MAHENDRA BHUSHAN, J. - (1.) THE following accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced to various imprisonments by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City, as mentioned below: - Name Offence under which convicted and sentenced. A.1 Jagnya A.2 Panchya A.3 Kanhiyalal All S/o Bhanwarlal U/s. 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life. U/s. 147, IPC 1 year's R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default to 1 month's R. I. 326/149, IPC 4 Years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, or in default to further suffer 1 month's R.I. U/s. 452, IPC 1- years R.I. U/s. 325/149, IPC 2- years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to further- 1 month's R.I. U/s. 324/149, IPC One year's R. I. U/s. 323/149, IPC Six months R. I. A.4. Latoor s/o Ghasi A.5. Bajranga A. 6. Kanhiya s/o Onkar U/s. 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life U/s. 148, IPC 1- years R. I. & a fine of Rs. 100/- & in default to one month's R.I. U/s.326/149, IPC 4 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to 1 month's R.I. U/S. 452, IPC 1- Years R.I. U/S. 325/149 IPC 2- years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to one month's R.I. U/S. 323/149 IPC Six months R.I. A. 7. Harphool U/s. 147, IPC 1 year's R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default to 1 month's R. I. U/S. 452, IPC 1- Years R.I. U/S. 326/149 IPC 4 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to one month's R.I. U/S. 325 IPC 2- years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to one month's R.I. U/S. 324/149 IPC One year's R.I. U/S. 323/149 IPC Six months R.I. A. 8. Motilal A. 9. Kishan A. 10. Laddu S/o Kanwarlal U/s. 147, IPC 1 year's R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default to 1 month's R. I. A. 11. Chotya A. 12. Madho A. 13. Hajari U/S. 452, IPC 1- Years R.I. A. 14. Gokul A. 15. Gopal A. 16. Latoor S/o Rampal A. 17. Laddu s/o Bhagwanta A. 18. Ghasi U/S. 326/149 IPC 4 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to one month's R.I. A. 19. Dhanna U/S. 325/149 IPC 2- years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default to one month's R.I. A. 20. Onkar A. 21. Madan A. 22. Radhakishan A. 23. Jainarain A. 24. Jagannath A. 25. Prahlad. U/s. 324/149, IPC One year's R.I. U/s. 323/149, IPC Six months R.I.
(2.) ALL the substative sentences of all the accused-appellants were ordered to run concurrently. State briefly, the prosecution story is that one Bansidhar (deceased) was in possession of Khasra No. 477 measuring about 35 Bighas in village Ferozepura, District Sawai Madhopur. Baira Crop was standing on the said fields and on October 14, 1973 Jagat Prakash (PW 11) and others had gone to Bankhandi-Balaji in a 'Goth' (Picnic Party). The deceased Bansidhar and the other members of his family were removing the harvested Bajra crop from the fields, mentioned above At about 4 P. M. on that day, all the accused persons (hereinafter referred to A. 1 to A. 25.) along with several others armed with lathis, Laundi (lathi having iron wires at the top), Gandasi and Kulharis attacked the family members of Pandit Bansidhar and gave indiscriminate beating to them. When the pilgrims who had assembled at the temple Barkhandi-Balaji for a picnic, as aforesiad intervened it is alleged that they were also beaten by the accused persons. Jagat Prakash (PW 11) a petition writer also received inju-ries at the hands of accused A.7 and others. He went to the police station, Ravajna-Doonger and lodged a report (Ex. P3) there at 7 P.M. on October 14, 1973. A case on the F.I.R. Ex. P. 20 was registered and Lachman Singh S.H.O. (Pw.26) reached the hospital and prepared Inquest Report Ex.P.9 of deceased Bansidhar on October 15, 1973. He also reached the spot and prepared the site plan (Ex .P. 10) and seized sticks, broken pieces of bangles, Chappals etc. Ar. 1 to Ar. 13 from the spot and prepared its sizure memo (Ex.P. 11). The accused persons were arrested by him and were directed to remain 'Ba Parda' as identification proceedings were to take place. Some of the accused - persons got recovered the alleged weapons of offences Art. 22 to Art. 29 under S.27 of the Evidence Act. The accused persons were put for identification and were identified by the Dr. V. K. Singhi (PW 27) conducted autopsy on the dead body of Bansidhar on October 15, 1973 at 9.15 A.M. and found that there was incised wound on the fore-head, incised wound on the left parieto occipital area, incised wound on the left parieto occipital area 1" below injury No. 2, lacerated wound on the right frontal area, fracture of nasal bone, incised wound on the mid line in parieto occipital region, abrasion in right third inter-costal space, contusion on the back of chest, contusion over left lower chest and abdomen, contusion on left abdomen, abrasions on the left hypocondryum, compound fracture of right tibia and bifula, fracture of lower hand, right tibia and fibula, fracture of right patella, abrasion over lateral aspect of thigh, fracture of left leg, fracture of right radius and ulna in middle and on the lower 1/4 th, fracture of right 3, 4, 5th meta carpal bone, contusion over left fore-arm, multiple abrasions 7 in number covering left scapular region, right scapular region and over spines, contusion overback on the mid line over both scapula, contusion over left scapula and back of the abdomen, contusion over right infra-scapular region and abrasion over buttock. Thus, out of the multiple injuries, four were caused by sharp weapon and the others by blunt weapon. On opening the skull and other parts of the body, multiple fractures of skull bones were found. In the opinion of Dr. Singhi, the internal fractures of the skull bones and other damage were the result of external injuries 2 to 5, and the other injuries and the haematoma was the result of injuries 1 & 3. All the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, and the death must have taken place instantaneously or within about half an hour of the incident. Dr. Singhi also examined the other injured persons and found as follows: - 1. Shankerlal s/o Hajari. 6 injuries by blunt weapon (5 simple & one grievous, fracture of lower end of ulna bone right fore-arm) 2. Mst. Shanti w/o Shankerlal. 