SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE appellants nine in number, were put to trial before learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur, who vide judgment dated August 12, 2002 convicted and sentenced each of the appellants as under: Ram Ratan : Under Section 302 I. P. C. : To suffer imprisonment for life. Under Section 148 I. P. C. : To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. Under Section 447 I. P. C. : To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Batti Lal, Manbhar, Dhapa, Sammi, Ram Parsi, Kajod, Bharat Lal and Charat Lal: Under Section 326/149 I. P. C. : Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. Under Section 147 I. P. C. : Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. Under Section 447 I. P. C. : Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) IT is the prosecution case that on October 26, 2001 informant Nanag Ram (PW-3) submitted a written report (Ex. P/1) at Police Station Malarna Doongar (Sawai Madhopur) to the effect that on the said day around 9 a. m. while Nanag Ram, Daya Ram, Kamli and Lad Bai were working at their field Kajod, Bharat Lal, Charat Lal, Batti Lal, Hajari, Ram Ratan, Rajesh, Kajod S/o Ramesh, Dhapa, Manbhar, Ram Parsi and Sammi armed with lathis, Gandasi, Paila, Axe and iron-rod came over there. Ram Ratan having exhorted Rajesh to kill the members of complainant party, inflicted three blows with Gandasi on the head of Dayaram, as a result of which he fell down. Batti Lal then inflicted lathi blow on the person of Nanag Ram and Manbhar gave stone-blow on his face. Kamli and Lad Bai were beaten up by Kajod, Batti Lal, Charat Lal, Bharat Lal, Ram Ratan, Rajesh, Dhapa, Manbhar, Ram Parsi and Sammi. On that report case under Sections 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 302 and 149 I. P. C. was registered and investigation commenced. Autopsy on the dead body was performed, necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded, appellants were arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge Sawai Madhopur. Charges under Sections 447, 148, 302, 302/149, 324/149 and 323 I. P. C. were framed against the appellants, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 21 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellants claimed innocence. Four witnesses in support of defence were examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated above. Having given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced before us we notice that death of Daya Ram was homicidal in nature. A look at Post-Mortem Report (Ex. P/17) reveals that following ante mortem injuries were found on the dead body: Dissolution of scalp, at middle aspect of frowal bone of skull (transversely) and lacerated wounds margin regular, blood ooze out & skull bone meniarfing ruptured and brain matter comes out from skull 8' x 2" x 2" in size, blood ooze out & semi dried in portion length, breadth depth Abrasion 1" x 1" lt. upper lateral aspect of forehead. Contusion middle 1/3rd of Rt. arm dorsa lateral aspect obliquely 2-1/2" x 3/4". In the opinion of Dr. Kailash Chand Soni (PW-17) the cause of death was Coma due to (head injury) excessive hemorrhage (from skull) from lacerated would by sharp object. It appears from the record that members of accused party also sustained injuries in the course of incident. Injuries sustained by accused Kajod, Manbhar and Ratan are as under: Injury Report Ex. D/12 (Kajod) 1. Lacerated wound 1/4 x 1/4 x through & through near lobule with red clotted blood. 2. Abrasion swelling 3 x 2 cm (L) forearm 1/4 3. Bruise 2 x 2 cm (R) forearm. Injury Report Ex. D/13 (Manbhar) : 1. Abrasion 1/4 x 1/4 cm (R) posterior aspect upper forearm 2. Lacerated wound 1 x 1/4 x MD on mid occipital region. Injury Report Ex. D/14 (Ratan) : 1. Incised wound 1 x 1/4 x MD on Rt. side forehead with red clotted blood 2. Lacerated wound 1/2 x 1/4 x MD on mid of forehead 3. Swelling diffused with tenderness on L. side chest post aspect. 4. Bruise 3 x 2 R. shoulder. The prosecution case is founded on the testimony of Nanag Ram (PW-3), Kamli (PW-7) and Lad Bai (PW-4 ). According to informant Nanag Ram while he was working at the field Kajod, Bharat Lal, Charat Lal, Batti Lal, Hajari, Ram Ratan, Rajesh, Kajod S/o Ramesh, Dhapa, Manbhar, Ram Parsi and Sammi armed with lathis, Gandasi, Paila, Axe and iron-rod came over there and Ram Ratan inflicted three blows with Gandasi on the head of Daya Ram, as a result of which he fell down. Thereafter Batti Lal inflicted lathi blow on his (Nanag Ram) person and Manbhar gave stone-blow on his face. Kamli and Lad Bai were beaten up by all the accused. Ghanshyam (PW-2) and Ratan Lal (PW-8), attributed the injury on head of Daya Ram to Ram Ratan. Testimony of Nanag Ram gets corroboration from the statements of Ghanshyam, (PW-2), Lad Bai (PW-4), Kamli (PW-7), Ratan Lal (PW-8), Tulsi Ram (PW-9) and Lachhi Ram (PW-10 ). Kanhaiya Lal Investigating Officer (PW-20), in his cross- examination admitted that cross-cases were registered between the parties. He also admitted that incident occurred on account of boundary-wall of the field. He deposed thus:
(3.) FNUKAD 6-6-2001 dks ,d fjiksvz crrhyky vfhk;qdr }kjk esjs iwoz vf/kdkjh ds ikl is'k dh xbz Fkh ftl ij ,q vkbz vkj pkd dh xbz tks izn'kz Mh 8 gsa ---- tks ,q vkbz vkj 181@2001 gs] blesa Hkh eqyfteku ukux;k] cqf)jke] n;kjke o ykmckbz oxsjg Fksa --- ;g lgh gs fd eqyfteku i{k ds 'kjhj ij vkbz pksvksa ds ckjs esa esus bl izdj. k esa myys[k ugha fd;k gs fd muds mdr pksvs fdl izdkj ls vkbza ;g lgh gs fd esjs vuqla/kku esa kxm+k esm ckcr~ gqvk Fkk] ijurq esm dk fookn igys ls py jgk Fkka esm dks vkil esa nksuksa i{kksa }kjk dkvus dk gh fookn Fkka** Fact situation emerges from the material on record may be summarized thus: (i) Members of complainant party and accused party were neighbours. (ii) Accused Ram Ratan gave blow from Gandasi on the head of Daya Ram that proved fatal. (iii) There was no specific allegation against other co- accused for inflicting injuries. (iv) Cross cases were registered between the parties. (v) Members of accused party sustained lacerated wounds and injuries sustained by the accused party were not explained by the prosecution witnesses. (vi) Incident occurred all of sudden and both the parties fought freely. Similar situation arose before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dharman vs. State of Punjab (AIR 1957 SC 324) dispute regarding Shamlati land existed between the parties. The accused claimed that the land was in their possession whereas the party of the deceased put forward the claim that the land had been in their possession for many years. On the date of the incident a fight ensued. The deceased died in the course of a sudden and free fight by the injury inflicted by the appellant. The deceased's party was also armed with dangerous weapons. Held by the Supreme Court, that when two such contending parties, each armed with weapons, when clashed and in the course of free fight some injuries were inflicted on one party or the other, it could not be said that either of them acted in cruel or unusual manner and the case against the appellant clearly fell within Exception 4 to Section 300 I. P. C. ;