ARJUN RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) learned Additional Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case No.102/2015 (27/2011) whereby, he was convicted for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and was sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 months' additional imprisonment.

(2.) The prosecution case emanates from the written report (Ex.P/5) submitted by Manak Ram to the SHO, Police Station Merta City on 20.07.2011 at 10:30 p.m. alleging inter alia that on the very same evening at about 7 o'clock, the informant's brother Ugma Ram was returning on his tractor after doing farming activities on his field. When he reached a little distance from the market, the accused party comprising of Arjun Ram and Sukha Ram (both sons of Buksa Ram), Budha Ram and Buksa Ram (both sons of Misa Ram), Ratna Ram S/o Dayal Ram, Kamodari W/o Arjun Ram and Suganai W/o Budha Ram, who were lying in wait from before, came across and obstructed Ugma Ram's tractor. Arjun Ram was having a knife in his hand whereas, the other accused persons were armed with lathis. Ugma Ram was pulled down from the tractor. The accused party surrounded Ugma Ram and started assaulting him indiscriminately with the weapons held by them. The informant (Manak Ram) and his brother Nema Ram were present in his shop and saw the incident. Ratna Ram caught hold of Ugma Rama and Arjun Ram inflicted numerous knife blows on his back. Budha Ram inflicted a lathi blow on the back of the deceased due to which, he fell down. Ratna Ram, gave a prod by lathi on the neck of Ugma Ram. Sukha Ram, Buksa Ram, Kamodari and Suganai (accused) rained lathi, fist and kick blows on Ugma Ram. The informant Manak Ram and his brother Nema Ram tried their level best to intervene and save Ugma Ram from the assault upon which they too were beaten and received numerous injuries at the hands of the accused party. The informant was pushed aside and Arjun Ram stabbed his brother Ugma Ram by the knife on his abdomen. It was alleged that the accused party hatched a prior conspiracy owing to the long standing dispute pending between the parties over the boundary wall (ekB) of a field and with this objective, they collected together, attacked and killed the informant's brother Ugma Ram. On the basis of this report, a formal FIR No.199/2011 was chalked out at the Police Station Merta City and investigation was commenced. Manak Ram and Nema Ram were got examined for their injuries at the Primary Health Center, Merta City. Nema Ram was found having a skin deep abrasion on his left scapular region. Manak Ram was found having two trivial abrasions on the toe and index finger of his left hand. The dead body of Ugma Ram was subjected to postmortem. The Medical Board opined that cause of death of Ugma Ram was stab injuries on various vital organs of his body including ribs, lungs, liver and heart. While conducting investigation, the Investigating Officer came to a conclusion that Ratna Ram, named as an accused in the FIR, was not involved in the incident and thus, he was not charge-sheeted. It may be noted here that at the initial stage, the prosecution filed an application under Section 190 Cr.P.C. for summoning Ratna Ram as an additional accused in the case. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court and the matter was left at that resulting into the exoneration of Ratna Ram attaining finality. After completion of investigation, the accused Arjun Ram, Sukh Ram, Budha Ram, Buksa Ram and Kamodari and Suganai were charge-sheeted in the Court of the ACJM, Merta for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323 and 302 I.P.C. Since the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. was exclusively Sessions triable, the case was committed to the Sessions Judge, Merta, who framed charges against the accused persons for the above offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After prosecution evidence had been commenced, the case was transferred for trial to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Merta. The prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses in support of its case. Upon being confronted with the prosecution evidence in their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the same and claimed that they had been falsely implicated in the case for oblique motive.

(3.) Shri J.S.Choudhary, Sr.Advocate assisted by Shri Amardeep Lamba representing the accused Arjun Ram in the appeal (CRLA No.797/2016) against conviction and the respondents-accused in the appeals against acquittal vehemently and fervently contended that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The prosecution witnesses concealed the genesis of occurrence while lodging the FIR and while deposing in the court. The Court's attention was drawn towards the FIR (Ex.P/5); depositions of the material witnesses viz. Manak Ram P.W.3; Nema Ram P.W.4; Gheesa Ram P.W.6 and Smt.Jhankari P.W.8 and it was urged that from the testimony of these witnesses, it is manifest that the accused and the complainant parties are closely related to each other. The dispute of boundary wall was prevailing between the complainant party and only the accused Budha Ram. So far as the other accused are concerned, these witnesses categorically admitted that they had no involvement in the boundary dispute.