R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) PARSA Singh, Ram Singh and Shankar Singh have filed the present appeal against the judgment dated 13.11.1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beawar whereby the learned Judge has convicted them for offence under Section 302/34 IPC and had sentenced them to life imprisonment, imposed a fine of Rs. 500/ - and directed them to further undergo a sentence of six months of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof. During the pendency of the present appeal, Parsa Singh has expired. Therefore, the appeal qua him abates. Hence the present appeal is being decided only qua Ram Singh and Shankar Singh.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts of the case are that on 20.10.1988 Afu W/o. Megh Singh lodged a written report (Ex. P.19) with the SHO, Police Station Masuda, District Ajmer. The written report (Ex. P.19) when translated into English, reads as under: - - To, The SHO,Police Station Masuda. Sir, It is humbly submitted that today at 8:00 AM, I and my husband went to our field for picking cotton. The moment we entered our field, Parsa S/o. Ghasi, Ghashi, Mana, Sayari, Kamla, Panchi S/o. Rama, Shankar, Chiman S/o. Ghasi, Shankar S/o. Ghasi, by caste Rawat r/o. Kirap who were hiding themselves in the field, suddenly came towards us. Parsa was armed with a Farsi, Shankar with a Kulhadi, Rama with a Lathi. All of them assaulted my husband. I ran towards our well where Kana Rawat was working at the well. I asked him to intervene and to separate the assailants from my husband. But he refused to do so as he was afraid that they will also assault him. When the assailants left the place, I went and looked after my husband. But he had become unconscious. His forehead... his ear had sustained injuries. I went and told the villagers to place him in a bus and brought him to Masuda. Therefore, I am filing this report to start the proceedings. Sd/ -" On the basis of the written report (Ex. P.19), the police chalked out a formal FIR (Ex. P.20), namely FIR No. 61/88, for offences under Sections 147, 307, 148, 149, 323, 324, 447 IPC and started the investigation. Subsequently, with the death of Megh Singh on 20.10.1988, the offence under Section 302 IPC was added. After completion of the investigation, the police filed a charge -sheet against Parsa Singh, Ram Singh and Shankar Singh for offences under Sections 302, 302/34 IPC. The chargesheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate. Subsequently, the case was committed to the learned Sessions Judge wherefrom the case was transferred to the learned Judge. The learned Judge framed charge for offence under Section 302 IPC and in the alternative, under Section 302/34 IPC. In order to support its case, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses, and submitted twenty -six documents. The defence also examined a single witness, and submitted four documents. After going through the documentary and oral evidence, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants, as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal before this court.
(3.) MR . Rajendra Singh Tanwar, the learned counsel for the appellants has raised the following contentions before this court: firstly, it is a case of blind murder that nobody has seen. Yet in order to convict the appellants, the witnesses have been concocted by the investigating agency. The concoction is apparent from the fact that Afu (P.W.7), the complainant, does not mention the name of a single eyewitness in the FIR. If they had been, indeed, present at the scene of the crime, the complainant would have certainly mentioned the name in the FIR.;