Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 250 (RAJ)

Shankar Lal v. State of Rajasthan

2014-01-22

ATUL KUMAR JAIN, GOVIND MATHUR

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. Challenge in this appeal is given to the judgment dated 13.5.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bikaner recording conviction of the accused appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, and further to undergo six months simple imprisonment in the event of default in payment of fine. 2. The facts relevant for adjudication of the appeal are that at 2:45 PM on 4.4.2004, on the basis of an oral information given by Shri Atma Ram (PW-7) at Police Station, Khajuwala, a case was registered against the accused appellant along-with one Shri Bhaga Ram for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C. As per the facts recorded in the FIR (Exhibit-P/10), Atma Ram (PW-7) and his grand-son Om Prakash (deceased) were residing in a hamlet in 27 KYD. Accused Shankar Lal was also residing with his family in a neighbouring hamlet. On 2.4.2004 Om Prakash had some quarrel with his brother Dula Ram. Elder brother of accused Shankar Lal, namely, Prem intervened and got the quarrelling boys separated, however, Om Prakash at that time stated that he will not visit hamlet of Prem in future and also expected that no person from the family of Prem shall visit his hamlet. On 4.4.2004 at about 1:00 PM, when Atma Ram (PW-7), Om Prakash and his wife Sumitra (PW-2) were going to village Pavli, accused Shankar Lal and Bhaga Ram came on a bicycle. Shankar Lal was armed with a sharp-edged iron piece having a wooden handle looking like a "choora". Other person Bhaga Ram was carrying an iron pipe in his hand. Shankar Lal gave a blow on the neck of Om Prakash from the sharp-edged iron piece and Bhaga Ram gave blows on the legs of Om Prakash with iron pipe. The injuries occurred resulted into death of Om Prakash. 3. The Investigating Agency after completing investigation submitted a police report in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Khajuwala with a charge of committing offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C. against the appellant Shankar Lal and accused Bhaga Ram. The matter being sessions triable was committed to the court of sessions. 3. The Investigating Agency after completing investigation submitted a police report in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Khajuwala with a charge of committing offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C. against the appellant Shankar Lal and accused Bhaga Ram. The matter being sessions triable was committed to the court of sessions. The Sessions Court after providing an opportunity of hearing to the accused persons, framed charge for commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. against appellant Shankar Lal and for commission of an offence punishable under Section 302/34 I.P.C. against Bhaga Ram. The accused persons denied the charge, thus, the trial commenced as desired. 4. The prosecution supported its case with the aid of eight witnesses, out of whom, PW-2 Sumitra and PW-7 Atma Ram were cited as the eye-witnesses. Testimony of Dr. Dilip Kalera was examined as he conducted autopsy on the corpus of deceased Om Prakash. Shri Narayan Singh (PW-8) narrated all the steps taken during investigation, being the Investigating Officer. The prosecution in support of its case also got 26 documents exhibited. 5. An opportunity was accorded to both the accused to explain the adverse and incriminating circumstance appearing against them in prosecution evidence. The accused appellant Shankar while availing the same stated that Dula Ram and Atma Ram were having certain disputes with Om Prakash, who murdered his father Birbal Ram on 20.6.2003. In that murder case Atma Ram and Dula Ram were witnesses, however, due to persuasion by relatives and other persons of the society they became hostile, resulting in acquittal of Om Prakash. Om Prakash, though, was acquitted but his grandfather Atma Ram and brother Dula Ram were keeping annoyance with him. Om Prakash was a person of ill and loose virtues and he was in the habit of entering into quarrels with his family members and wife. Looking to all these tendencies of Om Prakash, Atma Ram and Dula Ram killed him by putting him on round sowing disks attached to a tractor. In defence, testimony of Kana Ram (DW-1) was examined and three documents were exhibited. 6. The learned trial court after examining the entire evidence, acquitted Bhara Ram, but convicted the appellant Shankar Lal for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. 7. In defence, testimony of Kana Ram (DW-1) was examined and three documents were exhibited. 6. The learned trial court after examining the entire evidence, acquitted Bhara Ram, but convicted the appellant Shankar Lal for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. 7. In appeal, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the trial court failed to appreciate that the eye-witnesses Smt. Sumitra (PW-2) and Atma Ram (PW-7) were interested witnesses, as such, the narration of facts by them should have been supported by other independent reliable evidence, which is conspicuously absent in the case in hand. 8. While opposing appeal, the submission of learned Public Prosecutor is that the prosecution case is supported by definite evidence adduced by eye-witnesses and that is further corroborated by medical and forensic evidence. According to learned Public Prosecutor, adequate evidence is available on record to held the accused appellant guilty for commission of murder of Shri Om Prakash. 9. We have examined entire evidence available on record in light of submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 10. As per medical evidence available on record, deceased Om Prakash was having the following injuries:- 1. Incised wound 15cm x 5cm x trachea deep extending from right sterno-cloid muscle to left-cloid muscle, above thyroid cartilage. Trachea also cut. Carobid arteries also clearly cut. Clotted blood present in trachea. 2. Incised wound 7cm x 3cm x muscle deep right hand palmer aspect. 3. Incised wound 6cm x 3cm x bone deep with amputation of left little finger of left hand palmer aspect. 4. Incised wound 6cm x 4cm x muscle deep chest wall right side below 12th rib posteriorly. 5. Incised wound 3cm x 2cm x muscle deep left side chest wall in between 11th & 12th rib posteriorly. 11. The cause of death given was asphyxia and excessive hemorrhage. The medical evidence is adequate to establish that the death of Om Prakash was homicidal one. It is pertinent to note that all the five injuries found on the person of deceased were incised. 12. At the instance of accused Shankar Lal weapon of offence was recovered. The weapon of offence was sent for its serological examination to Forensic Science Laboratory and as per the report made by the laboratory, the iron weapon was found with blood-stains of human origin. 12. At the instance of accused Shankar Lal weapon of offence was recovered. The weapon of offence was sent for its serological examination to Forensic Science Laboratory and as per the report made by the laboratory, the iron weapon was found with blood-stains of human origin. At the instance of accused his shirt and pent were also recovered and those were stained with human blood. No explanation is given by the accused as to how his wearing apparels had blood of human nature. This evidence acquires significance in view of the statements made by the eye-witness Smt. Sumitra (PW- 2), who in quite specific terms stated that on 4.4.2004 she was accompanying her husband Om Prakash and her father-in- law Atma Ram. While on the way, Shankar Lal and Bhaga Ram came on a cycle and gave a blow on the neck of Om Prakash. As per this witness, Shankar Lal was having a sharp-edged weapon from which he gave a blow on the neck of Om Prakash. She maintained her version in the detailed cross-examination also. On asking she clarified that after giving blow on neck, Shankar Lal further gave blows to Om Prakash on his back and chest. As per this witness, blows were also received by Om Prakash on his palm and fingers. PW-7 Shri Atma Ram also narrated the facts in the same tune. The statement given by the eye-witnesses PW-2 and PW-7 in no manner lack confidence. True it is, the witnesses aforesaid are the close relatives of deceased but the narration of facts made by them does not suffer from any contradiction and further that is corroborated by medical evidence and also by the recoveries made at the instance of accused Shankar Lal. Besides that, we do not find any reason at-least for Smt. Sumitra (PW-2) to state wrong facts about the accused by saving the real culprits committing murder of her husband. 13. In view of the examination and appreciation of evidence as above, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same, thus, deserves to be dismissed. 14. Accordingly, the conviction recorded and the sentence awarded by the trial court under the judgment impugned is affirmed. The appeal is dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******