KISHAN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Public Prosecutor Shri Anil Joshi has chosen not to file reply to the instant application for suspension of sentences.

(2.) Heard on the application for suspension of sentences. Perused the material available on record.

(3.) Learned Counsel Shri Devendra Mahalana representing the applicants-appellants urges that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The accused and the complainant party indulged in a free fight. There is no specific allegation whatsoever against the accused-appellants of having inflicted any particular injury to the deceased. The two injured eye-witnesses PW.1 Jawan Singh and PW.2 Hazari Singh have attributed omnibus allegations to as many as five male assailants and two female assailants of having assaulted Mithu Singh of whom, one was not chargesheeted and two have been acquitted. He further contended that the appellant Nepal Singh was not even named by the witness Jawan Singh (PW.1) in his examination-in-chief. He further submits that the medical jurist Dr. Surendra Singh (PW.14), who issued the postmortem report (Ex.P/19) did not even opine that any of the injuries caused to the deceased were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death or they could be inflicted by the weapons attributed to the applicants-appellants by the eye-witnesses. He further contended that total of four injuries were noticed on the person of deceased Mithu Singh whereas the number of assailants named by the witnesses is six and thus, it is an obvious case of over-implication. He further contended that two women who were attributed identical role in the testimony of the eye-witnesses have been acquitted. Hence, he prayed that the applicants-appellants deserve indulgence of bail, during pendency of the appeal.