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

2010 Supreme(Raj) 1184

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
S.P.Pathak, K.S.Chaudhari, JJ.
Narayan Lal - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 1025 of 2003.
Decided On : 5-02-2010

Advocates:
For the Appellant: S.L. Songara, Amicus Curiae.
For the State: Rekha Madnani, P.P.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – S. 302 and 304II – It has been held that the accused appellant shall be convicted under – S. 304 P – II IPC instead of 302 and thus the sentence has been reduced to already offered by him and he is convicted under – S. 304 P – II – Parchabayan clearly states that the two accused persons had come to the school and they gave blow with knife to the deceased – The statement of PW 4 clearly state that the accused appellant had caused injuries on the shoulders and back side of deceased and the injuries were not enough to cause death – The PW 4 has also stated that the injury caused in the stomach was given by co – accused – The daces died after two days in hospital – The intention is proved but the offence cannot be said to be murder clearly – Culpable homicide is proved.

JUDGMENT

1. The accused-appellant Narayan Lal has filed the present criminal appeal from jail under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.2.2002 recorded by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Kota in Sessions Case No. 25/2002 by which the appellant has been awarded imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of which to further undergo three months simple imprisonment.Brief facts for the disposal of the present appeal are that a parcha-bayan (Ex.P-9) of deceased Yogesh was recorded in MBS Hospital, Kota by PW-12 Kailash Chand, ASI on 26.1.2002 at about 11.45 a.m. In the parcha-bayan, it was alleged that three days prior to the incident at about 12.00 O'clock in the night, accused Dhiru @ Cylinder in the drunken state was creating scene in front of his house. Dhiru @ Cylinder was asked by the mother of the deceased not to create scene and closed the door of the house but Dhiru @ Cylinder pushed the door and also rang the bell of the house. It is also alleged that after some time Dhiru @ Cylinder left the place. On the other day, deceased along with his mother went to the house of Dhiru @ Cylinder and made complaint to his father. It is further alleged that on the day of incident i.e. on 26.1.2002, while the deceased along with his mother was attending the function organised in St. Dayanand School on the occasion of Republic Day at about 10.30 a.m., Dhiru @ Cylinder along with Narayan (present accused appellant) came at the place of function in the school having knife and katar in their hand. Narayan with the intention to kill him inflicted first knife blow on his left shoulder and another blow in his armpit and when the deceased turned to save himself, Dhiru @ Cylinder inflicted a blow which caused injury at the left side of abdomen. On receiving injuries, the deceased shouted. His mother and other persons came there. On seeing them, the accused ran away. It is also alleged that the incident was seen by the persons who were attending the function.

2. On the basis of above parcha-bayan, FIR No. 42/2002 was registered at police station Mahaveer Nagar, Kota on 26.1.2002 for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC. During the course of treatment, Yogesh died on 30.1.2002, therefore, section 302 IPC was also added. One of the accused Dhiru @ Cylinder being minor, his case was tried by the Juvenile Justice Board and after finding him guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC, a punishment of fine of Rs. 5,000/- was imposed upon him. The fine imposed upon him was deposited by him on 4.9.2009, the day on which he was convicted by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Kota. During the course of investigation, post-mortem was conducted on the dead-body of deceased Yougesh.

3. PW-2 Dr. Ashok Mundra, has conducted post-mortem and prepared post-mortem report (Ex.P-2). In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was due to septicemic shock as a result of ante-mortem injury to Jejunum sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of life.

4. After conducting usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC before the concerned Magistrate and thereafter case was committed to the court of Sessions and from there it came for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Kota who framed charge under Section 302/34 IPC against the accused-appellant on 21.3.2002 to which the accused denied and claimed trial.

5. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 14 witnesses and also got exhibited 11 documents (Ex.P- 1 to Ex.P-11).

6. After close of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.PC. was recorded on 28.8.2002 to explain the circumstances against him. In his explanation, the accused denied the prosecution case and took the plea of alibi. No evidence in defence was produced.

7. Lear










































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