M. L. Shrimal, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated March 24, 1976, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Alwar convicted the appellants and sentenced them as under:- JUDGEMENT_36_LAWS(RAJ)12_19771.html The substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. The other four accused namely, Badri, Bansi, Parsadi and Mishrilal were acquitted of all the charges framed against them.
(2.) Tersely speaking shorn of unnecessary details the prosecution case as disclosed at the trial is that the relations between the accused and the members of the complainant party were far from being happy. On February 4, 1975 at 10 a. m. Jagdish Prasad was going towards the railway station. When he reached near the hotel of Badri accused (acquitted by the trial court), Ram Singh caught hold of him and the other accused surrounded him and inflicted blows. Bhag Chand and Ram Prasad accused caused grievous hurt on the hand of Jagdish and Arjun chopped off a portion of his nose and ears and rest of the accused inflicted injuries with lathis. It has also come in the evidence that the occurrence was witnessed by Laxman Nai; Jagan Meena, Ganpat Mahajan, Ram Singh Meena, Kanhaiya Jat and the Station Master of Rampura. Injured Jagdish was taken to dispensary at Raini, where first aid was provided to him and thereafter he was removed to the hospital at Alwar, Meanwhile a written report was lodged at the Police Station, Rajgarh. Jagdish was clinically examined by PW 2 Dr. D. R. Sharma and his injury report is Ex. P/7. The police after usual investigation submitted a challan against ten accused. On commitment all the ten accused were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Alwar. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and the prosecution examined in all 20 witnesses, out of whom PW. 1 Jagdish Prasad, is the injured person and PW 4 Lachhman, PW 5 Ram Singh, PW 12 Jegana and PW 14 Kanhaiya Lal were examine as eyewitness of the occurrence.
(3.) The learned Sessions Judge after keeping in view the infirmities in the prosecution case that some of the independent eye witnesses, whose presence at the time of the occurrence was proved on the record, were not examined and that there were certain variations in the statements of the eye witnesses made in the trial court and the statements recorded by the police as well as in the first information report, acquitted four accused, but he found the case against the remaining accused proved beyond reasonable doubt as such convicted and sentenced them as mentioned above.;