Criminal Appeal No.961/2006, 962/2006
Rajasthan High Court
Bench: Hon’ble Mohammad Rafiq J., Hon’ble Nisha Gupta J.
Date of judgment: 16th September 2013
Relevant Acts/Sections:
- Section 147 of IPC (Punishment for rioting)
- Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for murder)
- Section 148 of IPC (Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon)
- Section 447 of IPC (Punishment for criminal trespass)
- Section 341 of IPC (Punishment for wrongful restraint)
- Section 149 of IPC (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offense commit)
- Section 323 of IPC (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.)
- Section 341 of IPC (Punishment for wrongful restraint.)
- Section 325 of IPC (Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.)
- Section 307 of IPC (attempt to murder)
- Section 91 of IPC (. Exclusion of acts which are offenses independently of harm)
- Section 324 of IPC (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.)
- Section 437 A of IPC (Mischief with intent to destroy or make unsafe)
- Section 173(8) of CrPC (Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preclude further investigation in respect of an offense after a report under subsection)
Backstory
Facts of the case are that a written report was submitted by one PhoolchandJat to Station House Officer, Police Station Shahpura, on 28.04.1998 regarding the incident, which took place at 10.00 am that day. It was alleged that one Bhura (of complainant party) had purchased land of SugaramBunkar fifteen years ago. When Bhura went to cultivate the agriculture field on that day, the accused party attacked him and his companions. They gave a severe beating to Bhura and his companions. The accused were armed with ‘Farsi’, ‘lathi’, ‘kulhari’, knife, etc. The accused, who gave beating, were Gyarsilal, BhagwanSahai, Chandraram, Chhoturam, Girdhari, Suganchand, Gadaram, Kanaram, Sumer Singh, Ghisaram, Radheyshyam, Nanchhu, Chhima W/o Gada, Shanti W/o Suganchand @ Sugga and 15 more women were accompanied them. The women were armed with ‘lathis’, and actively participated in the incident. Initially, the FIR was lodged. During an investigation, Suggaram and BhagwanSahai died. The police filed challan against nine accused, who were appellants. The investigation against five accused was kept. Subsequently, challan was also filed against the remaining five accused. The accused-appellants denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The accused-appellants though tried in separate trials but the impugned judgments were delivered on the same day i.e. 28.08.2006. The prosecution produced 32 witnesses and got sixty documents exhibited. The defense also produced six witnesses and got 31 documents exhibited. The appellants were convicted and sentenced in the manner indicated above.
Ramsingh, Chander @ Ramchandra, Chhotu, and Girdhari received at-least one injury each on the head. Bhagwana has fracture on proximal phalanx 5th metacarpal on the left hand, Girdhari received a fracture of a right front-parietal bone, and Chander @ Ramchandra received elodena of the fractured scapula.
Analysis of the evidence thus leads to the conclusion that accused Suganchand @ Sugga was solely responsible for causing fatal injury on the body of deceased BhagwanSahai and in view of major contradictions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses and lack of corroboration by medico-legal evidence as to multiple numbers of injuries in the injury-report as also an absence of incised wound, despite some of the witnesses alleging that Shanti @ Phooli inflicted ‘kulhari’ blow, and in the absence of recovery of any weapon at the instance of Shanti, she is held entitled to benefit of doubt, for the injuries for the murder of deceased BhagwanSahai.
Dr. Satish Agnihotri has proved injury-reports of all other injured.
Postmortem Findings
Deceased BhagwanSahai, as per injury-report, received one lacerated wound in the size in the size 4.5cmx1.0cmxbone deep on the right parietal bone of the skull. His postmortem-report indicates seven injuries, but in fact injuries no.1 to 5 was the effect of a single blow with its manifestation. Single head injury is shown in the injury-report. Dr. P.C. Vyas has also clarified that injuries no.1 to 3 are stitched wounds, all on left front parietal region and left side of the occipital region, whereas injury no.4 was lacerated wound just anterior to injury no.3 and injury no.5 was diffused swelling on the right temporal region. The fact that in the injury-report was proved by Dr. Satish Agnihotri, no apparent injury is shown in the right temporal region, this swelling could be the result of the severe blow inflicted on the head of the deceased leading to injuries no.1 to 4, three of which were stitched wound. The sixth injury was having two abrasions on the left side in front of the chest and at the left elbow, which could not be noticed by the medical officer while preparing injury-report, but this was a simple injury. The seventh injury was wound of tracheotomy present on the front of the neck, which was due to the procedure applied by the treating doctors. The cause of death was opined to be coma, as a result of injuries to the skull and brain.
