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

2021 Supreme(Raj) 203

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, RAMESHWAR VYAS, JJ.
Jagdish Son Of Harji Gurjar, By Caste Gurjar - Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through P.P. - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1005/2017, 806/2017, 876/2017, 939/2017
Decided on : 27-08-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashvin Garg, Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan, Mr. Mukesh Chouhan, Mr. Narendra Prasad Meena, Mr. Surendra Sharma, Mr. Vijay Choudhary
For the Respondent: Ms. Rekha Madnani, Mr. Suresh Sahni, Mr. R.M. Sharma

Point of law: only permissible view would be to hold each accused responsible for his individual act. As the incident took place at the spur of moment after the violence acts committed by the members of the complainant party at the Panchayat Bhawan, the accused cannot be clothed with either the knowledge or intention to commit murder of deceased Mangilal

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374, 313 and 437A –Indian penal Code,1860 – Sections 148 ,302 ,323/149 and 374 – Punishment for murder - Appellants herein above have been convicted and sentenced as below by the learned trial Court. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentenced awarded to them, the appellants have preferred these appeals - Whether he or had gone to village Baniyani for submitting their tenders –

Finding of the Court:

They were told that tender boxes would be opened at but then an information was given that as Sarpanch and were absent, tenders would not be opened - While they were coming out, accused persons launched an assault on informant and his companions - In cross examination witness claimed that he had filed a tender but then he accepted that tender was submitted by - Witness admitted that a criminal case was registered against them for indulging in violence and causing damage at Panchayat Bhawan. - Witness stated that submitted their tenders but later on they were told that tenders would not be opened and date would be intimated. - Fight took place thereafter. In cross-examination witness feigned ignorance as to what was work for which tender was submitted –

Result: Appeals partly allowed

JUDGMENT :

MEHTA, J.

1. These four appeals have been preferred against the judgment dated 20.04.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) No.2, Kota and thus the same are being heard and decided together by this common judgment. The appellants herein above have been convicted and sentenced as below by the learned trial Court. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentenced awarded to them, the appellants have preferred these appeals under Section 374 Cr.P.C.

    APPEAL No.1005/2017:

Accused appellants Jagdish, Dayaram and Shambhu Dayal convicted for the offences punishable under:-

(i) Sec.148 IPC: Sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years.

(ii) Sec.323/149 IPC: Sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year.

(iii) Sec.302/149 IPC: Sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(II) APPEAL NO. 806/2017:

Accused appellant Mahaveer convicted for the offences punishable under:-

(i) Sec.148 IPC: Sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years.

(ii) Sec.323/149 IPC: Sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year.

(iii) Sec.302/149 IPC: Sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(III) Appeal No. 876/2017:

Accused appellants Ashok & Girraj convicted for the offences punishable under:-

(i) Sec.148 IPC : Sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years.

(ii) Sec.323/149 IPC: Sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year.

(iii) Sec.302/149 IPC: Sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(IV) Appeal No. 939/2017:

Accused appellant Pappu @ Mahendra convicted for offences punishable under :-

(i) Sec.148 IPC : Sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years.

(ii) Sec.323/149 IPC: Sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year.

(iii) Sec.302/149 IPC: Sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

2. Succinctly stated the facts relevant and essential for decision of these appeals are noted herein below. A Parcha Bayan (Ex.P9) of injured Mahesh Gurjar (PW8) was recorded by ASI of Police Station, Kethaun (Kota) at M.B.S. Hospital, Kota wherein, the injured alleged that on the same day, he alongwith his brother Mangi Lal (deceased), maternal uncle Hiralal (PW6) and Mahaveer (PW18) had gone from Rangbadi, Kota in a jeep to the Gram Panchayat Baniyani for submitting tenders. They reached Baniyani at 12:30 p.m. and submitted their tenders. The time for accepting the tenders was up to 1:00 p.m. At about 2:30 p.m. they were informed that the Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch were not available and thus, the tenders would not be opened on the same day and the next date would be informed later on. After this information, the informant and his companions were moving out from Gram Panchayat when the accused Jagdish, Daya Ram, Ramesh, Devlal, Ashok, Girraj, Harji and Pappu Gurjar came there and started hurling abuses towards them and also launched an attack. Jagdish was armed with farsa like an axe, Dayaram was having a gandasi and the other accused were holding iron rods and pipes. It was further alleged that Jagdish and Dayaram inflicted blows with their respective weapons i.e. axe and gandasi on the head of Mangi Lal who fell down. Thereafter, the remaining accused gave a beating to the victim by iron rods and pipes. The informant tried to intervene, on which he too was beaten all over the body. Hiralal also tried to intervene but he also met the same fate. While the incident was going on, Smt. Bhuri Bai, mother of Jagdish and Sugna Bai W/o Shambhu came there and they also participated in the assault. It was alleged that the accused persons had launched the assault on the complainant-party without there being any

    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
    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