MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred by accused-appellants Narendra Singh and Kishan Singh against the judgment dated 8.7.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Bharatpur vide which appellant no.2-Kishan Singh has been convicted for offence under section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 25,000, in default whereof he was to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. He was also convicted for offence under section 3/25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment of 3 years with fine of Rs. 5,000, in default whereof, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of three months. He was also convicted for offence under section 341 IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonment of one month. Accused-appellant no. 1-Narendra Singh has been convicted for offence under section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 25,000, in default whereof he was to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. He was also convicted for offence under section 341 IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonment of one month. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 22.05.2009, complainant Surji @ Surajmal (PW-2) has, during his treatment, lodged a report at R.B.M. Hospital, Bharatpur before SHO, Police Station Udyog Nagar, Bharatpur alleging therein that today on 22.05.2009, they were raising construction of "Hanuman Ji Ka Mandir" on their land situated at Village Gunsara near the Road. The complainant Surajmal along-with his three brothers Bholi, Virendra and Rajendra were jointly raising the said construction. Bhopal Koli was mason and another person was working as labourer in construction of temple. At about 5.00 PM, the complainant and Bholi asked one of their brother Veero, who had placed his 'khokha' (wooden box) on the land illegally, that the gate of the temple has to be open towards the side of this khokha therefore, he should move this to another side. Veero angrily went to home saying that he would return soon. After some time. Kishan, Ram Sahai, Gopal, Narendra and Veero came there with conspiracy to kill them. Kishan Singh was having a 'katta' (country made pistol), Gopal was also carrying a Katta. Veero was carrying a lathi in his hand, Narendra was having a 'farsa', Ram Sahai was also carrying a 'farsa'. It was also alleged that accused Kishan Singh, with the intention to kill, fired from the 'katta', which hit Radheyshyam at his chest. Gopal had also fired, which hit at the shoulder of Laxman. Narendra gave a farsha blow on the head of Bholi. Veero gave a 'lathi' blow on the person of Om Prakash. Ramsahai gave a 'farsa' blow on the head of the complainant which resulted in bleeding. The villagers namely, Prakash, Vinod etc., who were seeing the occurrence, had thereafter brought them to the hospital. Radhey Shyam, who died on the spot, was also taken to the hospital.
(3.) On the basis of the aforementioned report, the police registered FIR No. 102/2009 for the offence under Section 332, 353 and 342 IPC and the investigation commenced. On conclusion of investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed before the learned court below for the offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 307 and 302 IPC against the accused persons, including the accused appellants. The case was then committed to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, the case was transferred to the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 3, Bharatpur for trial. Charges for the offence under sections 148, 323, 341/149, 307/149 and 302/149 IPC were framed against the accused appellants who denied the same and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 30 witnesses and exhibited 53 documents. Thereafter, the accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 They stated that they have been falsely implicated and had no concern with the alleged incident. In defence, the statements of Narendra Singh (DW-1) were recorded and defence has produced 11 documents which were exhibited as Ex.D1 to Ex.D11. During the pendency of trial, a report was received on 30.6.2011 about death of co-accused Veero and therefore proceedings were dropped against him. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 3, Bharatpur, after hearing both the parties, vide impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused appellants in the manner stated above. However, co-accused Ramsahai and Gopal were extended benefit of probation under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act on each of them furnishing surety bond of Rs. 25,000 and personal bond of the same amount. Hence this appeal.;