- (1.) HON'ble BHAGWATI, J. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 21 July, 1997 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2, Bharatpur whereby, the appellant Hari Singh and Mst. Santa have been convicted in the offences under Sections 307/34 and 307 respectively and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 4 years and a fine of Rs. 200/-; in default of payment of fine to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for one month.
(2.) THE nub of the appellants story is as under:- That on 7 September, 1983 PW-3 Mst. Shanti wife of Padam Singh went to her field to collect fodder for animals. She saw the wife and daughter of Hari Singh cutting the fodder. When she asked them not to cut the fodder, they abused her. It is alleged that on the same day at about 4 in the evening Mst. Shanti went to a well to fill water in her pitcher. It is further alleged that the accused persons namely Rajveer, Hardai, Santa daughter of Hari Singh and Hari Singh armed with clubs were already standing there and the accused Hari Singh prodded other accused persons exclaiming that :- Lkys dks tku ls ekj nks] es nw[k ywaxka** Thereupon, the accused Mst. Hardai assaulted upon the head of Shanti and the accused Santa hit on her knee. It is further alleged that the accused Mst. Santa with an intention to kill, pushed her in the well. PW-2 Phool Singh, the son of Mst. Shanti having seen this incident, rushed to his father and apprised him with the same. PW-1 Padam Singh, the husband of Mst. Shanti rushed to the spot where Hari Singh and Rajveer threatened him and asked him to go away from there. However, one Balveer Singh pulled out his wife from the well who was in a state of unconsciousness. It is also alleged that Mst. Shanti was kept by the accused Hari Singh and others in his own house and she was set free next morning only. On the written report Ex. P/1, police lodged the First Information Report and commenced investigation. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr. P. C. , prepared the site plan, got the injured Mst. Shanti medically examined and on completion of investigation, the police having found no evidence against the accused persons gave negative final report in the case. Aggrieved with the negative police report of the S. H. O. , Police station Vair, the complainant filed a protest petition/complaimnt in the court of Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Vair who having examined witnesses under Section 200 and 202 of Cr. P. C. took the cognizance of the offences under Section 447, 323, 307/34 and 326 of IPC and proceeded against the accused persons namely Mst. Hardai, Mst. Santa, Rajveer and Hari Singh. In due course of time, the case came up before Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2, Bharatpur for trial. The accused Hari Singh was indicted for offences under Section 323, 307/34 and 376 of IPC, Rajveer for the offence under Section 323 and 307/34, Mst. Hardai for the offences under Sections 307/34 and 447 and Mst. Santa for the offences under Sections 307 and 447 of IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined in all 11 witnesses to prove its case. The accused persons in their explanation under Section 313 of Cr. P. C. claimed innocence. The accused examined only one witness DW-1 Virendra Singh in defence. On completion of trial, the learned trial court did not find the accused Rajveer guilty in the offences under Sections 307/34 and 323 of IPC and Mst. Hardai in the offences under Sections 323 and 447 of IPC and thus, acquitted them for the aforesaid charges. So far as, the appellants Hari Singh and Mst. Santa are concerned they were convicted and sentenced as indicated hereinabove.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and with their assistance scanned the relevant material available on record. Learned counsel for the appellant has canvassed that the First Information Report lodged by PW-1 Padam Singh and the protest petition/complaint filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Vair on 7 November, 1983 are laden with contradictions in material particulars. The story of rape has not been mentioned in the written report Ex. P/1 filed by the complainant. He has further canvassed that Mst. Shanti is alleged to have been ravished by the accusedappellant Hari Singh in his house but she was recovered from the house of Chhiddi. The police has not shown any recovery of the prosecutrix from the house of Chhiddi. The sole statement of prosecutrix with regard to her recovery from the house of Chhiddi has not been substantiated by police. This fact does not find place in the First Information Report Ex. P/1 which falsifies the whole statement of the prosecutrix and on such unreliable and false statement appellants cannot be convicted. The learned counsel has also contended that all the injuries found on the person of Mst. Shanti are simple in nature which are said to be caused by the blunt object. There is a variation about age of the injuries also and the statement of PW-11 Dr. K. L. Verma suffers from infirmity. The prosecution has failed to prove the offence under Section 307 of IPC against the appellants, as such, they deserve to be acquitted accordingly. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that the learned trial court has critically analyzed and properly appreciated the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in detail. The statement of PW-1 Padam Singh, PW-2 Phool Singh, PW-3 Mst. Shanti are trustworthy and there is no reason on record to abandon their evidence. The statement of PW-2 Phool Singh cannot be jettisoned simply for the reason that he happens to be the son of injured Mst. Shanti. The judgment of the learned trial court is just and proper and it calls for no interference, hence, the appeal filed by the appellants may dismissed. ;