GURDEO SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh dated 1.12.1987, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held accused appellants Gurdeo Singh, Gyan Singh, Khadag Singh and Shravan Singh guilty for the offence under section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced each one of them to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days imprisonment. Hence this appeal.

(2.) The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are that deceased Niranjan Singh and his daughter Mst. Jaswinder Kaur P.W. 8 went from their village Dabli Rathan to Hanumangarh for obtaining money from Tehsil Hanumangarh as regards their land. They came to their village Dabli Rathan at 3.30 p.m. by bus. As soon as they alighted from the bus near the shop of Gurbachan Singh, Khadag Singh came there on his cycle. Accused Gurdeo Singh and Gyan Singh were sitting in front of the shop of Gurbachan Singh. He told these two accused persons that this man has to be caught and cut and thereafter Khadag Singh, who was armed with a gandasa caught hold of Niranjan Singh from behind his back. At that time, these two accused persons i.e. Gurdeo Singh and Gyan Singh came from the shop of Gurbachan Singh. Gurdeo Singh was armed with a Kapa (fodder cutting instrument with sharp edges, the blade of which was 1 foot and 41/2 long, while Gyan Singh was armed with a gandasa. Niranjan Singh was having a stick in his hand and when Gurdeo Singh tried to inflict a blow with his Kapa on his head he raised his hands, whereby the fingers of his hand were cut and injuries Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 were received by him detailed in the post-mortem examination report Ex. P. 6. Thereafter, it is alleged that Gyan Singh inflicted a blow with his gandasa on the waist of Niranjan Singh and thereafter Gurdeo Singh again inflicted a Kapa blow on his head. Thereafter it is alleged that all the accused persons started beating Niranjan Singh. When Mst. P.W. 8 Jaswinder Kaur tried to intervene, Gurdeo Singh threw her away by catching hold of her "Chutiliya" and as it was a sandy place, she did not receive any injury on her body. At that time, P.W. 1 Shehare Khan came there from the bus stand side and intervened and told the accused persons not to kill him, but it was of no avail. P.W. 3 Mahindra Singh also came there and witnessed the occurrence. It is alleged that in the meantime Shravan Singh came there on his cycle from the market side and told his companions that this man should be killed. It is alleged that deceased Niranjan Singh had killed the brother of the accused persons and has been released on bail only before six months of this occurrence, they availed him. They had also enmity with the complainant party about their field and therefore this occurrence has taken place. Soon after the occurrence Sarpanch P.W. 7. Chandra Bhan came there and Mst. Jaswindra Kaur narrated to him the entire incident and he accompanied her to report the matter to the police, where an oral report was lodged by Jaswindra Kaur, which has been marked as Ex. P. 7. Post-mortem of the dead body of Niranjan Singh was got conducted, which has been marked as Ex. P. 6. A panchnama of the dead body was prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 8 Site Plan was prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 9 and site inspection memo was also prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 9A. The watch of the deceased was recovered from the dead body of Niranjan Singh vide seizure memo Ex. P.10. Seizure memos of blood stained oil and controlled soil were prepared, which have been marked as Ex. P. 11 and Ex. P. 12 respectively. An inquest report was also prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 14. Blood stained clothes of the deceased were obtained, which has been marked as Ex. P. 15. The accused persons were arrested by the police and on their information and at their instance weapons of offences were recovered. They were sent for the chemical and serological examination. After usual investigation the case against the accused persons was challaned in the court of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh from where it was committed from trial to the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh, who framed charges against the accused persons under section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code except Shravan Singh, who in the alternative has also been charged with the offence under section 302 read with 109/149 Indian Penal Code. The accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial, whereupon the prosecution examined as may as 13 witnesses in support of their case. The statements of the accused persons were recorded under section 313 Criminal Procedure Code., wherein they have denied their participation in the occurrence. They have examined no witness in their defence and after hearing both the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge decided the case as aforesaid.

(3.) We have heard Mr. M.L. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. V.R. Mehta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Mr. H.S. Sandhu learned counsel appearing for the complainant, and have critically gone through the record of the case.