committed for trial to the Court of sessions. Charges were framed. During the course of examination of evidence, 17 witnesses were examined. At that point of time appellant Susya alias Lokesh as also Kalua alias Kaushal Kishore were arrayed as accused persons, by resorting to the provisions contained in Section 319, Cr. P. C. by the learned trial Judge. After the addition of the two accused persons, qua all the five accused persons charges were framed. As against appellant Susya alias Lokesh charges were framed for the offences under sections 302 in the alternative 302/149, ipc. As against appellant Pintoo alias Kamal kishore, charges were framed for offences under Sections 302 in the alternative 302/ 149, IPC and Section 3/25 Arms Act. The accused persons denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 19 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313, Cr. P. C. the appellants claimed innocence. Three witnesses in support of defence were examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3.) DEATH of Lakhan was undeniably homicidal in nature. As per post-mortem report (Ex. P. 35) following ante-mortem injuries were found on the dead body :-