RAM KUMAR & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By his judgment dated 10.1.1995, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pillibanga convicted the petitioner No. 1 Ram Kumar for the offences under Secs. 458, 324, 323 and 326 read with 34 I.PC. and petitioner No. 2 Sahib Ram for the offences under Sec. 458, 326, 323 and 324 read with 34 I.RC. in Cr. Case No. 487/92 and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and fine. The petitioners preferred appeal which was decided on 20.3.1999 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh whereby the conviction of the petitioners was maintained for the offence under Secs. 458, 324 read with 34 I.RC. and the conviction and sentence for the offence under Sec. 326 and 326 read with 34 I.RC. was set-aside. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction, the petitioners have filed this revision petition.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that Smt. Sampat daughter of the complainant Muriidhar was married to petitioner Ram Kumar. But their relations became strained and a case under Sec. 498-A I.RC. was pending against Ram Kumar. On 10.3.1992 Smt. Sampat was staying at the house of her parents. It is alleged that the petitioners entered In the house by opening the window in the main gate and lifted the daughter of the complainant Smt. Sampat. When Muriidhar protested, Ram Kumar petitioner inflicted injuries by knife to Mgrlidhar and also caused injuries to Smt. Sampat. The police submitted charge-sheet after investigation and the petitioners faced the trial which ended in their conviction as stated above.

(3.) I have gone through the evidence on record and also heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. It is vehemently contended that the offence under Sec. 458 I.RC. is not proved at all by the statements of Smt. Sampat and the complainant Muriidhar because there is no evidence to show that the petitioners committed lurking house trespass or house breaking, as alleged by them. There is material contradictions and improvements in the statements of the complainant with regard to the manner of committing the alleged trespass vis a vis the F.I.R. and statement under Sec. 161 Cr.RC. The complainant Muriidhar has completely improved his version by stating that the petitioners came by scaling down the wall of the Bada.