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

1992 Supreme(Raj) 34

Rajasthan High Court
Kanta Bhatnagar and RaJendra Prasad SAxena, JJ.
Surjan Singh and others - Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan (8) - Respondents
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 1988.
Decided On : January 17, 1992

Advocates Appeared:
M.M. Singhvi, for Surjan Singh and Umed Singh appellant M.L. Garg for Man Singh and Ashu Ram appellant S.M. Singhvi, Public Prosecutor

Headnote:(a) Cr.P.C, 1973 — Secs. 154 and 158 — No explanation why copy of F.I.R. reached the concerned court with a delay of three days—Other facts are there which raise suspicion about F.I.R. being the pre-investigation document. (Para 19)(b) Evidence Act — Section 5 — Circumstantial evidence — Blood was so profusely bleeding that the plaster of the wall got stained with blood —Cannot be believed that not a drop of blood fell on the ground — Prosecution witnesses have deliberately changed the site of the event — Ulterior motive of depriving the accused of plausible self defence. (Paras 21 and 22)(c) Evidence Act — Section 5 — Circumstantial evidence — Weapon of offence Barchi recovered and kept — Not produced in court or before the doctor — Witnesses refer its where about — It was recovered in pursuance of information furnished by Mansingh-accused — This recovery connected with the crime — Its non-production is a damaging factor for the prosecution story. (Para 34) Appeal accepted

       

BHATNAGAR, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment dated May 16, 1988 passed by the Sessions Judge, Churu by which appellant Surjan Singh, Man Singh, Umed Singh and Ashu Ram were convicted under section 302/34 I.P.C. and the first three were sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 250/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months R.I. Appellant Ashu Ram was sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo six months R.I.

2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that four days prior to the incident of giving a beating to Ganesh Singh in the night of January 21, 1986 Bhanwar Singh, brother of appellant Man Singh entered the house of Mohan Singh, brother of deceased Ganesh Singh and his hiding in the house was detected by Umed Kanwar Wife of Mohan Singh. She raised a cry at which Raghuvir Singh (P.W. 3) son of deceased Ganesh Singh went there and gave a beating to Bhanwar Singh which caused annoyance to the family members of Bhanwar Singh. That, on January 23, 1986 at about 9.00 P.M. Ganesh Singh went to the house of Phoola Ram (P.W. 1) and asked him to work with him as labourer. Phoola Ram expressed his inability as he was already employed as labourer by Abbas. At that time Magha Ram (P.W. 2) brother of Phoola Ram was also present and the two brother were warming themselves as the dhuni (furnace). Ganesh Singh went out when he had gone to a distance of 6-7 paundwas, he was surrounded by the appellants and three others viz. Bhadar Singh, Kishan Singh and Mohan. The assailants gave a beating with barchhi, lathis and Jeis. On hearing the cry of Ganesh Singh, Phoola Ram and Magha Ram came out of the house and saw the assailants giving a beating to Ganesh Singh . Ganesh Singh fell down. Phoola Ram went to the house of Ganesh Singh and informed about the incident. Pappu, son of Ganesh Singh went to the site. Raghuvir Singh, another son of Ganesh Singh also reached there. Ganesh Singh was first taken to his house in a camel cart and then to Churu Hospital in a jeep by Raghuvir Singh, Kalyan Singh and Himmat Singh. Phoola Ram also accompanied them. On receiving information about Ganesh Singh being admitted in hospital in injured condition, Sadhu Singh (P.W. 13), Station House Officer, Police Station, Churu went to the hospital in the same night and found Ganesh Singh unconscious. He could not therefore record his statement. The S.H.O. recorded the statement of Phoola Ram and on the basis of that parchabayan Ex. P/1/F.I.R. Later on Ex. P/2 was chalked out. Dr. Chiranjilal (P.W. 6), Medical Jurist, Bhartiya Hospital, Churu examined the injuries of Ganesh Singh and prepared the injury report Ex.P/13. The Doctor noted following injuries on his person :—

1. Incised wound present on left parietal region of 10 cm x 1 cm x bone deep.

2. Incised wound present on left parietal region of 2 cm x 1 cm x bone deep.

3. Incised wound of 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on left parietal region.

4. Incised wound of 4 em x 1 em x bone deep on left temporal region.

5. A lacerated wound of 7 em x 1 em x bone deep present on right parietal region.

6. A lacerated wound of 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep present on right parietal region.

7. A incised wound present on lateral aspect of left thigh of 3 x 0.4 x 1 cm.

8. There are four bruises on lateral aspect of the chest left side measuring 8-10 cm. on length and each 2.5 cm. in breadth with bone crepitus present.

9. A lacerated wound present on dorsal aspect of right band of 4 cm x - cm. x 0.3 cm.

10. A lacerated wound present on lateral malleolus on left leg of size 1 cm. x 1 cm x 0.3. cm.

3. According to the Doctor, Injuries No. 1,2,3,4, and 7 could be caused by sharp edged weapon. He advised x-ray.

4. Ganesh Singh succumbed to the injuries sustained by him on January 24,1986. Dr. Vijay Swaroop Bhargava (P.W. 5), Medical Jurist, conducted the autopsy over the dead body of Ganesh Singh. The Doctor noted following injuries on his person :—

1. Inc













































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