- (1.) Challenge in this appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', for short) is to the correctness of the judgment and order dated 13.08.1985 rendered in Sessions Case No. 70 of 1983 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh, by which accused-appellants Daula alias Daulat Ram, Mander Singh, Brij Lal, Satya Narayan, Devi Lal and Shokaran ('accused A-1 to A-6', for short) have been convicted for commission of the offence under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC', for short) and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Accused A-3 Brijlal and A-6 Shokaran have also been convicted for the offence under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and accused appellants Daula alias Daulat Ram, Mander Singh Satya Narayan and Devilal,(respectively A-1, A-2, A-4 & 5) have further been convicted for the offence under Section 147 and each one of them have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution case, as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial is as under: 2.1 On 25.01.1983, Complainant PW1 Balram alongwith his brother Birbal Ram had gone to the field in the morning and at 1:30 PM his brother left the field for village. Complainant and Krishna Ram also followed him. At about 2 O'clock, they saw that his brother was encircled by accused-appellants Daulat Ram, Mangal Singh, Satya Narayan, Brij Lal, Devilal and Shokaran. At that time, complainant and Krishna Ram were behind him about one and a half kila and they saw Shokaran giving a Gandasi blow to Birbal Ram and thereafter all other accused persons beaten him by lathies, who while taking to hospital for treatment died in the way. It was alleged that there was a long enmity between deceased Birbal Ram and accused Shokaran etc. 2.2 On the basis of above information, FIR No. 18 of 1983 was registered at Police Station Hanumangarh against accused appellants for the offence under Section 302, 147, 148, 149 IPC and police started investigation. 2.3 During the course of investigation, inquest was held on the dead body of deceased and thereafter it was sent for autopsy. Panchnama of the scene of occurrence was prepared in the presence of Panchas and the statements of witnesses were recorded. Muddamal articles recovered from the accused persons were sent to FSL for chemical examination and on receipt of the Autopsy Report as well as FSL report as sufficient evidence was found against the accused, they were chargesheeted in the Court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh for commission of offence punishable under Section 302, 147, 148, 149 IPC. 2.4 As the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar. 2.5 The learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh ('trial Court' for short), to whom the case was made over for trial, framed charge against the accused for commission of offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 302, 302/149 IPC. The charge was read over and explained to the accused to which they pleaded innocence and claimed trial, therefore, they were put to trial. 2.6 To prove the culpability of the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and also produced number of documents which were exhibited and relied upon . 2.7 The trial Court, thereafter recorded the statements of accused under Section 313 of the Code. In their further statement, accused denied the case of the prosecution in toto and reiterated that a false case has been filed against them. However, they neither produced any evidence nor examined any witness in support of their defence. They only produced statements of Balram, Krishan Lal and Moman Ram vide Ex.D/1, D/2 & D/3 in support of their case. 2.8 On appreciation, analysis and scrutiny of the evidence on record, trial Court came to the conclusion that homicidal death of the deceased has been proved and the accused formed an unlawful assembly with the intention to commit murder of the deceased because there was previous enmity between accused party and the deceased. 2.9 On the aforesaid finding, the trial Court convicted and sentenced all the accused for the offence of murder to which reference is made in earlier paragraph of the judgment.
(3.) At the outset, it be stated that accused A-2 Mandar Singh, A-4 Staya Narayan & A-5 Devi Lal have died during the pendency of the appeal, therefore, appeal filed on their behalf has been abated vide order dated 25.0 1.2010. Therefore, we have to examine the appeal filed by remaining accused, A-1 Daula, A-3 Brij Lal and A-6 Shokaran.;