7 injuries all by blunt weapon (6 simple and one grievous, a fracture of 2nd meta carpal head chip) 3. Prembai w/o Nandlal. 8 injuries all simple and by blunt weapon. 4. Mst. Sushila w/o Babulal. 3 injuries all simple and by blunt weapon. 5.Mst. Dropdi w/o Kishanlal. 5 injuries (4 simple and one grievous, a fracture of right ulna lower part), all by blunt weapon. 6. Mst. Kesar w/o Bansidhar. 7 injuries (all simple and by blunt weapon. X-ray was advised for injuries 2 and 3, but the injured did not turn up for x-ray, and hence they are to be taken as simple.) 7. Mst. Sulekha w/o Jansi. 3 injuries by blunt weapon. 2 simple and one grievous all, 8. Harnarain. 6 injuries all by blunt weapon. (4 simple and two grievous, fractures of 2nd meta carpal bone and of left greater Trochanter) 9. Gulab Chand. 7 injuries all by blunt weapon (6 simple and one grievous, a fracture of mid shaft of ulna bone.) 10. Babulal s/o Jansi 2 injuries simple and by blunt weapon. 11. Jansi s/o Hajarilal. 8 injuries all by blunt weapon (6 simple and two grievous being fracture of lower end of ulna and fracture of tibia and fibula both lower ends) 12. Ramkishore s/o Jankilal. 8 injuries (one incised wound over right parietal region by sharp weapon and others by blunt weapon. Six simple injuries including by sharp weapon, and 2 grievous fractures of the left fore-arm and left 3rd meta carpal.) 13. Badrilal S/o Johrilal 7 injuries (3 incised on left car bisected upto base by sharp weapon and the other by blunt weapon. 4 simple and 3 grievous, fracture of left fore-arm in upper 4th, fracture of right fore-arm in lower 4th, and injury by sharp weapon was also grievous) 14. Jagat Prakash 6 injuries by blunt weapon (5 simple and one grievous being a fracture with swelling left fore-arm). After investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the accused persons were committed to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City, who framed various charges, stated above, against the accused persons. On behalf of the prosecution, as many as 28 witnesses including a number of eye witnesses, who were also injured, were examined. Thereafter, each of the accused was examined under S. 313. Cr. P. C. to explain the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Accused A.2 has come out with a case in his statement that the field Khasra No. 477 consists of 27-28, Bighas, which had been allotted to five persons including himself, and there was litigation going on between Bansidhar and others on the one ha'nd,and accused A.2 and others on the other hand relating to that land. He further pleaded that the standing Bajra and Juar crops on the day of the incident belonged to him and others and they had sown the crops and having come to know that Bansidhar and others had gone to their fields to harvest Bajra Crop, he and others had gone to the field to refrain Bansidhar and others from cutting the standing crops. It were Bansidhar and others, who started beating him and Rarasahai gave a blow of his sword at his neck and Shanker gave a lathi blow on his right leg. Jagat Prakash also gave a lathi blow on his back. It was also stated by him that he has also filed a complaint in the Court of Magistrate relating to that occurrence. Accused A.7 in his statement has taken the plea of alibi to the effect that on the day of incident he was in Cement factory, which is situated at Phalodi and had gone to purchase a pair of shoes at weekly fair (Hatwara)on that day. Accused A.6 has also pleaded alibi to the effect that he was on duty on that day. Accused A.3 has also taken a plea that he was in the factory and he too had gone to the weekly fair to purchase some articles. Accused A.5 has stated that he was returning from the jungle and hearing the cries he reached the spot to pacify the persons fighting there, but he too was beaten Accused A.4 had taken a plea that he and others were cultivating Khasra No. 477 for the last about 10-12 years and on half of the field Bajra crop was standing, and on the other half Juar crop was standing. ft was Bansidhar and others, in all numbering about 40-50 persons, who were cutting the Bajra crop when he reached there to request them not to do so. Jagat Prakash incited Bansidhar and others to beat him and he received injuries on his head. Babulal gave an axe blow on his leg and the other pilgrims also beat him on his back. Accused A.17 has stated that on hearing the alarm when he started to that side and before he could reach, some body gave a lathi blow and some body an axe blow to him. He received other injuries also and became unconscious, and it was Nathulal who lifted him after two hours and took him away. Accused A 10 speaks about having reached on the spot to pacify the persons who were fighting but ha too was beaten. The rest of the accused persons have denied their presence at the spot. On behalf of the accused persons, as many as 10 witnesses were examined and reliance was also placed on documentary evidence to show that accused persons A.5, A.4, A.2, A. 16 and A. 17, received injuries in the occurrence and that it was the accused persons A.2 and others, who were in possession of the fields in dispute.
(3.) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge believing the case of the prosecution, and that Bansidhar (deceased) and his brothers were in possession of the fields in dispute Khasra No. 477, convicted and sentenced the accused persons, as aforesaid. We have heard the learned Advocate for the accused-appellant and the learned P.P., and have been taken through the velumenous oral and documentary evidence, which has been brought on record. The first contention of the learned Advocate for the accused-appellants is that there was litigation going on in between accused A.2 and others on the one hand and Bansidhar and others on the other hand with regard to Khasra No. 477 measuring 35 Biahas and 16 Biswas and the prosecution has utterly failed to prove that it were Bansidhar and others, who were in possession of the land in dispute on 14.10.73. The prosecution has also failed to prove that the standing Bajra and Juar crop had been sown by Bansidhar and others. According to the learned Advocate, on the evidence on record, it is proved that accused A.2 and others were the allottees of the land in dispute and it were they who were in its possession. ;