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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Pankaj Bhandari, Anoop Kumar Dhand, JJ.
Bhupendra Singh S/o Shri Ratan Lal– Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2018, D.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 259 of 2018
Decided On : 21-02-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Anil Kumar Upman
For the Respondent: Mr. Javed Chaudhary, AGA.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374(2) and 313 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 341, 323 and 325 - Probation of fenders Act 1958 - Section 4 and 5 – Criminal Trial – Offence of Murder – Injuries/Wounds/Weapons – Appeal against conviction - informant he received a telephonic call of Bhoor Singh Jatav who told that his son has expired in a quarrel taken place in 'Barat'- Immediately after getting the information, he reached Government Hospital,, where Bhoor Singh, Sangram Singh, Sher Singh, Sunil and other 'baratis', residents of the vicinity met him and they told that at the time of departure of Barat, Bachchu Singh, Govinda, Ghanshyam, Bijendra, Ramdhan, Kedar, Kailash, Prakash gave beating to his son-by 'Sariya' (iron rod) and also gave beating from kicks and fists. Bachchu Singh was armed with 'Sariya' (iron rod) and rest of the persons gave beating to Vikram Singh from kicks and fists. When Sangram Singh, Sher Singh, Sunil and Bhoor Singh were tried to intervene then these persons also gave beating to them with kicks and fists, due to which these persons also sustained injuries – Held, Court find that there was no premeditation to the incident and fatal injury was inflicted to Vikram by appellant by 'lathi', which is commonly carried in villages. Based on which, it cannot be said that he was carrying 'lathi' with him with intention to commit crime. The single injury inflicted by the appellant proved fatal, as has been deposed by PW-10 Dr., who conducted Post- mortem upon the body of the deceased and prepared Post- mortem report - On a careful perusal of the testimony of the material prosecution witnesses, we find that there was no premeditation to the incident and the fatal injury was inflicted to Vikram by the appellant by 'lathi', which is commonly carried in villages. Based on which, it cannot be said that he was carrying 'lathi' with him with intention to commit the crime. The single injury inflicted by the appellant proved fatal, as has been deposed by PW-10 Dr., who conducted the Post- mortem upon the body of the deceased and prepared the Post- mortem report - Impugned judgment of trial Court stands modified - Appeal partly allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.

Reportable :

1. Both these criminal appeals arise out of a common judgment, hence same are being decided by a common judgment.

2. Both the criminal appeals have been filed by the accused appellants under Section 374(2) Cr.PC against the judgment dated 11.01.2018 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2 Bharatpur (for short 'the learned trial court') in Sessions Case No.42/2016 (State of Rajasthan v. Bijendra & Ors.), whereby the learned trial court while acquitting appellants Bijendra Singh & Ghanshyam for the offence under section 302 IPC, extended benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of of fenders Act 1958 (for short 'the Act of 1958') for the offence under sections 341, 323 and 325 IPC and directed them to deposit compensation of Rs. 25,000/- each, under Section 5 of the Act of the Probation of fenders Act, 1958 and also directed that out of the said amount of compensation, Rs.40,000/- be paid to the wife of the deceased Smt. Neeraj. The learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 11.01.2018 convicted and sentenced the accused appellant Bhupendra as under:-

Conviction for the offence under Section

Sentence Awarded

Fine Amount

Default in payment of fine

341 IPC

One mont simple imprisonment

-

-

323 IPC

One year Rigorous imprisonment

-

-

325 IPC

Three years' rigorous imprisonment

1000/-

One month rigorous

302 IPC

Life imprisonment

50,000/-

Six months' rigorous imprisonment

3. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

4. Briefly, the facts arising out from the written report (Ex.P1) submitted by informant Rameshwar (PW1) are that on 7.7.2014, 'Barat' of Satish and Lokesh, sons of Ramdhan Jatav came to Bharatapur Chandan Garden Marriage Home, Near Sogariya Mohalla, Bharatpur. In the said 'Barat' his son Vikram Singh also came. In the night, on 8.7.2014 at about 1.30 A.M., he received a telephonic call of Bhoor Singh Jatav who told that his son has expired in a quarrel taken place in 'Barat'. Immediately after getting the information, he at around 3:00 p.m. reached Government Hospital, Bharatpur, where Bhoor Singh, Sangram Singh, Sher Singh, Sunil and other 'baratis', residents of the vicinity met him and they told that at the time of departure of Barat, Bachchu Singh, Govinda, Ghanshyam, Bijendra, Ramdhan, Kedar, Kailash, Prakash gave beating to his son- Vikram Singh by 'Sariya' (iron rod) and also gave beating from kicks and fists. Bachchu Singh was armed with 'Sariya' (iron rod) and rest of the persons gave beating to Vikram Singh from kicks and fists. When Sangram Singh, Sher Singh, Sunil and Bhoor Singh were tried to intervene then these persons also gave beating to them with kicks and fists, due to which these persons also sustained injuries. In injured condition Vikram Singh was taken to Arora Hospital, where he was declared dead. Dead body of Vikram Singh was kept in the mortuary of the Government Hospital. His son Vikram Singh was murdered by Bachchu Singh, Govinda, Ghanshyam, Vijendra, Ramdhan, Kedar, Kailash and Prakash from 'Sariya' (iron rod) and kicks and fists. Upon this written report (Ex.P1), first information report No.574/2014 (Ex.P23) was registered at Police Station, Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur for the offence under Sections 143, 323, 341 and 302 IPC against the accused persons and other co-accused persons. After conclusion of investigation the Police submitted charge-sheet against Bhupendra Singh, Bijendra Singh and Ghanshyam for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 325, 302 IPC. Since the co-accused Bachchu Singh was absconding, therefore, investigation was kept pending against him under Section 173(8) Cr.PC. Learned Trial Court framed the charges against the above-named accused persons for the offence under sections 323, 341, 325 and 302/34 IPC, who denied the charges,

        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