Honble YADAV, J.–This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.6.91 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar in sessions case No.46/89 whereby he found accused- appellant Prahlad guilty of the offence under Sec.302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months imprisonment. Learned Additional Sessions Judge found appellant Mangtu Ram and Puran Ram guilty of the offence under Sec. 323 IPC and sentenced both of them for six months RI. As both the above named accused persons were in judicial custody from 6.9.89 to 30.11.89, the learned Additional Sessions Judge directed to reduce the said period from six months sentence awarded to them. Accused-appellant Prahlad was acquitted under Section 325 IPC and both accused-appellants Mangtu Ram and Puran Ram were acquitted under Section 302/34 IPC and under Section 325/34 IPC.

(2). We noticed from perusal of the record that during the pendency of the appeal appellant No.1 Mangtu Ram had expired, but no order to abate the appeal against him has been passed. We therefore pass an order, abating the appeal against him.

(3). In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case now this Court is called upon to decide the appeal filed by appellants No. 2 and 3 namely Prahlad and Puran Ram on merits.

(4). The prosecution case at the trial was that PW 1 Bagdawat Ram gave an oral information on 4.9.89 at 12.10 AM at Police Station Nohar to the effect that on 3.9.89 when his deceased brother Bajrang Ram was playing `Chopar at village Pandusar in Guhad under a pipal tree with Pabudan and Sadhuram etc. at about 4.00 PM, accused Mangtu Ram came there and asked to Bajrang Ram as to why he had uprooted the grass from his field. His deceased brother Bajrang Ram answered to accused Mangtu Ram that he has not gone to his field. Mangtu Ram accused started to abuse him who warned him not to abuse upon which accused Mangtu Ram gave him teeth bite on his left thumb. Bajrang Ram deceased threw Mangtu Ram on the ground. It is alleged that other persons sitting there intervened and both of them were separated. His deceased brother Bajrang Ram narrated the aforesaid facts to PW 1 first informant at his house whereupon he advised him not to quarrel.

(5). On the same day at about 5 or 5.30 PM when his deceased brother Bajrang Ram was going towards the house of Jora Ram Chippa from his house through lane he heard noise at his house. When he came out from his house he saw his deceased brother Bajrang Ram surrounded by accused-appellants Mangtu Ram Prahlad and Puran Ram near the house of Sohan Lal. At the scene of occurrence all the accused were abusing him. It is alleged that Mangtu Ram and Puran Ram were armed with lathies whereas Prahlad accused-appellant No.2 was armed with a sela. Prahlad gave a sela blow to his deceased brother Bajrang Ram who after receiving the said blow fell down on the ground. He rushed to the place of occurrence to intervene but at the exhortation of Mangtu Ram accused he was also assaulted by all the accused persons. On the exhortation of witnesses namely Mangtu Ram, Lichman Ram, Jeet Ram and Ramji Das Swami, the accused persons ran away towards the house of their brother Ram Chandra from the scene of occurrence.

(6). On the receipt of oral information of brother of deceased PW 1 Bagdawat Ram, an FIR Ex.P1 was registered at Police Station, Nohar under Sections 302, 307 read with Section 34 IPC and investigation commenced. After completion of investigation, challan was filed against the three accused appellants under Sections 302, 307 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code before the learned committal court which committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial.

(7). The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges against the appellant Prahlad under Sections 302 and 325 IPC. Similarly against Mangtu Ram and Puran Ram charges were framed under Sections 302/34, 325/34 an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document