SATYA NARAYAN ALIAS SATTU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE joyous occasion of a marriage, suddenly turned into a tragedy, when allegedly the appellant hit Bhairon Lal, a member of the wedding party with a piece of wood and consequently Bhairon Lal died. Convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and imposed with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and directed to further undergo one year of simple imprisonment in default thereof, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 2. 12. 2002 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Kota before this court.

(2.) BRIEFLY, the facts of the case are that on 16. 6. 02 one Kishan Lal submitted a written report (Ex. P. 4) before the Police Station, Seemlia, District Kota wherein he alleged that he alongwith the appellant and Bhairon Lal had come as members of a wedding party from Lalpura to Gumanpura. According to him there were about 30-40 members in the wedding party. As the wedding procession was proceeding towards the wedding place, the men were dancing before the bridegroom. The appellant had stopped the women from dancing. Therefore, an altercation had taken place between the appellant and the Bhairon Lal. Initially some of the members of the wedding party separated the appellant and Bhairon Lal. However, after a while the appellant pulled out a piece of wood from a tractor trolly and hit Bhairon Lal on his head. Being struck, Bharon Lal fell on the ground. He was picked up, bundled up, and taken to the hospital. He expired on the next morning. On the basis of the said report a formal FIR, FIR No. 85/02 was registered at P. S. Seemlia, District Kota for offence under Section 302 IPC. In order to prove its case the prosecution examined seventeen witnesses and submitted fifteen documents. Although the defence did not examine any witnesses, but it did submit five documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Thus this appeal before this court.

(3.) IN our view Mr. Shandilya has fairly left the evidence produced by the prosecution untouched. For, the testimonies of Kishan Lal (P. W. 2), Dhuli Lal (P. W. 5) and Bhura Lal (P. W. 6), all of whom were eye-witnesses to the alleged crime, clearly prove that the appellant had struck the deceased on his head with a piece of wood. Their testimony is further corroborated by the INjury Report (Ex. P. 9) and by the testimony of Dr. P. K. Tiwari (P. W. 11) who had examined the injured Bhairon Lal. These testimonies are further corroborated by the Post-Mortem Report Ex. (P. 15) and by the testimony of Dr. Kedar Sharma (P. W. 17) who performed the Post-Mortem of the deceased. According to the Post- Mortem Report (Ex. P. 15) the deceased had suffered a blunt wound on his head on the left side of the parietal region of his head. He had also suffered a haemotoma in the brain because of the said injury. Thus the prosecution has sufficiently proved that Bhairon Lal died a homicidal death caused by the appellant.