SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant jail appeal preferred on behalf of Roshan is directed against the judgment dated 29.6.2015 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 59/2014 whereby, whilst acquitting the appellant from the charge under Section 302 IPC, the trial court convicted him for the offence under Section 304-II IPC and sentenced him to 10 years S.I. with a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months S.I.
(2.) Facts in brief are that the complainant Sohan s/o Naring lodged a written report at P.S. Gogunda on 6.8.2014 alleging inter-alia that he used to work with his two brothers Hiralal and Nojiram at Surat. His elder brother Roshan (appellant) was working as a labourer at Kelwa. A person named Rooplal called him on phone from the village and told him that Roshan had beaten their father Naring and that his condition was serious. On this, the first informant and his brothers Nojiram and Hiralal rushed back to the village and saw the dead body of their father lying in the courtyard of their house. His mother Chunki told that on 4.8.2014 in the night at about 12'o clock, Roshan came to the house in an inebriated condition and started demanding Rs. 20,000/- which had been received in the settlement of Jhagra pursuant to his wife's going in Nata. Naring told that the money had been spent, upon which Roshan became enraged and assaulted him by Lathi blows on his head, chest and left hand which broke because of the assault. Naring passed away in the afternoon at about 2 on 05.08.2014. On the basis of this report an F.I.R. No. 268/2014 was lodged at P.S. Gogunda for the offence under Section 302 IPC and investigation commenced. During course of investigation, the dead body of Naring was subjected to post-mortem and the doctor noticed two bruises on the body, one measuring 2"x1" on the left side of chest wall with oozing of blood. Underneath the said injury, there was a fracture of 10 th rib and laceration of lower lung tissue. The second injury on the left hand measured 1"x1" with oozing of blood and underneath, there was a fracture of humerus. The Doctor observed in the post mortem report Ex.P-21 that both the injuries were dangerous to life. The investigation culminated into filing of charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC. After committal, the case was transferred to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur. Charge for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. was framed against the accused who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. At the trial, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses in support of its case. The accused denied the prosecution case upon being examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. but did not lead any evidence in defence. Learned trial Judge while deciding the case held that the incident occurred on a trivial quarrel over demand of money made by the accused from his father, the deceased Naring who expired on the next day of the incident. There was no enmity between the parties. Thus, it was held that the accused did not have any intention to cause such injuries to the deceased which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause his death. With these findings, learned trial court acquitted the accused from the charge under Section; 302 IPC but convicted him for the offence under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced him as above. Hence, this appeal.
(3.) .I have considered the arguments advanced by Mr. Sunil Bishnoi, Amicus Curiae representing the appellant and the learned P.P. and have gone through the record.;