SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Raj) 64

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : K.S.Lodha,R.S.Verma
HANUMAN - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Respondent
D. B. Cr. Appeal 450 Of 1982
Decided On : 02/27/1989

Advocates Appeared:
BHAGWATI PRASAD, R.N.MATHUR, S.S.VYAS

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Arms Act - Section 27 - Offences under - Conviction of appellant - Appeal against - Incident seen by Ram Chandra, Mani Ram and Devi LaI - Prosecution examining only Mani Ram and Devi Lal inimical witnesses - Ram Chandra, an independent witness, not examined - Facts showing that present murder was borne out on long standing enemity between two factions - Thus Ram Chandra might be reluctant to come forward as a witness -

       Held: Non-examination of Ram Chandra in this case should not be a ground for rejection of the evidence of Mani Ram & Devi Lal, if their testimony is otherwise reliable (Para 13)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Arms Act - Section 27 - Conviction of appellant under - Non-linkage of empty cartridge left at the spot by appellant with the gun recovered from appellant- Whether a good ground for rejecting testimony of eyewitnesses? (No, if the same is other same found trustworthy). (Para 14)

       (iii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Arms Act - Section 27- Conviction of appellant under - based on evidence of eyewitnesses Mani Ram & Devi LaI - They improved their previous versions given to police by introducing a second lalkara - Whether makes them untruthful witness? (No this was done to rope other accused who have been acquitted) (Para 16) - Eye-witnesses found inimical witnesses - Evidence examined with good deal of care and caution - Whether trustworthy? (Yes) - Result: Appeal dismissed.

       Held: We are of the view that in this case, the testimony of Mani Ram and Devi Lal is cogent and trustworthy when they say that they saw the appellant firing the fatal shot at the deceased Phoosa Ram and also saw him fleeing away with his companions with a gun in hand. (Para 28)

       Held consequently: In view of the above discussion, this appeal fails and is dismissed (Para: 30)

       

Judgment


VERMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by Hanuman is directed against the judgment dated 12-11-82 of learned Addi. Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh exercising jurisdiction in the Court of Sessions, Ganganagar whereby the appellant has been convicted of offences under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Indian Arms Act. Under the first count, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two years. Under the second count he has been sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The judgment has further directed confiscation of rifle along with a cartridge and licence thereof recovered at the instance of the appellant.

( 2 ) THE gist of the prosecution story is that on 19-4-82, P. W. 1 Mani Ram r/o Jakhadawali had gone to Suratgarh to attend hearing of a criminal case pertaining to murder of one Indian son of Magha Rani, a co-accused and father of the appellant. In this case besides Mani Ram, there were 12 other accused persons. Deceased Phoosa Ram uncle of Mani Ram was also one of them. He had also gone to attend the hearing of the said case in the court of Munsif and Adi. Magistrate Suratgarh along with P. W. 2 Devi Lal his nephew. The prosecution story is that the hearing of the case was over by 11 a. m. and thereafter P. W. 1 Mani Ram P. W. 2 Devi Lal and deceased Phoosa Ram went to the place of one Dr. Agarwal to obtain certain medicine. They received medicine from the place of Dr. Agarwal and started for the house of Birbal Ram, also known as Pradhan. The other coaccused of Mani Ram in that case had sometime earlier gone to the house of the said Pradhan by a jeep but these three persons, namely, Mani Ram, Devi Lal and deceased Phoosa Ram logged behind because they had to go to the place of Dr. Agarwal.

( 3 ) THE prosecution case further is that at about 11. 30 a. m. , Mani Ram, Phoosa Ram deceased and Devi Lal reached the square known as Dr. Goyals Square. Mani Ram and Devi Lal were going bit ahead while Phoosa Ram was following them at a distance of about ten steps. All of a sudden Magha Ram and Devi Lal heard a lalkara Dekhta kya hay Dusman ja rahe hai Maar Goli. On this lalkara; both of them, namely, Mani Ram and Devi Lal turned back and saw that accused persons Magha Ram, Birbal, Hazari along with present appellant Hanuman were standing at the back of the deceased Phoosa Ram. As soon as Magha Ram and Devi Lal turned back, accused Magha Ram, Birbal and Hazari exhorted Hanuman to fire at Phoosa Ram. On this appellant Hanuman, who was already armed with a gun, placed the barrel of the gun at the back of Phoosa Ram and fired a shot with the result that Phoosa Ram fell down and dead at the spot. The appellant and his co-accused Magha Ram, Birbal and Hazari ran away. Mani Ram and Devi Lal chased them for some distance however, they could not catch hold of the appellant and his companions and therefore came back to the spot where Phoosa Ram was lying dead. The incident was also witnessed by one Ram Chandra r/o 34 MOD. Devi Lal stayed with the dead body of Phoosa Ram while Mani Ram went to Police Station, Suratgarh, which is situated at a distance of about 1 km. from the spot. Mani Ram lodged an oral report the same day at 11. 55 a. m. with P. W. 4 Bhajan Singh, Station House Officer. Bhajan Singh himself scribed this report Ex. P. 1. He read over the same to Mani Ram and obtained signatures of Mani Ram thereon. Upon this report, he registered a case under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of Indian Arms Act. He, thereafter, immediately proceeded to the scene of occurrence. Mani Ram also followed him. Bhajan Singh saw the dead body of Phoosa Ram lying in the market place of Suratgarh Town some distance away from the Square known as Dr. Goyals Square. He prepared a site plan Ex. P. 2 with reg


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top