Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 220 (RAJ)

Hem Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2013-01-28

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. - The instant revision has been filed by the petitioner complainant against the order dated 27.11.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur in Sessions Case No. 48/1998, whereby the respondents No. 2 to 10 have been discharged from the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. and the case has been toned down under Section 228 Cr.P.C. and has been sent to the Nagaur for trial. 2. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an F.I.R. at the Police Station Khinvsar on 18.8.1997 with the allegation that in the evening at about 7 O'Clock Gumam Singh, Bhera Ram, Birda Ram, Nanak Ram, Hari Singh, Shambhoo Khan, Kesha Ram and Suresh came to the Dhani of Nanak Ram in a truck. Thereafter, these persons collected in a tractor-trolley and a jeep and came to the agricultural field of the complainant and started cutting the Millet crop. When the complainant and his sons Mohan Singh and Gulab Singh requested them not to do so. The accused persons started firing towards the complainant party indiscriminately by the guns. The complainant and his family members hid themselves in the house for saving themselves and that is why they did not receive any injuries. It was also alleged that the accused persons damaged the Millet crops belonging to the complainant and caused a loss worth Rs. 10,000/- He also alleged that the accused persons hurled stones towards them but the complainant and his companions hid themselves in the house and thus, were saved from harm. On the basis of this report, a case for offences under Sections 147,148, 447,427, 336, 307 and 149 I.P.C. was registered. When the Police conducted the site inspection, it was found that the Millet crop standing in the field was destroyed by the running over of a jeep and a tractor. The jeep of the accused was found standing in the field. Empty cartridges. Live cartridges as well as wads of the cartridges were recovered at the site. The Police ultimately after conclusion of investigation filed a charge-sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences. The accused were arrested and various fire arms and cartridges etc. were recovered during investigation. 3. Empty cartridges. Live cartridges as well as wads of the cartridges were recovered at the site. The Police ultimately after conclusion of investigation filed a charge-sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences. The accused were arrested and various fire arms and cartridges etc. were recovered during investigation. 3. The case was committed to the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur for trial and the learned Additional Sessions Judge proceeded to discharge the accused from the offence under Section 307/149 I.P.C. the complainant has now approached this Court by way of the instant revision challenging the order passed by the learned trial Judge, whereby the accused have beer discharged from the offences under Sections 307 and 149 I.P.C. 4. Shri Sunil Mehta learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a specific allegation of the complainant that the accused persons in order to take forcible possession of the field in question collected together, in - the complainant's field and destroyed the crops of the complainant. When the complainant and his companions requested them not to do so, gunshots were fired by Gumam Singh and Nanak Ram, who were having fire arms in their hand. The allegation of gun fires being made has been corroborated during the site inspection as empty cartridges, live cartridges and wads etc. have been recover a from the place of the occurrence. Two fire arms have been recovered from the accused during the course of the investigation. The accused Gumam Singh and others are alleged to have gone to the field of the complainant for the purpose of taking possession of the field on the basis of an alleged sale transaction and when the complainant resisted the attempt, indiscriminate fun fires have been made towards the complainant party. He thus contends that as gunshots were fired towards the complainant party by aiming the fire arms towards them, the intention of the accused was nothing short of committing the murder of the complainant party and therefore, they have been wrongly and illegally discharged from the offence under Section 307/149 of the I.P.C. He therefore, prays that the revision deserves to be accepted and the order passed by the learned trial Judge discharging the accused from the offence under Section 307/149 of the I.P.C. deserves to be reversed. 5. 5. Shri K.L. Thakur counsel for the respondents submits that the whole case as set up by the complainant is totally false. He contends that the accused party had purchased the field in question and had gone to the field for bona fide agricultural activities, at which point of time, the complainant party tried to intervene. He submits that by the so-called gunshots, not a scratch has been caused to any of the members of the complainant party and therefore, prima facie, the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. cannot be said to be made out against the accused. 6. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar. Perused the order impugned and the record. 7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Balram Bama Patil, reported in 1983 SCC Criminal 320 , has held that causing of such injury as would endanger live is not an essential ingredient for the applicability of Section 307 of the I.P.C. In this case, there is a specific allegation of the complainant that the accused persons fired gunshots indiscriminately towards the complainant party with the intention of committing their murder and the complainant party could just save its lives by hiding themselves in the house. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that at the stage of framing of charge, there was sufficient material with the trial Court to frame charge the accused for the offence under Section 307/149 I.P.C. The order of discharge passed in favour of. the accused for the said offence thus obviously cannot be sustained. 8. Resultantly, the revision succeeds and is hereby allowed. The order dated 27.11.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur in Sessions Case No. 48/1998 is hereby quashed to the extent, the respondents have been discharged from the offence under Section 307/149 I.P.C. the learned C.J.M. Nagaur is directed to commit the case to the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, who shall thereafter frame the charge against the accused under Section 307/149 I.P.C. and then shall conduct the trial of the case in accordance with law.Revision allowed. *******