FATEH SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge I, Aiwar dated Feb. 28, 1986 by which the appellants Fateh Singh and Baiwant Singh, who are father and son, were convicted under sections 302/34, I.P.C. and each was sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) Briefly, stated, the prosecution case is that at about 11.00 a.m. on 16/7/1981, Sooraj Bhan Singh appeared at Police station Mundawar, District Alwar and presented written report Ex. P. 6. It was stated therein that at about 11.30 a.m. on the preceding day (15/7/1981) he, his father Sheo Narain and his mother P.W. .3 Smt. Bhagwani were going to village Kat Ka Mazra to purchase a she buffalo. When they reached in the Ghati of Kat Ka Mazra, the appellants suddenly emerged from a bush. Accused Fateh Singh had a gun which he fired in the air. Accused Balwant Singh had a Ballam. He struck a blow of his Ballam on the left foot of Sheo Narain. Sheo Narain fell down. Thereafter both the accused started landing blows to Sheo Narain with lathi and ballam. Sooraj Bhan and Smt Bhagwani tried to intervene. Accused Fateh Singh again fired a shot in order to scare them. As a result of beating Sheo Narain sustained severe multiple injuries. There was profused bleeding from his injuries and the clothes he was wearing got drenched with it. The police registered a case under section 302 etc. of the Penal Code and took up the investigation. The postmortem examination of the victims dead body wall conducted at 4.15 p.m. on the same day by Dr. Rajesh Gupta. As many as 14 injuries were found on the dead body of Sheo Narain. The cause of death was haemorrhage and shock due to crush injury. The post-mortem examination report issued by the Doctor is Ex. P. 15. The appellants were arrested and in consequence of the informations furnished by them, Lathi and ballam were recovered. After when the investigation was over, the police presented a charge-sheet against the appellants in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh Bus who in his turn committed the case for trial to the court of Sessions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge before whom the case came for trial framed charges under sections 302/34, 392/34 and 398/34, I.P.C. against both of them. They pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. In support of its case the prosecution examined 19 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence no witness was examined. On the completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the charges under sections 392/34 and 398/34, I.P.C. not proved. He, however, held the charge under sections 302/34 proved against both the appellants. The appellants were consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very outset.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor. We have also gone through the case file carefully.