LAWS(RAJ)-1989-2-32

MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJ.

Decided On February 28, 1989
MUKHTIAR SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJ. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The offences, alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are under sections 302 and 379 IPC. The incident occurred on 28th Sept., 1988. The deceased was taken by the petitioner to his house in village Baroli and there they took liquor together. Thereafter, some dispute arose and it is alleged that Jogendra Singh was beaten by the petitioner by fists and some money and other articles etc. were taken away from him. Jogendra Singh was taken to several hospitals but he died after 13 days of this incident. The cause of death according to the post mortem report, is the injuries to testicles and kidneys, extra-vesation of urine and suppuration. Spleen was also enlarged. It is also stated that the liver and the spleen were not healthy and were in damaged condition, due to the excessive consumption of Alcohol. The deceased has also been referred as choronic alcoholic for the last 20 years.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner as well as the deceased were taking liquor together and it could be that some quarrel took place but looking to the nature of the injuries caused by the petitioner there could be no intention of causing death of Jogendra Singh. It is also contended that the report was lodged after a long delay of 14 days and the petitioner has been implicated falsely. As regards the medical aspect, it is contended that the death was not the result of the injuries inflicted by the petitioner but due to the failure of the organs, which were already in bad condition.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that there are two eye witnesses of the incident and deceased had also made statement to his wife and others about the beating given to him by the petitioner. It is also contended that the deceased had illicit relations with the wife of the petitioner and because of this the petitioner had a motive to quarrel with the deceased. For the medical aspect it is stated that this can be appreciated after the Sessions Judge examines the same after examination of the doctors.