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

2009 Supreme(Raj) 2157

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
A.M.Kapadia, Shri Deo Narayan Thanvi, JJ.
Banwari Lal & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 1986.
Decided On : 04-08-2009

Advocates:
For the Appellant:Mr. Vineet Jain, Advocate.
For the Party: Mr. K.R. Bishnoi, Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – S. 302 – Murder – Conviction – Intention to cause death was not proved – self – defense theory was rejected by the Trial Court – deceased suffered from only one head injury by the accused – No offence under – S. 302 Indian Penal Code was established – Conviction changed – Accused guilty under – S. 304 part II – Appeal Permitted to some extent.

JUDGMENT

1. - Challenge in this appeal filed under Sec.374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', for short) is to the correctness of the judgment and order dated 28.02.1986 rendered in Sessions Case No.63 of 1983 by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta, by which appellant No.1 Banwarilal S/o. Shri Rughnath, original accused No.1 ('A-1', for short) has been convicted for commission of the offence under Sec.302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC', for short) and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment of one year whereas appellant No.2 to 6 i.e. Kailash, Ramdeo, Rughnath Ram, Kamla and Bholki original accused No.2 to 6 (A-2 to A-6) have been convicted for the offence under Section 148, 323/149 and 325/149 IPC and they have been extended benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act and each one of them has been directed to pay by way of compensation Rs.400 to Panchu Ram and Rs.200 to Smt. Goran within 25 days.

2. The prosecution case, as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial is as under:

2.1 On 12.10.1983, Gokalram (PW1) lodged a verbal report at Police Station, Thawla, stating inter-alia that the New Bera of Ahirs is situated at the outskirts of Nimbola in Kankad, which is divided into seven parts and the water is taken from the well turn by turn. It was alleged that on 12.10.1983 the turn of taking water from the well was of his uncle Panchuram but Rugnath A-4 told that his crops of 'Mirchi' and 'Shakarkand' urgently required water and on this there was altercation between them. It was further alleged that at about 7 O'clock in the evening when he, Gordhanram and Panchuram were smoking sitting near the well, at that time Jawara came there from his field and thereafter came accused Kailash, Ramdev, Banwari, Rugnathram, Bholki, Kamla and Gyarsi armed with lathies and kassis with common intention and started quarelling. Banwari gave a blow on the head of Jawara from the reverse side of Kassi due to which Jawara fell down and the other accused also gave blows with lathis, then on hearing hue & cry; he, Gordhanram, Chhittar, Nathu, Bashir, Ramlal, Smt. Gora and Panchuram rushed and intervened to save, then the accused also gave blows on them and they also received injuries. Jawara was lying unconscious on the earth and the accused assuming him having died, fled away. Thereafter Jawara was taken to the hospital on camel cart but Jawara died on the way so they brought the dead body of Jawara to the Police Station.

2.2 On the basis of aforesaid report, police registered a case vide FIR No.75/83 at Police Station Thawara against accused persons for commission of the offence under Sec.302 IPC and started investigation.

2.3 On completion of investigation, accused were chargesheeted in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Merta, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Merta as the offence punishable under Sec.302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

2.4 The learned Sessions Judge ('trial Court', for short) framed charges against accused A-1 for commission of offence punishable under Sec.302 IPC and against rest of the accused for offence under Secs. 148, 323/149 and 325/149 IPC

2.5 The charges were read over and explained to the accused persons, who pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried, therefore, they were put to trial.

2.6 To prove the culpability of the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses and relied upon their oral testimony and also produced number of documents which were relied upon during the course of trial which were exhibited and read in evidence.

2.7 The trial Court, thereafter, recorded statements of accused under Sec.313 of the Code, wherein also accused pleaded not guilty and denied the case of prosecution in toto and stated that a false case has been filed against them. Accused A-1 in his statement stated that in the evening he was going to his hom



















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