Back
2009 Supreme(Raj) 2574
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Narendra Kumar Jain, Raghuvendra S.Rathore, JJ.
Illiyas & Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2002.
Decided On : 18-12-2009
For the Party: J.R. Bijarnia, P.P.
In the absence of any intention to cause death, the author of an injury that results in death can be convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - [SECTION 302, 307, 304 PART II, 148, 149 IPC] - [SECTION 27 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT] - [SECTION 323, 324 IPC] - Conviction and sentence of appellants under various sections of IPC - Challenge - Legality and correctness of the impugned judgment - Appreciation of evidence - Applicability of provisions of Section 300 IPC - Intention to cause death - Liability of accused for causing death - Offence committed - Quantum of sentence.
Fact of the Case:
16 accused appellants were convicted and sentenced for offences under Sections 302, 307, 148, and 149 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the accused appellants attacked the complainant and his family members with weapons, resulting in the death of one Juhuri. The accused appellants denied the charges and claimed trial.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the recoveries of weapons were not proved by independent witnesses, and that the injuries sustained by the deceased and other injured persons were simple in nature. The court also found that there was no pre-meditation or intention on the part of the accused persons to inflict injuries on the deceased or any other injured person.
Issues: 1. Whether the offence under Section 148 IPC can be said to be made out or not? 2. Whether accused appellant Majid is liable to be convicted under Section 307 IPC and other accused appellants U/s. 307/149 IPC? 3. Whether accused appellant Abdul Rehman is liable to be convicted under Section 302 IPC and the other accused appellants under Section 302/149 IPC?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the genesis of the occurrence beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that there was no common intention or object of the accused appellants to inflict injury on the person of the deceased. 2. The court held that appellant Majid could be convicted for offence under Section 323 IPC for having caused simple injury to injured Ibrahim, but that he was entitled to acquittal on the basis of compromise. 3. The court held that appellant Abdul Rehman was liable to be convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and not under Section 302 IPC simplicitor, as there was no intention on the part of any of the accused persons including Abdul Rehman to inflict such injury on the person of deceased.
Final Decision: The appeal of all the appellants (15 in number), except appellant Abdul Rehman is allowed. Their conviction and sentence under Section 302/149, 307 or 307/149 and 148 IPC is, set aside. Appellants (1) Iliyas, (2) Surajmal, (3) Kaasam, (4) Sumer Khan,(5) Sirdar, (6) Dalsher, (7) Janu, (8) Fazru, (9) Deen Mohammad, (10) Jumme Khan, (11) Sheru, (12) Abdul, (13) Ajmat, (14) Ruzdar and (15) Majid are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged and they need not to surrender. The appeal of appellant Abdul Rehman is partly allowed. He is acquitted of the offence under Section 302,307 and 148 IPC. However, he is convicted under Section 304 part II IPC and is sentenced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. He is in judicial custody, therefore, it is directed that he be released forthwith, if his custody is not required in any other case.
Accused appellant Abdul Rehman:
U/s. 302 IPC : to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 307/149 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 148 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months;
Accused appellant Majid:
U/s. 302/149 IPC : to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 307 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 148 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months;
Accused appellants : Iliyas, Surajmal, Kaasam, Sumer Khan, Sirdar, Dalsher, Janu, Fazru, Deen Mohammad, Jumme Khan, Sheru, Abdul, Ajmat & Ruzdar :
U/s. 302/149 IPC : to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 307/149 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
U/s. 148 IPC : to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months;
