[2025:RJ-JD:39275-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 257/2002

1. Gurdev Singh son of Shri Bhan Singh, resident of Chak-1-

KLD, Tehsil Ghadsana, District Sri Ganganagar.

2. Sukhdev Singh son of Shri Bhag Singh, resident of 265 Head/Chak-2-KLD, Tehsil Ghadsana, District Sri Ganganagar ----Appellants Versus The State of Rajasthan ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. D. S. Rajvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

Order

28/08/2025 PER, HON’BLE MR. RAVI CHIRANIA, J

1. The present Criminal Appeal is against the judgment dated 15.10.2001 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.64/2001 titled as “State vs. Gurdev Singh and Anr.” whereby the learned trial Court convicted the appellants for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 323/34 of IPC and imposed the punishment which are as follows:

Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The present appeal was filed on 26.11.2001. The matter was listed under the hearing category before this Court on 18.08.2025.

On that date, the learned Public Prosecutor was directed to call the latest report as to whether the accused-appellants are alive or not. On 26.08.2025, the learned Public Prosecutor, by report dated 17.08.2025, informed that the appellant No.2 Sukhdev Singh son of Shri Bhag Singh has expired. The present appeal in respect of the accused-appellant No.2 Sukhdev Singh is abated. In view of the above, the present appeal survives only in respect of accused-appellant No.1 Gurdev Singh.

3. In nutshell facts of the case are that complainant Paramjeet Singh son of Pyara Singh made an oral report to the SHO, Police Station Ravla, District Sri Ganganagar against the accused-appellants namely, Gurdev Singh son of Shri Bhan Singh and Sukhdev Singh son of Shri Bhag Singh. On the basis of the said report, the police registered F.I.R. bearing No.322/2000 for offence under Sections 302, 323 IPC. Thereafter, police conducted the investigation and filed the charge-sheet against the accused- appellants. The learned trial Court framed the charges against both the accused-appellants for offence under Sections 302, 341, 323 and 325/34 IPC. The appellants denied the charges and trial was ordered to commence against them. The prosecution, to support its case, produced 17 witnesses and in documentary evidence various documents were exhibited. In defence, the statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Considering the evidence on record and the statements of material witnesses, the learned trial Court passed the impugned judgment dated 15.10.2001 whereby the accused-appellants were punished with imprisonment for life for offence under Section 302/34 IPC and for 2 months’ S.I. under 323/34 IPC.

4. As noted in the previous para that the Appeal survives only against the accused-appellant No.1 Gurdev Singh, therefore, this Court heard this appeal only to the extent of the surviving appellant No.1 Gurdev Singh.

5. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 15.10.2001, the learned counsel for the appellant Mr. D.S. Rajvi while confining his argument to the extent of appellant No.1 submitted that on the basis of the oral report of Paramjeet Singh the FIR bearing No.322/2000 was registered against the appellants, Ex-P5 dated 29.10.2000, which is reproduced as under: Ex-P5 “vkt fnukad 29-10-2000 ds oDr 1 ih,e ij Jh ijethr flag iq= I;kjkflag tkfr jkenklh;k mez 35 lky fuoklh 2 ds,yMh 365 vkj Mh is”kk dksroky us gkftj Fkkuk gksdj tqckuh lwpuk nh fd esjk cMk lkyk I;kj flag iq= tkxj flag jkenklh;k mez 45 lky fuoklh 2 ds,yMh vius cky cPpksa lfgr vius edku esa jgrk gSA eq[kr;kj flag ds iMkSl esa lq[knso flag iq= Hkkx flag jkenklh;k fuoklh 2 ds,yMh dk Hkh edku gS eq[kR;kj flag lq[knso flag ls 700 :i;s etnwjh ds ekaxrk gSA bl dkj.k ls lq[knso flag eq[kr;kj flag ls jaft”k j[krk gSA vkt