Bhanu Pratap Singh vs State And Ors. (2025:Rj-Jd:34801-Db)
2025 Latest Caselaw 4325 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Bhanu Pratap Singh vs State And Ors. (2025:Rj-Jd:34801-Db) on 6 August, 2025

Author: Dinesh Mehta

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2025:RJ-JD:34801-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                   D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 220/2016

 Bhanu Pratap Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh Bhati, R/o Ward
 No.2, Tara Nagar, District Churu.


                                                                      ----Appellant
                                       Versus
 1. State of Rajasthan
 2. Kalu Khan S/o Nabbu Khan, R/o Ward No.4, Tara Nagar,
 District Churu.
 3. Jodha @ Shyokat Ali S/o Nabbu Khan, R/o Ward No.4,
 Taranagar, District Churu.


                                                                    ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. Gaurav Singh
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. CS Ojha, PP
                                   Mr. Shaitan Singh (Amicus Curiae)



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

Order

06/08/2025

1. By way of present appeal, the appellant-complainant has

challenged the judgment dated 23.12.2015, whereby the accused-

respondents had been convicted for offence under section 304

Part-II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as

the 'IPC') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 7

years and a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of which to

further undergo six months' additional rigorous imprisonment.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the accused-

respondents ought to have been convicted for the offence

punishable under section 302 of the IPC instead of section 304

[2025:RJ-JD:34801-DB] (2 of 2) [CRLA-220/2016]

Part-II of the IPC and must have been awarded sentence

accordingly.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor at the outset informed that one of

the accused namely Rafiq had passed away during the trial.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. On going through the record, we find that the trial Court has

duly considered the evidence on record and having found it to be

a case of mutual scuffle, rightly, convicted the accused-

respondents under section 304 Part-II of the IPC.

6. Though we do not find any error or infirmity in appreciation

of evidence made by the trial Court, yet in view of the fact that

the incident took place way back on 11.09.2012, we are of the

view that even if there is some arguable point in the appeal, no

interference is warranted, as it is not an exceptional case

warranting interference.

7. The present appeal is therefore, dismissed.

8. The Amicus Curiae shall be paid applicable fees by the

Rajasthan Legal Services Authority in accordance with law.

                                    (SANGEETA SHARMA),J                                             (DINESH MEHTA),J
                                       75-raksha/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)