Bhanwar Lal and Others vs The State of Rajasthan

B.R. Arora, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment dated November 15,1979, passed by the Sessions Judge, Merta by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant Bhanwar Lal u/s 324, I.P.C. and sentence him to undergo two years'' rigorous imprisonment. He, also, convicted accused-appellants Sunder Lal and Shera Ram for offences u/s 307, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to five years'' rigorous imprisonment.

The accused were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta, for offences Under Sections 307, 307/34, 323 and 324/34, I.P.C. The case of the prosecution, in nut-shell, is that there was an old enmity between the accused with Rafiq and Masid Khan. On September 13,1977, at about 12.30 in the noon when the complainants Rafiq Khan and Masid Khan were going towards the Police Station to lodge a report u/s 107 Cr. P.C, in the way, near public-park, the three accused persons surrounded them. At that time Shera Ram was armed with a sword, Sunder Lal was armed with Gupti and Bhanwer Lal was armed with Katar. These three accused persons started beating Rafiq Khan and Masid Khan. The place of the incident was near the Office of the Superintendent of Police and, therefore, on hearing the alarm, the police personnel, viz., Ghisu Singh A.S.I., Liyakat Khan A.S.I., Kaliyan Singh, Kishore Singh, Ibrahim and others came on the scene of the occurrence, saw the incident and snatched the weapons of offence from the accused persons. They saved Masid Khan and Rafiq Khan and caught-hold the accused-appellants. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined twelve witnesses. PW 11 Rafiq Khan and PW 12 Masid Khan, are the injured witnesses and PW 5 Ishwar Singh, PW6 Liyakat Ali, PW 7 Kaliyan Singh, PW 8 Ghisu Singh and PW 10 Ibrahim Khan are the police personnel and are the eye witnesses of the occurrence. PW 1 Bhagirath and PW 4 Ramu are the two Motbir witnesses. PW 2 Dr. R.L. Baid is the Radiologist, who, after examining the injured, gave the opinion that there was no fracture of any bone. PW 3 Dr D.R. Choudhary examined Masid Khan and Rafiq Khan and found six injuries on the person of Masid Khan and 27 injuries on the person of Rafiq Khan, but none of these injuries were found to be grievous. PW 9 Harendra Singh was the Station House Officer, who investigated the case and presented the challan after necessary investigation. This is all the evidence produced by the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge, Merta, after trial, came to the conclusion that if is a case of free-fight between that parties and accused Bhanwar Lal did not inflict injury on the person of Rafiq Khan, who received 27 injuries and out of these 27 injuries, some injuries were on the head. He, therefore, convicted accused Bhanwar Lal u/s 3241.P.C., but convicted accused Shera Ram and Sunder Lal u/s 307/34 I.P.C. for inflicting injuries on the person of the complainant Rafiq Khan.

I have perused the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, as well as the record of the case.

The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 7 eye witnesses and out of whom, two are injured persons. I have gone through the statement of all these witnesses and the evidence given by these witnesses is consistent so far as the part played by these accused persons is concerned. A lengthy cross-examination has been conducted but nothing could be elicited from that cross-examination and after going through the statements of these witnesses, I am of the opinion that these witnesses are truthful witnesses and the learned lower Court has not committed any illegality in placing reliance on the statements of these witnesses.

Now coming to the point what offence has been committed by these accused-appellants, I have gone through the record of the case. Of course, the number of injuries, found on the person of the complainant are sufficient in number, but the accused themselves, also, received about 17 injuries. Bhanwar Lal accused received five injuries, out of which, one was grievous and was fracture. Sunder Lal received three injuries and Shera Ram received nine injuries. The intention of the accused can be judged from the injuries received by the members of the complainant party. All the three accused were armed with deadly weapons and if they had any intention to kill the members of the complainant party then they should have certainly inflicted some serious injuries as they had sufficient opportunity to inflict such injuries. The nature of the injuries, the part of the body selected by the accused-persons and the force with which the blows have been given, show that the accused persons never intended to kill Rafiq Khan and Masid Khan. Their intention appears to give beatings to the complainant party. When the intention of the accused was to give beatings then they can be punished only for the offence of giving beatings which they have given and as all the injuries received by the members of the complainant party in the present case are simple in nature and there is no fracture then the offence falls only u/s 324/34 I.P.C. and not u/s 307/34 I.P.C.

Now, comes the question of sentence. The incident took place on September 13, 1977 and more than thirteen years have elapsed. The accused-persons are not previous convicts and they, also, received injuries in this free fight case. They are, also, repenting. Looking to all theses facts, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served in sending the accused-appellant behind the bars again and therefore, I think it proper to sentence the accused for the period already undergone by them.

Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the accused-appellants Shera Ram and Sunder Lal u/s 307 I.P.C. is set-aside and they are convicted u/s 324/34 I.P.C. The conviction of the accused-appellant Bhanwar Lal u/s 324 I.P.C. is, however, maintained. The sentence awarded to these accused-appellants is reduced to that already undergone by them. The accused are on bail and they need not surrender. Their bail-bonds shall stand discharged.