SHIV NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Reportable These two appeals (Appeal No.199/05 & 932/03) arise out of the judgment and order dated 18.1.05 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.69/03 and judgment and order dated 3.7.03 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.67/02. By judgment and order dated 3.7.03, the appellants Mahaveer Prasad has been convicted for offences under Sections 302/149, 148, 449, 364, 323, 324, 342 IPC and Sheoprakash has been convicted for offences under Sections 302/149, 148, 449, 364, 323, 324, 342 & 341 IPC, whereas, vide judgment and order dated 18.1.05 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar in Session Case No.69/03, the appellants Shivnarayan and Dilaver Singh have been convicted for offences under Sections 302/149 and 148 IPC. The appellants have been sentenced as under: Mahaveer Prasad And Sheoprakash Section 302/149 IPC Life imprisonment with fine Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine one year simple imprisonment. Section 148 IPC One year's rigorous imprisonment. Section 449 IPC Ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' simple imprisonment. Section 364 IPC Seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' simple imprisonment. Section 323 IPC One year's rigorous imprisonment. Section 324 IPC Three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 200/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' simple imprisonment. Section 342 IPC One year's rigorous imprisonment. That apart, Sheoprakash has been sentenced for conviction for offence under Section 341 IPC for one month's simple imprisonment. Shivnarayan @ Shyonarayan And Dilaver Singh Section 302/149 IPC Imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/-; in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year simple imprisonment. Section 148 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution story may be summarised thus:

(3.) Narrating the incident as aforesaid, complainant Ramlal submitted a written report (Ex.P/5) to the SHO, Police Station, Chunawad at 10.25 P.M., at the Government Hospital, Sri Ganganagar. On the basis of the written report, the police registered the FIR No.53/02 (Ex.P/40) and the investigation commenced.