N.L. Tibrewal, J. - (1.) This appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the Judgment and order dated, February 8, 1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bundi in Sessions Case No. 205/92 convicting and sentencing the appellants as under : JUDGEMENT_41_LAWS(RAJ)10_19961.html
(2.) The appellants were put on trial along with co-accused Harnath and Ramesh. The charge against appellant Mool Chand was that he caused the death of Bhairu Lal Meghwal by a gun shot on his chest with a country made pistol. He was also charged under Sections 3/25 and 3/27 of the Arms Act. Appellant Govinda and co-accused Ramesh and Harnath were charged under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 34IPC. Govinda was also charged under Section 323 IPC for causing simple injury to Smt. Sumitra. The learned trial Judge after completion of the trial, acquitted co-accused Harnath and Ramesh, but convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid.
(3.) Put briefly, the prosecution case is that PW 3 Chhitar Lal made an oral report at the Police Station, Kesorai-patan at 4 p.m. on 19.4.92 stating therein that at about 1.30 p.m. on the same day, he and his nephew Daya Ram were standing out-side their house when all the accused came there with weapons. Appellant Mool Chand was having a country made pistol while others were having lathis-and Gandasis. Soon after reaching there, appellant Govinda asked Daya Ram as to what talks he was having with his sister Sanju. On this, Daya Ram replied that Sanju had come there in search of his sister who had gone to the field. There-upon, Mool Chand-Appellant threatened them saying "Thum Bahut Itra Gave ho jo hamari Ladkiyon se baat karte ho. Isliye Tumhare Sabke ek Taraf se goli nikalunga." (You have become so mean that you talk with our daughters. I will shoot all of you.) It was also stated in the report that his younger brother Bhairu Lal came there after taking his bath in the river, who also asked Mool Chand as to why they had come to quarrel. There-upon, appellant Mool Chand made a fire from the country made pistol which struck on his chest. Bhairu Lal fell down on the platform and died on the spot. The informant's wife was assaulted by the appellant Govinda with a lathi when she came for rescue. One Ganga Ram Meghwal was stated to be an eye-wit,ness of the incident. On this report, crime No. 114/92 was registered under Sections 302, 323 and 3/25 of the Arms Act. After registration of the case investigation commenced. Inquest report (Ex.P. 1) of the dead body was prepared by the S.H.O. Raghunath Singh and thereafter, the body was handed over for postmortem examination. Site-plan (Ex.P. 4) of the place of incident was prepared at 6.15 p.m. on 19.4.92. Postmortem-examination of the dead body was conducted by a Medical Board consisting of PW 9 Dr. Narottam Nuwal and Dr. Navneet Vijay. Postmortem report is Ex.P. 14. The following external injuries were noticed by the Doctors at the time of postmortem examination:- 1. Exit wound 2 x 1 cm. elliptical in shape lying obliquely on left side chest just below nipple-margins clear well defined. No blackening or tattooing at or around margins. 2. Entry wound 21/2 x 1/4 cm. elliptical shape lying obliquely on left side back in mid scapular line just below scapula, margins are irregular and 1 cm. of area around margin is blackened. On internal examination, there was an entry exit wound on the heart which are described as under: 1. One wound (entry) 3 cm. x 1/2 cm. on back side of left ventricle cavity deep. 2. One exit 11/2 cm. x 1/2 cm. on front of left ventricle.;