The Trial Court found respondent accused Bhanwar Singh guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
Background facts in a nut shell are as follows A written report was lodged by Gulab Singh, PW 8 on 27.10.1992 at Udaipur around 7.00 PM which was sent to police station Panrawa on 28.10.1992.
2004 Supp 4 SCR 409 The Judgment was delivered by HONBLE JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT The respondent Bhanwar Singh hereinafter referred to as the accused faced trial along with five others for allegedly companymitting homicidal death of one Kalu Singh hereinafter referred to as the deceased .
The cause of death was attributed to the head injury.
Accused Bhanwar Singh was carrying a sword with which he inflicted injury on the head of the deceased by the sharp edge.
The Trial Court placed reliance on the evidence of PWs.
When the deceased had reached Birothi, all the six accused persons surrounded him and attacked him with sword and lathis.
Thanwar Singh, PW 3 accompanied the deceased and Shambhu Singh, PW 4 and Gulab Singh, PW 8 followed them.
Three other companyaccused persons, namely, Moti Singh, Shankar Singh and Bhanwar Singh were companyvicted in terms of Section 323 IPC and were given benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in short the Probation of Offenders Act .
The deceased was taken to the hospital where he succumbed to the injuries on 27.10.1992 at around 5.00 AM, as numbered above.
The Doctor, Anis Ahmad, PW 15 who companyducted the post mortem found one injury, i.e. lacerated wound 5 x 1 cm.
In appeal, the High Court found that the evidence of PWs.
On that day in the afternoon, accused Guman Singh and Nathu Singh requested the deceased to go to see a cattle fare.
According to the FIR, deceased had succumbed to the injuries on 27.10.1992 at about 5.00 AM.
PW 3 tried to intervene but he also received injuries at the hands of Moti Singh.
Bhanwar Singh questioned legality of his companyviction by preferring an appeal before the High Court of Rajasthan.
The injuries were inflicted on 26.10.1992 at about 4 PM.
3, 4 and 8 lacked credibility.
3, 4 and 8 at the alleged spot of occurrence to be improbable.
It was numbered that PW 5, the widow of the deceased categorically stated the she heard about the incident from some persons and sent for PWs.
3, 4 and 8 to record companyviction and imposed sentence, as numbered above.
3, 4 and 8 who went to the alleged spot of occurrence to bring the deceased in an injured companydition and thereafter he was sent to the hospital.
By the impugned judgment, a Division Bench of the said High Court found that the prosecution has number been able to establish its accusations.
The deceased fell down.
Taking all these factors into account, the High Court directed acquittal.
In the evidence in companyrt, the Doctor stated that the injury on the head companyld number have been caused by a sword and it was only possible by a blunt weapon.
Additionally, the medical evidence was found to be at variance with the ocular evidence.
State has questioned companyrectness of the said judgment in this appeal.
Two other companyaccused persons Guman Singh and Nathu Singh were acquitted.
bone deep on vertex of skull and fracture on right parieto frontal bones of skull and right temporal bone.
