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

2008 Supreme(Raj) 1525

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
R.C.Gandhi, Chatra Ram Jat, JJ.
Ram Ratan and Another - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 979 of 2002 and 572 of 2003.
Decided On : 13-02-2008

Advocates:
For the Accused-Appellants:Suresh Sahni, Advocate.
For the Party: Brahmanand Sandu, Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – S. 161Indian Penal Code, 1860 – S. 148 and 302 – Appeal against the conviction and sentence. The sword which was recovered showed no connection between the accused and the commission of the crime. In postmortem report no injury to show be caused by the sword. Preparation of the site plan not according to the knowledge of investigation officer but according to the witness instance. The statement under – S. 161 Cr.PC is contrary to the provisions ant thus the sentence liable to be set aside, the appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT

1. - These appeals have been directed against the judgment and Order dated 23rd July, 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 (Fast Track), Kota in Sessions Trial No. 55/2001, whereby out of 29 accused, he convicted twenty three accused and released twenty one by extending the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and two are sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. Four accused have been acquitted of the charges, whereas two have died during trial. The present appeal has been preferred by the accused convicted and sentenced for commission of offence under Sections 302 and 148 IPC.

2. The prosecution story is that on 19.8.2002, PW 28 Bhanwar Lal, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station Budhadeet received wireless message that occurrence has taken place in village Jhatoli and the injured have been shifted to Hospital at Sultanpur. On receiving this information, he proceeded to the Hospital, where Ram Kalyan, PW 6 submitted a written report, Ex.P-24 to him at 2.15 PM, stating therein that "in their village, the mother of Kishore passed away three days prior and on 19.8.1992 they went to attend the third day ceremony at the cremation ground, where, at about 8-9 AM all of a sudden accused Rain Ratan S/o Prabhu Lal, Ram Kishan S/o Bhairulal, Ramniwas S/o Prabhu Lal, Ram Kishan S/o Bhairulal, Prahlad S/o Prabhu, Ram Dev S/o Motilal, Babulal S/o Motilal, Latoor S/o Ram Kishan, Ram Charan S/o Hajarilal, Rajendra S/o Gobarilal, Babulal S/o Gobarilal, Dhanraj S/o Prabhulal, Satya Narayan S/o Prabhulal, Chandrabhan S/o Gendilal, Ramlal S/o Chandrabhan, Ram Gopal S/o Chandrabhan, Dev Chand S/o Chandrabhan, Ram Kanwar S/o Nandan, Badrilal S/o Ram Kanwar, Moharpal S/o Ram Kanwar, Dev Lal S/o Ghasilal, Ram Swaroop S/c Ghasilal. Devi Shanker S/o Madho, Khemraj S/o Devi Shanker, Ganga Ram S/o Devishankar, Shambhudayal S/o Kishanla, residents of Jhotali duly armed with weapons i.e. Batons, Gandasi (axe) and Dhariya appeared on the spot with intention to kill them and started assaulting them. Accused Ram Ratan inflicted blows by sword on the hands and legs of Ramhet. Accused Ramesh also inflicted Gandasi blows on the hands and legs of Ramhet. Accused Babu inflicted gandasi on the head of Mahaveer and accused Ram Charan struck on his head and legs. Accused Rajendra struck blows by gandasi on the head of Ramesh and Prahlad assaulted Rajendra on his head and hands, as a result of which Dhannalal, Gopilal, Prabhulal, Ramesh and Mahaveer sustained numerous injuries. It is further stated that when complainant Ramkalyan tried to intervene, accused Ram Karan caused injuries by baton on his left palm and accused Shokaran caused injury on his left shoulder. Accused Mathura also caused injury on his head. This incident was witnessed by Chhitarlal, Bhaktari and Ram Prasad of village Gokulpura who were present on spot. On the basis of this report, FIR No. 153/92 came to be registered. The Investigating Officer started investigation. During investigation, the site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared, the accused were arrested and on their disclosure statements, sword was recovered from accused appellant Ramratan and gandasi from accused appellant Ramesh. Recoveries were also made from other accused. The blood stained clothes of the deceased were seized. The weapons of offence coated with blood were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The report of the FSL was collected and after completing other formalities, the challan was presented before the Court. The Court framed charges against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and were put to trial.

3. During trial, the prosecution examined all 33 witnesses cited in the %challan. PW 1 Ramesh, PW 2 Gopilal, PW 6 Ram Kalyan, PW 7 Chhitar Lal, PW 8 Bheru Lal, PW 9 Ram Chandra, PW 10 Ram Prasad, PW 11 Kishan Lal, PW 12 Mahavir, PW 14 Dhanna Lal and PW 15 Prabhulal have been cited as eye witnesses to prove the occurrence. At the instance of Ramesh accuse















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top