- (1.)The present criminal appeal filed u/S 374(2) of IPC assails the judgment dated 16.01.2004 passed in Special Case No. 382/2000 by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as enumerated below: JUDGEMENT_133_LAWS(MPH)7_2016.jpg
(2.)The facts giving rise to present appeal are that: As per prosecution case on 08.06.1996, at around 12-15 p.m., Gaderam PW-1 lodged a report at P.S. Sihoniya Distt. Morena to the effect that he used to work of brick-clin for which he had paid Rs. 500/- to Jasrath Thakur to get woods. It is alleged that four months before, when he alongwith his son went to the field of Jasrath to take woods, accused Vishambhar came there and objected. When the complainant asked him not to do, he (Vishambhar) rushed towards the village and after sometime at around 6 O' Clock in the evening came alongwith Rambaran, Omveer. All these three accused were armed with deadly weapons and surrounded the complainant. It is alleged that accused Rambaran inflicted a pharsa blow on the head of Prahlad, son of the complainant. Accused Vishambhar also dealt Prahlad with a lathi blow due to which Prahlad fell down on the ground. Thereafter, accused Bade also came and inflicted a lathi blow to Prahlad. When Raju, another son of Gaderam came to rescue, accused Omveer inflicted Raju with a lathi blow. Accused Vishambhar also assaulted Raju with a lathi . After the incident accused persons fled away from the spot. The matter was reported to the police station, offences were registered and after investigation, chargsheet was filed in the Court of competent jurisdiction.
(3.)After lodging of FIR by Toderam on 08.06.1996 bearing Crime No. 55/1996 at Police Station Sihoniya, Distt. Morena for offences punishable u/S 323, 294, 325, 326 read with Sec 34 of IPC and Sec 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act 1989 (The Act of 1989 for brevity), investigation was conducted. Statement of witnesses were recorded and evidence was collected including the report of medical examination of three injured persons, which led to filing of chargsheet. Charge was framed under Sec 3(1)(x) of the Act of 1989, 323, 326 & 323 read with Sec 34 and 326 read with Sec 34 of IPC. Thereafter, the prosecution witnesses were produced including the three injured persons Gaderam, Prahlad and Raju as PW1, PW2 and PW4 respectively. Appellants were questioned u/S 313 of Cr.P.C on the evidence that came on record. Out of the four accused, Om Veer Singh and Vishambhar in their response u/S 313 Cr.P.C. put up the defence that the prosecution is an act of vendetta due to past animosity. The trial Court after marshalling the evidence returned the finding of guilt by convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offences and punishments as enumerated in para 1.