Back
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Shiv Kumar Sharma, Dalip Singh
Guddu - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 389 of 2000
Decided On : 12/22/2004
Conviction - Criminal Law - IPC 302, 307/34, 324/34 - The judgment discusses the application of Sections 302, 307/34, and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case involving a fatal assault and the establishment of common intention among the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the accused under Sections 302, 307/34, and 324/34 of the IPC for a fatal assault that resulted in the death of the victim and injuries to other individuals. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of injured eye-witnesses and the evidence of the autopsy surgeon and investigating officer.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimony of the injured eye-witnesses to be reliable and established the guilt of the accused. It rejected the defense's contention regarding the timing and location of the incident and upheld the conviction based on the evidence presented.
Issues: The issues included the reliability of the prosecution's case, the timing and location of the incident, and the applicability of the charged sections of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimony of the injured eye-witnesses to establish the guilt of the accused and rejected the defense's contentions regarding the timing and location of the incident. It also discussed the application of common intention under Section 34 of the IPC in establishing the liability of the accused.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused was ordered to surrender to serve the sentence.
S.K. Sharma, J.-The appellants (hereinafter described as “accused”) were indicted before the learned Judge Special Court (Communal Riots Cases) Tonk in Sessions Case No. 24/1998. Learned Judge vide Judgment dated 30.06.2000 convicted and sentenced the accused as under:-
Guddu:-
Under Section 302, IPC:-To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.
Under Section 307/34, IPC:-To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.
Under Section 324/34, IPC:-To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven days.
Mohd. Aslam:-
Under Section 302/34, IPC:-To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.
Under Section 307, IPC:-To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.
Under Section 324, IPC:-To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.200/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven days.
The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. It is the prosecution case that on 19.02.1998 Dinesh Sharma (PW. 14). SHO Police Station Purani Tonk recorded Parcha Bayan (Exhibit-P-1) of Shakil Ahmed (PW. 1), wherein it was stated that on the same day at about 4.30 PM when he was rolling Bidis at his house his younger son Salim came rushing and told that at Babron ka Chowk Guddu and Aslam, were quarreling with Mohammad (now deceased).On such information Shakil Ahmed.Shahjad and Salim reached at Babron ka Chowk and found Guddu and Aslam beating Mohammad by legs and fists. On alarm raised by informant Shakil Ahmed Aslam exhorted Guddu to kill Mohammad. Guddu then caused injury with Churra on the chest of Mohammad, as a result of which Mohammad fell down. Aslam and Guddu respectively inflicted Churra blows on the back and left shoulder of Shahjad (PW. 2). When informant attempted to intervene Aslam gave sword-blow on the back side of his head and Guddu inflicted injury on his chest. Mohammad was removed to the hospital where he died. Autopsy on the dead body of Mohammad was performed. Statements of witnesses under Section 161 were recorded and necessary memos were drawn. The accused were arrested and on completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Judge, Special Court, (Communal Riots) Tonk. Charge under Sections 302, 307, 326, 326/34 and 324, IPC was framed against Guddu and against Aslam 302/34, 307, 326 and 324, IPC. The accused denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 17 witnesses and exhibited the documents In the explanation under Section 313, CrPC, the accused claimed innocence and stated that about 4.00 PM no incident took place at Babron ka Chowk. The accused further stated that about 6.00 PM the injured Shahjad and Shakil, alongwith 25-30 persons came to the house and made assault on them during that incident Shahjad and Shakil sustained injuries. Two witnesses in defence were examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the accused as indicated herein above.
3. Before proceeding further we deem it appropriate to refer to the post-mortem report (Exhibit-P/25) of the deceased Mohammad according to which the deceased had sustained following
ante-mortem injury:-
“Stab wound (penetrating wound) Horizontally placed with tapering of both ends.
1”X1/3rd in its middle 2/3rd and
1/8” at both corners X thorasic cavity deep cutting muscles and chondral part of 7th rib (Lt)
The cause of death, according to Dr. V.K. Nigam (PW. 17), was haemorrhage shock caused by injury to vital organs i.e. Heart with facture of rib leading to excessive
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
