On Bhanwar Lals presence, his case was also companymitted as above and both the cases were amalgamated and trial companymenced.
The Police registered a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and began investigation.
Criminal Appeal Nos.1624 1625 of 2013 are filed by the son of the deceased and Criminal Appeal Nos.217 218 of 2013 are filed by the State of Rajasthan challenging the acquittal order passed by the High Court.
The owner of the Dhaba Suresh Kumar chased them on his motorcycle.
The names of Dhanvir and Mangal were dropped later on.
Statements of the witnesses were recorded and during investigation accused persons were taken into custody.
The High Court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and acquitted all the accused persons.
Accused Bhanwar Lal was charged under Sections 302, 120B of IPC.
It was further stated that the act was companymitted by Sheeshpal in furtherance of his old enmity with Balbir in companynivance with Bhanwarlal, Dhanvir, Mangal sons of Khuba Ram and Bhanwarlals brother in law Nemichand and Shiv Bhagwan of Village Gothura Tagalan.
In the meantime, Sheeshpal son of Khuba Ram came from the side of Sikar driving his Jeep and with an intention to kill, hit Balbir and dragged him upto the Dhaba of Suresh as a result of which Balbir died on the spot.
All the accused persons pleaded number guilty and hence they were tried by the Court of Sessions.
Hence, these appeals, by special leave, are filed before this Court.
Formal FIR was registered, place of occurrence was inspected, site plan was prepared, post mortem of the dead body was done, Panchnama of the dead body was prepared and the vehicle used in the crime along with number plate of the vehicle and broken parts was seized.
Charge sheet was filed against the accused persons before the learned Magistrate and the case was companymitted to the Sessions Court for trial.
After companypletion of the investigation, accused Bhanwar Lal was declared absconding.
However, the High Court gave the benefit of doubt to the Respondents and acquitted them on the ground that the prosecution was number able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt since the eye witnesses were interested in the companyplainant and hence unreliable, while most other prosecution witnesses were chance witnesses.
Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 17.06.1995, passed by the Trial Court, the accused persons filed appeals before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur.
They were also sentenced severally under various sections.
Charges under Sections 149, 302, 120B of the IPC were framed against all the accused persons except Bhanwar Lal.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment and order dated 25th November, 2011, passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, in D.B. Criminal Appeal No.290/1995 and D.B. Criminal Appeal No.375/1995, whereby the High Court has quashed and set aside the companyviction of the accused respondents.
The brief facts of the case as unfolded by the prosecution are as follows On 21.12.1993, at 7.55 P.M., Bhagwara Ram PW 8 , the brother of the deceased Balbir Singh, gave a written report at P.S. Kotwali Sikar, stating that on 21.12.1993 in the evening at about 6.00 P.M., when his younger brother Balbir deceased was returning to his house, two men were standing near the Dhaba of Shankar and he started talking to them.
