DURGA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to the applications for suspension of sentences and proposes to argue the matter orally. Heard learned counsel for the applicants-appellants and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(2.) The applicants-appellants herein stand convicted for the offences under Sections 148, 302/149, 307/149, 325/149, 323/149 IPC vide judgment dated 11.07.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, (SC/ST) (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Bikaner in Sessions Case No.30/12 (CIS No.235/2014). The applicants-appellants except accused Mohan Ram S/o Balu Ram, also stand convicted for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act vide the impugned judgment. As per the FIR and the statements of the eye-witnesses Udaram (PW.1) and Gomadram (PW.2) as well as the medical jurist Dr. Bhavesh Bohra (PW.9), it is apparent that the solitary fatal injury caused to the deceased Mukhram is specifically attributed to the accused Shankar Lal @ Shankar Ram. Though the applicants-appellants herein were also allegedly armed with various weapons but no significant injury was inflicted by them to the deceased Mukhram. The applicants-appellants were on bail during the course of trial. The incident took place on a trivial issue.

(3.) In this background and considering the small number of injuries ('2' in number) noticed on the person of Mukhram, we feel that the possibility of over-implication of applicants-appellants in the incident cannot be ruled out. Be that as it may. The observations made herein shall be restricted for the purposes of the instant applications for suspension of sentences.