Prabhudayal S/o. Ram Kumar vs State of Rajasthan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Raj) 462

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.
Prabhudayal S/o. Ram Kumar & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 267 of 1992
Decided On : 22-07-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. D.S. Gharsana with Mr. Suresh Nehra.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG, Mr. A.R. Choudhary, P.P.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 304-II, 307, 325/34, 323/34 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 313, 374(2) – Criminal Appeal – Punishment for murder – Attempt to murder – Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Power to examine the accused – Appeals from convictions – Facts of case are that a First Information Report was registered on basis of oral information of complainant to effect that his water tank and that is situated at a distance of 200 from village – Held, Court have perused statements of prosecution witnesses and find that injured witnesses as well as other witnesses specifically state that deceased appellant had inflicted head injury to deceased – According to post-mortem report as well as statement of PW/4 Dr., deceased received only single injury on his dead which was cause of death – There are cross-cases between parties and FIR has been filed against complainant party which is exhibited as Ex.D/4 in which challan was present against complainant party – It has also come on record that a compromise has arrived at between parties – So far as sentence part is concerned, a sentence should neither be too lenient nor disproportionately severe – It is duty of court to impose a proper punishment depending upon degree of criminality and desirability to impose such punishment as a measure of social necessity as a means of deterring other potential offenders – Appeal is partly allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Instant criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.07.1992 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Churu (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court') in Sessions Case No. 22/1992(21/1988), whereby the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellants as under :-

S. No.	Name of accused	Offence	Punishment
1.	Prabhudayal	304-II IPC	Five years’ rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of fine to undergo one month R.I.
		325/34 IPC	Two Year’s rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of fine, to undergo one month R.I.
		323/34 IPC	One month rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to undergone seven days R.I.
2.	Amar Singh	304 II IPC	Five years’ rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of fine to undergo one month R.I.
		325 IPC	Two Year’s rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of fine, to undergo one month R.I.
		323/34 IPC	One month rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to undergone seven days R.I.

2. The concise facts of the case are that a First Information Report was registered on the basis of oral information of complainant Sant Lal to the effect that his water tank and that of Ram kumar is situated at a distance of 200 pavandas from the village. It is alleged that the accused persons had raised some illegal constructions in the catchment area. When the complainant went on the post the accused persons threatened him. In the evening when the complainant alongwith his father Radhakishan and uncle Mahaveer and son Suresh went to the spot, the accused persons who were armed with lathi attacked his father Radhakishan. Suresh also sustained injuries on his hand.

3. On the basis of aforesaid report, FIR was registered about commission of offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 34 IPC. During investigation, the injured Radhakishan succumbed to his injuries. After due investigation, police filed charge sheet against accused-persons for offence under Section 302, 323, 325 IPC. The case was transferred to the court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Churu where the charges of the case were framed for offence under Section 302, 325/34, 323/34 IPC against accused Ram Kumar, for offence under Section 302/34, 325/34 and 323/34 IPC against accused Amar Singh and for offence under Sections 302/34, 325 and 323/34 IPC against accused Prabhudayal. The appellants denied the charges and claimed trial.

4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses and various documents were also exhibited. Thereafter, statement of appellants under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. No witness was examined on the defence side.

5. After scrutiny of the material on record and evidence produced by the prosecution as well as statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., learned trial Court vide judgment dated 31.07.1992 convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated hereinabove.

6. Being aggrieved with the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, the accused-appellants have preferred this criminal appeal before this Court.

7. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants contended that the incident relates back to year 1988 and after this occurrence, the complainant party murdered the accused appellant Ram Kumar and a cross FIR was also registered against the complainant party. It is argued that a specific allegation has been made by the injured and other witnesses that only accused Ram Kumar inflicted head injury by lathi to the deceased. As per post-mortem report also and statement of PW/4 Dr. Sahadev Singh, deceased received single injury on his head which was the cause of death which has been assigned to accused Ram kumar who

Click Here to Read the rest of this document