Suresh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6019 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:26062]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                     S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 643/2020

Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Kishanlal, Aged About 32 Years, Village
Madiya, Police Station Nokha, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner.
                                                                       ----Appellant
                                       Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                     ----Respondent
                                  Connected With
                S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 644/2020
1.    Kishanlal S/o Sh. Ramrakh, Aged About 58 Years, Village
      Madiya, Tehsil Nokha, Police Station Nokha, District Bikaner.
2.    Rameshwar Lal S/o Sh. Ramrakh, Aged About 59 Years,
      Village Madiya, Tehsil Nokha, Police Station Nokha, District
      Bikaner.
3.    Maniram S/o Sh. Ramrakh, Aged About 48 Years, Village
      Madiya, Tehsil Nokha, Police Station Nokha, District Bikaner.
                                                                      ----Appellants
                                       Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)              :    Mr. Manish Dadhich
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr. Anis Bhurat, PP



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                   JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT RESERVED ON                               ::::             25/07/2023
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON                             ::::             18/08/2023
BY THE COURT:-

1. These two appeals have been preferred by the appellants

Suresh Kumar, Kishan Lal, Rameshwar Lal and Maniram against

[2023:RJ-JD:26062] (2 of 5) [CRLAS-643/2020]

the judgment dated 13.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge No.3, Bikaner in Sessions Case No.19/2012

whereby, the learned Judge convicted the accused-appellants for

the offence Sections 323/34 & 325/34 of the IPC and acquitted

them for the offences under Sections 307, 307/34, 354 & 354/34

of the IPC. Benefit under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders

Act was also extended to them. They were also directed to pay

compensation of Rs.50,000/- out of which Rs. 10,000/- to

complainant Ram Chandra, Rs.10,000/- to Smt. Parma Devi and

Rs.30,000/- to injured Om Prakash.

2. Bereft of elaborate details, the facts necessary for disposal of

the appeals are that on 19.07.2008 at 8:30 p.m. complainant

Ramchandra filed a written report to the effect that today at about

1:00 p.m. when he was sitting at his uncle's house at Village

Madiya along with another uncle Gorkharam, uncle Asuram, his

cousin Om Prakash and sister-in-law Smt. Parma Devi then

Suresh, Kishan Lal, Rameshwar Lal, Mani Ram, Anopi, Bidami and

Imarti forcefully entered into his uncle's house with an intention to

kill his uncle Gorkharam; Suresh and Kishan Lal were having

sickles in their hands whereas other accused were having lathis in

their hands; Suresh inflicted a sickle blow on the head of his uncle

Ashu Ram and all the accused started to give beatings; upon

which he alongwith Gorkha Ram, Parma Devi and Om Prakash

tried to intercept and rescue the victim, then Kishan Lal inflicted

sickle blow on his left hand and left leg; injuries were inflicted to

Gorkha Ram by the accused Mani Ram and with an intention to kill

Kishan Lal inflicted a sickle blow on the head of Om Prakash. Both

[2023:RJ-JD:26062] (3 of 5) [CRLAS-643/2020]

Imarti and Bidami inflicted lathi blow on Om Prakash; Imarti

inflicted lathi blow on the hand of Parma Devi and Rameshwar Lal

tried to outrage the modesty of Parma Devi. On making hue and

cry by the injured persons, the assailants ran away from the place

of occurrence. The main cause of assault was that there was a

quarrel between the children of the parties, therefore, they

assaulted upon the opposite party. All injured were taken to Nokha

Hospital, where doctor referred Ashu Rama and Om Prakash to the

Hospital at Bikaner.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, an FIR No.288

dated 19.07.2008 was registered at the Police Station Nokha

against the accused persons under Sections 452, 323, 308, 147,

149 and 354 of the IPC and after usual investigation, a charge-

sheet came to be filed against the appellants herein for the

offence punishable under Sections 450, 323, 325, 354, 307/34 of

the IPC. As the offence was exclusively triable by a Sessions

court, the case was committed to the Court of the Sessions Judge,

Bikaner, from where the same was transferred for trial to the

Court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track No.2), Bikaner.

4. The trial court framed charges against the accused for the

above mentioned offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses

and exhibited 42 documents and 4 articles to prove its case. The

accused were questioned under Section 313 CrPC and were

confronted with the circumstances appearing against them in the

prosecution evidence. They denied the same and claimed to be

innocent. No witness was examined in defence and some

[2023:RJ-JD:26062] (4 of 5) [CRLAS-643/2020]

documents were tendered into evidence. After hearing the

arguments advanced by the Public Prosecutor and the defence

counsel and appreciating the evidence available on record, the

learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence accused-

appellants for the offence Sections 323/34 & 325/34 of the IPC

and acquit them for the offences under Sections 307, 307/34, 354

& 354/34 of the IPC by granting benefit of doubt to them. They

were also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the

complainant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that learned

trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual

aspects of the matter while passing the judgment impugned;

injuries received have been simple in nature; prosecution

witnesses have been declared hostile; the accused and victims

belongs to same family; there is no previous animosity between

the parties; thus, the instant appeals may be allowed and the

judgment dated 13.03.2020 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions

advanced by the appellants' counsel and submits that learned trial

Judge has not committed any illegality in passing the judgment

impugned.

7. I have gone through the judgment impugned passed by the

learned trial Court and minutely gone through the evidence

brought on record during trial and find no illegality or

misappreciation of evidence. In the considered view of this Court,

the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and

[2023:RJ-JD:26062] (5 of 5) [CRLAS-643/2020]

thereafter passed the judgment impugned there which requires no

interference of this Court

8. Accordingly, the instant appeals having no force and the

same are hereby dismissed.

9. Record of the Courts below be sent back.

(FARJAND ALI),J 261-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)