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

2006 Supreme(Raj) 1994

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
Honble SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. Honble CHATRA RAM JAT, J.
Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 547 of 2002
Decided On : July 21, 2006

Advocates Appeared:
Sanjay Mehrishi, Tarun Jain, Timan Singh, for Appellants R.P. Kuldeep, Public Prosecutor for State

Headnote:Penal Code, Secs. 302, 307/34, 326/34, 324/34, 302/34, 307, 326 – Conviction u/S. 302/34, IPC in a single injury case – Both the parties were neighbours – Incident occurred all of a sudden on trivial issue – Inflicted single injury with axe on head – Proved fatal – Held – In absence of evidence to attribute any common intention that activated both the appellants to join and commit crime, conviction with the aid of Sec. 34 IPC cannot be sustained – The appellant might be said to have caused bodily injury as is likely to cause death and he can be convicted u/S. 304 Part-I – Conviction altered – Sentenced to period of 7 years imprisonment already undergone with fine of 30,000/-. (Paras 9 to 11)

       

Honble SHARMA, J.–Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram and Madan Lal, the appellants herein, were put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Jhalawar, who vide judgment dated April 9, 2002 convicted and sentenced them as under:-

Chhitar Lal @ Sita Ram

u/S. 302 IPC:

To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

u/S. 307/34 IPC:

To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

u/S. 326/34 IPC:

To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

u/S. 324/34 IPC:

To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

Madan Lal:

u/S. 302/34 IPC:

To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

u/S. 307 IPC:

To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 300/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

u/S. 326 IPC:

To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2). The prosecution story is woven like thus:-

On November 30, 1998 Kanwar Lal (PW. 3) submitted a written report (Ex. P. 1) at Police Station Jhalawar to the effect that on the said day around 1.30 PM his brother Ramkalyan came from Kota in truck No. RPF 9336, after unloading the truck at Patan he came to Bheemsagar Dam. He asked for Gutka from Sampat Bheel, at that time Chhitar Lal hurled filthy abuses. When Ramkalyan forbade. Chhitar Lal threw stone which hit the glass of truck. When Ramkalyan got down from the truck Chhitar Lal, Madan Lal, Heeralal, Gopal, Ramchandra, Kanchan Bai and Pushpa Bai assaulted him. Chhitar Lal inflicted gandasi blow. Madan inflicted kulhari blow, Heeralal and Gopal inflicted lathi blows. Ramchandra inflicted gupti blow. Kanchan Bai and Pushpa Bai also gave beating. When Mohanbai intervened she was also beaten up. The injured was removed to hospital. Police Station Jhalawar registered a case and investigation commenced. Necessary memos were drawn. Statements of witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation injured Ramkalyan succumbed to his injuries. Dead body was subjected to autopsy. The appellants were arrested. On completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jhalawar. Charges under Sections 147, 148, 302/149, 307/149, 326/149 and 323/149 IPC were framed against the appellants, who denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 20 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., the appellants claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3). We have pondered over rival submissions and with the assistance of learned counsel scanned the record.

(4). A look at the post mortem report (Ex. P. 20) demonstrates that death of deceased Ramkalyan was homicidal. Following ante mortem injuries were found on the dead body:-

1. Incised wound 5 x 1.0 cm x scalp tissue deep on mid occipital parietal region oblique

2. Bruise 30 x 2.5 cm on the Rt. side front of chest vertical.

3. Bruise 40 x 2.5 cm on the Rt. side back of chest and abdomen vertical.

4. Bruise 10 x 2.5 cm on the Rt. lat. Side of lower part of chest vertical.

In the opinion of Dr. R.D. Verma (PW. 20) the cause of death was coma brought about as a result of injury to skull and brain. As regards injuries No. 2 to 4 autopsy surgeon deposed that they could be caused as a result of fall.

(5). Injured Mohan Bai (PW.





















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