B.J.SHETHNA, J. - (1.) THE appellants -accused have challenged in this appeal the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.9.1982 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 58/1982 whereby the accused have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 325, 149 and 147, IPC and sentenced to suffer 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 100/ - in default to further undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel Shri N.P. Gupta for the appellants -accused submitted that the learned Sessions Judge committed an error in relying upon the prosecution story and the evidence of the prosecution -witnesses. In all, six witnesses were examined. The defence of the accused was in two folds viz., (i) that deceased Rupi was a witch and she was beaten by the villagers wherein she received 6 injuries, (ii) Ram Lal, son of deceased Rupi misbehaved with the wife of appellant -accused No. 2 Sita Ram for which complaint was also filed, therefore, the names of the accused have been falsely given in this case. The incident in question took place on 2.4.1982 at about 10 -11 p.m. in the night. FIR was lodged immediately on the next day. It is true that Ramlal's version that first the accused started to beat him When his mother asked him to run away, he left the place. But. no injuries were found on the person of Ramlal. However, that itself would not be sufficient to discard the entire prosecution story. There were other witnesses. PW. 2 Kundan Mal's evidence is clear. He stated that all the accused came with arms and started to beat Rupi wherein she received 5 injuries -one of them was radius fracture on her hand. She was thereafter removed to the hospital and she succumbed to the injuries after some days. Therefore, a case was registered against the accused under Section 302. read with Sections 149 and 147 1PC. However, the learned Trial Judge considering the evidence of the witnesses and the medical evidence was of the opinion that no case was made out to convict the accused under Section 302 IPC, therefore, they were acquitted for the major offence. However, he convicted the accused for offence punishable under Section 325 read with Sections 149 and 147 IPC. Considering the reasons assigned by the learned Trial Court and the evidence of the witnesses mainly Kundan Mal, it cannot be said that the trial Court has committed any error in convicting the accused for offences punishable under Section 325 read with Sections 149 and 147 IPC.
(3.) MR . Gupta then contended that the incident in question took place because of the misbehaviour of Ramlal son of deceased Rupi who misbehaved with the wife of appellant -accused No. 2 Sita Ram for which complaint was lodged against him. He submitted that all the six accused -persons cannot be asked to undergo the remaining part of the sentence of 3 years after so many years of the commission of the offence. He submitted that the offence in question took place on 2.4.1982 i.e., almost 16 years from today. They have remained in jail for some time. Their appeal was admitted in 1982 and since then they are on bail. For these injuries, all the accused cannot be sentenced to 3 years. He submitted that the substantive sentence be reduced to the sentence already undergone.;