It is found from the medico-legal evidence, it became clear from the injury-report of SuggaBalai that he received only two injuries, one of which was lacerated wound on the middle of skull having dimension 4cmx1cmxbone deep, and another was swelling with bruise having dimension 2cmx1cm on the upper eyelid of the left eye. The cause of his death has been opined to be coma, as a result of antemortem injuries to the skull and brain. In the injury-report, injury no.2 has been described as swelling with bruise having dimension 2cmx1cm on the upper eyelid of the left eye, which was stated to be simply caused by blunt weapon.
The other twelve injured were:
Shivram @ Sheoram received one lacerated wound on the left parietal bone of skull vide injury-report, which was simply caused by blunt weapon.
Banshidhar had also sustained one lacerated wound on the left parietal bone of skull vide injury-report, which was simply caused by blunt weapon.
Smt. Saroj has received three injuries vide injury-report. The first injury was lacerated on the right parietal bone of the skull. The second was lacerated on the dorsal side of the right index finger. The third was a complaint of pain over back.
Narain, one of the injured, received four injuries. One was a lacerated wound, two were swelling, and one bruise. All injuries were simply caused by blunt weapons.
Kalu has received four injuries. First was swelling with tenderness on the lateral and dorsal side of the left hand. The second was lacerated on the pilnar side of the left ring finger. The third was a bruise in the middle of the back and forth was a complaint of pain over the left thigh.
Goti has sustained six injuries and has attributed her injuries to Gadaram, Chhima, and Sumer. The first injury sustained by her was lacerated on the upper and posterior part of right forearm, the second was lacerated on the right parietal bone of the skull, third was swelling with tenderness on the right ring finger, fourth was bruise with swelling on the right and middle of back, fifth was a bruise over the left shoulder joint and sixth was a bruise over the right scapular region.
Abhay Singh has sustained two injuries. One was lacerated wound with swelling over nose and second was swelling with bruise below the left eye.
Phoolchand has received five injuries. The first injury was lacerated wound on the lateral side of the right eyebrow, the second was lacerated wound on the lateral side of the right eye, third was an abrasion on the nose, fourth was lacerated on the middle side of the right forearm and fifth was a bruise on the lateral side of the left thigh.
Bhura has received three injuries.
Kanaram @ Kanhaiyalal W/o Bhuraram has received two injuries. One lacerated wound on the right parietal region of the skull and another is pain on the left shoulder joint.
Kana S/o Girdhari. Dhapa Devi has received two injuries, namely, one swelling on the left elbow and another bruise on the knee but she has not made any specific allegation against any particular accused.
Nathuram has received two injuries, one lacerated on the left parietal region skull posteriorly and another abrasion on the bridge of the nose.
Judgment
As the result, the appeal of accused-appellants Radheyshyam andNanchhuram was allowed. They were acquitted of all the charges giving them the benefit of doubt. They were on bail and need not surrender. Their bail bonds and sureties stand discharged.
Appeals of remaining accused-appellants were disposed of as under, Accused-appellants Gadaram and Suganchand @ Sugga, are convicted for an only substantive offense under Section 302 IPC. They were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- each, in default of payment of fine, each of them would have further undergone three months simple imprisonment. They were in jail and have to serve out the remaining sentence.
Accused-appellants Gyarsilal, Sumer Singh, Ramsingh, Girdharilal, Chander @ Ramchandra, Bhagwana @ Bhaggu, Kanaram @Kanhaiyalal and Smt. Shanti was convicted for an offence under Sections 323 and 447 IPC. Accused-appellant Chhoturam was convicted for an offence under Sections 325 and 447 IPC. Accused-appellant Chhima was convicted for an offence under Sections 324 and 447IPC. Smt. Shanti and Smt. Chhima remained behind the bars for about four months. Kanaram @ Kanhaiyalal remained behind the bars for about eight months. Gyarsilal remained behind the bars for about one year three months, Chhoturam for about 1 year 7 months, Sumersingh for about seven months, Ramsingh, GirdharilalamdChander @ Ramchandra for about ten months and Bhagwana @ Bhaggu for about one and half year. They were sentenced to the period already undergone by them. They were on bail and need not surrender. Their bail bonds and sureties stand discharged.
The provisions of Section 437-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, appellants Gyarsilal, Chhoturam, Sumer Singh, Ramsingh, Girdhari, Chander @ Ramchandra, Bhagwana @ Bhaggu, Radheyshyam, Nanchhuram, Kanaram @ Kanhaiyalal, Smt. Shanti and Smt. Chhima were directed to forthwith furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each, and a surety bond in the like amount, before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, which effectively was for six months, undertaking that in the event of filing of Special Leave Petition against this judgment or on a grant of leave, the appellants, on receipt of notice thereof, shall appear before the Supreme Court.