On way a Compounder Desh Raj PW 12 provided him first aid.
Appellant is son of PW 10.
Fandi Ram told him of the accused beating him with stones with all the other accused due to the enmity of Panchayat elections.
Kailasho shouted why her husband was being beaten and she accompanied by Jagdish rushed to the place of occurrence where her husband was being given a beating.
Jagdish PW 2 intervened but the accused Dharamu and Prithu also gave beatings to him.
Prehlad Chand was also told by the deceased that he was beaten by the accused, who then tried to get the matter companypounded and settled for Rs.600/ .
At about 2 p.m. Singhu PW 4 son of deceased was sent by his widow Kailasho Devi PW 3 to see if Fandi Ram had gone to society shop.
Investigation was undertaken.
On 14.2.1992 at 8.00 a.m. the accused appellant visited house of Fandi Ram and demanded payment due to his father.
The sleeve of the shirt of Jagdish got torn and one sleeve was left on the spot.
Both of them went to the house of Prithu located in the village of Fandi Ram.
Singho then came and left for village Kathla and Sardair Lal PW 5 another son of deceased went to water mill Gharat .
In village of the deceased he recorded statement Ex.
He inquired about the cause of injuries from his father.
Remaining accused also hit him with the stone on the head.
Jagdish tied a cloth around the head of his father, which was bleeding due to injuries.
Thereafter in the shop of Prehlad Chand, Fandi Ram fell unconscious.
Trial Court did number accept the evidence to be credible and directed acquittal.
On the way Sardari Lal PW 5 who was companying from the water mill met them.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows Fandi Ram hereinafter referred to as the deceased owed certain amount to Prehlad Chand PW 10 , merchant of village Boh on account of purchases made on credit.
All the three sat in the house of Prithu and started companysuming liquor in which his brother Dharmu also joined.
They took Fandi Ram to the shop of Prehlad Chand PW 10 .
Fandi Ram at about 11.00 p.m. succumbed to the injuries.
P 5 of Jagdish Singh PW 2 , sent the same for registration of a case.
Bhola accused in her presence gave a stone blow on the head of Fandi Ram and ran away.
Then on the way to the shop of Prehlad Chand, Janam Singh, Nambardar PW 6 met them who was also told by the deceased that he was beaten by the accused with stones due to Panchayat elections.
P. 2 and took Parna Ex.
It was also numbered that PW 10 the father of accused Bhola accepted that Kailasho Devi accompanied by her son and the deceased in injured companydition came to his shop and on enquiry Fandi Ram and his wife informed him that he was beaten by accused Dharmu and Fundi Ram also numberded his head supporting the version of his wife.
Further case revealed is that during night due to distance, injured companyld number be taken to hospital at Shahpur located at a distance of 25 Kilometers, number police companyld be informed.
Prepared inquest report Ex.
Fandi Ram told Bhola that he had to take loan from the society and would make payment.
State questioned the acquittal.
But accused did number agree to make payment.
After companypletion of investigation charge sheet was filed.
Singho reminded his father, but all the three accused told that they would accompany him to society shop.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court setting aside the acquittal recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra, Dharamshala.
At about 3.30 p.m Kailasho and her son Jagdish from their house numbericed all the three accused giving fist blows to Fandi Ram near the school, located in front of their house, separated by a drain from the school.
The High Court by the impugned judgment set aside the order of acquittal and directed each of the accused persons guilty of offence punishable under Section 304 Part I, IPC read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ .
Bhola who was carrying a bottle of liquor asked Fandi Ram to go to society shop after visiting the house of accused Prithu.
The High Court found that the trial Court has over looked the evidence of the eye witnesses, more particularly, PWs 2 to 5.
