- (1.) This criminal appeal has arisen out of judgment dated 21.03.1990 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karauli, Camp at Hindaun, in Sessions Case No. 29/84 (175/1988), whereby while acquitting six accused from all charges, Four appellants; namely, Devi Singh, jagdam, Maharaj Singh and Prahlad were convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 21.03.1990, as follows : JUDGEMENT_145_LAWS(RAJ)9_2016(2).html
(2.) Brief facts, of the case are that on 30.10.1983 at about 5.30 PM, complainant Kalyan (PW-1) submitted a written report Ex. (P-1) before Police Station Salempur (Sawai Madhopur) stating interalia that he alongwith other 13 persons is recorded tenant of land ad-measuring 40 Bighas in Khasra No. 699/1 in Village Peelwa and cultivated crop of Taara Meera on this land. The land situated near the bank of a river having danger of flood every year. In accordance with the order of Tehsildar, they wanted to reside in this land and for that, material for erecting huts was collected. Ten Patauls (hut like structure) were erected, wherein complainant Kalyan, Sukh Chand, Rampati, and Tijo were residing. In the same land four stacks of grass were also there. At about 12 in the last night ten persons namely Mola, Veer Singh, Devi Singh, Jagdam, Pooran, Maharaj Singh, Sita, Pehlad, Sher Singh, Lallu by caste Gujar, came there, holding lathies (sticks) and pushed the complainant, Sukh Chand, Rampati and Tijo forcefully with the stick to awaken them. Thereafter, they tied up Sukh Chand by rope and destroyed all the hutment, and torched with matchstick all material collected for erection of hutments and grass. These Gujars are quarreling with the complainant party since a long. On this report, SHO Police Station Salempur District Sawaimadhopur registered an FIR No. 118/1983 (Ex.P-4). After due investigation, chargesheet against all the 10 persons was filed. Learned trial court charged all the 10 persons for offence under Sections 147, 323, 149, 427, 436, 342, 447, 149, IPC. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial. Ten witnesses were examined on behalf of prosecution and 11 documents were exhibited. Accused were examined by learned trial court under Section 313 Cr. P.C., whereupon accused stated that evidence adduced by the prosecution is false, and that the land belongs to them. Possession is also with them since the time of their father. They have falsely implicated in this matter. No oral evidence was produced by defence but four documents were exhibited in defence. Learned trial court after hearing the parties vide judgment dated 21.03.1990 acquitted 6 persons from all the charges and convicted and sentenced the 4 appellants, as stated hereinabove.
(3.) Learned counsel for appellants submits that learned trial court has erred in convicting the appellants as the evidence available on record is not enough to convict them. When the yardstick used for acquitting four coaccused is applied in the matter of present appellants, they also deserve acquittal.;