SHEO NARAIN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused Sheo Narain, Kanhaiya Lal, Mst. Bhanwari, Mst. Ganga and Yedh Kori were tried by learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, in connection with an occurrence dated 24.7.74, which took place in the precincts of Village Chirawa in Khasra No. 408. During the course of that occurrence Om Prakash (since deceased), Lachhman P. W. 3, Mangtu P. W. 2 sustained injuries. The injury reports of Mangtu and Lachhman are Ex. P. 13 and Ex. 14 respectively. Om Prakash sustained as many as 7 injuries during the course of the same event.

(2.) First Information Report Ex. P. 15 was lodged at the police station Chirawa, by P. W. 7 Atma Ram on the same day at 9.45 a. m., i. e. within 46 minutes of the occurrence. Om Prakash (since deceased) was first taken to the hospital at Chirawa. He was clinically examined by Dr. Bharat Singh P. W. 5. The injury report is Ex. P. 11. Injured Om Prakash was found to be unconscious and in the stage of coma, and as such, he was advised to be taken to Pilani hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries on the same day. The autopsy on the dead body of Om Prakash was performed at 3.50 P. M. The post-mortem report is Ex. P. 12. The police after usual investigation submitted challan against all the five accused under sections 302, 302/149; 447, 323 and 148 I. P. C. All of them were committed to the court of Session for trial.

(3.) All the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and the prosecution examined 7 witnesses in support of their case. P. W. Moti Lal, P. W. 2 Mangtu, P. W. Lachhman and P. W. 6 Atma Ram were examined as eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P. W. 5 Dr. Bharat Singh, is the person who clinically examined all the three injured and performed autopsy on the dead body of Om Prakash. Learned Sessions Judge placing reliance on the statements of the eye-witnesses corroborated by the F. I. R. as well as the Medical evidence came to the conclusion that both the accused-appellants Sheo Narain and Kanhaiya Lal were guilty of the offence punishable under section 302 I. P. C. and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Accused Sheo Narain was also convicted under section 323 I. P. C. and was sentenced to two months rigorous imprisonment. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Besides the two appellants, Mst. Bhanwari was convicted under section 323 I. P. C. and was given benefit of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. As she has not come up in appeal, we are not concerned with her case. The rest of the accused were acquitted of all the charges and the appellants were also acquitted of other charges.