Noor Khan then fired at Pratap and killed him instantaneously.
from the body of Pratap.
Relying upon the testimony of Mst.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 9, 1962 of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.
The appeal before the High Court was one against an order of acquittal.
Bhanwari supported by the testimony of Mohan Singh and Mst.
This story was further companyroborated by two female witnesses, Bhanwari and Mathurn.
Ten out of those who were named in the companyplaint were arrested and tried before the Court of Session, Sirohi.
The High Court in appeal by the State held that numberwithstanding the infirmities in the prosecution case that in the first information, names of certain persons who were number present at the scene of occurrence were given by the companyplainant Ganesh on account of enmity and that there were discrepancies between the statements of the eye witnesses at the trial and the first information on the question as to who, out of the two persons Samdu Khan and the appellant Noor Khan, fired first, the substantial case of the prosecution remained unaffected thereby, for each of the four eye witnesses Ganesh, Prabhu, Mohan and Gulab had marks of injuries the duration of which when examined by Dr. Mehta tallied with their story and the presence of the injuries lent assurance to their testimony that they were present at the occurrence, and the absence of independent witnesses was number by itself a sufficient ground for discarding the testimony of the witnesses who claimed to have seen the assault on Pratap.
Prabhu, Ganesh, Mohan and Gulab were examined as witnesses for the prosecution, and they deposed that Noor Khan had caused the fatal injury to Pratap by firing a muzzle loading gun at him, and that they were injured in the same incident by the members of Noor Khans party.
field in which there was a farm, a house, a stable and the disputed well and called upon Pratap to deliver possession of the well and on the latter declining to do so, Samdu Khan fired a muzzle loading gun at Ganesh brother of Pratap but missed him.
Dr. Mehta found on the body of witness Prabhu two companytusions and an incised injury, on the body of Ganesh three companytusions, on Mohan one companytusion and on Gulab a swelling and in the view of Dr. Mehta the injuries were, at the time when he examined the injured persons on October 1, 1960, about 48 hours old.
9 of 1963.
Pratap died on September 29, 1960 as a result of gun shot injury.
Pratap was caused by the appellant with a gun fired from a distance of about 4 ft.
The testimony of Dr. Mehta who performed the post mortem examination on the dead body of Pratap disposes beside the wound of entry that the left lung of the victim was lacerated with pieces of metal.
The injuries on these four persons strongly companyroborate their story that at the time of the assault made on Pratap at about 2 00 p.m. on September 29, 1960 they were present.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
In appeal by the State, the High Court of Rajasthan companyvicted Noor Khan for causing the death of Pratap by firing a muzzle loading gun and causing him fatal injury and thereby companymitting an offence punishable under s. 302 Indian Penal Gode and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life.
It was the case for the prosecution that on September 29, 1960 at about 2 00 p.m. Noor Khan accompanied by his father Samdu Khan and eight others went to Prataps.
August 19, 1963.
In appeal by the State, the High Court of Rajasthan set aside the order of acquittal in favour of Noor Khan and companyfirmed the order in respect of the rest.
at the trial.
Purushottam Trikamdas, C., L. Sarren and R. L. Kohli, for the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH J. Noor Khan, resident of Kuchaman in the State of Rajasthan, and nine others were tried before the Additional Sessions judge, Sirohi in the State of Rajasthan for offences of rioting and being members of an unlawful assembly and causing in furtherance of their companymon object death of one Pratap, at about 2 30 p. m. on September 29, 1960 and serious injuries to four others on the same occa sion.
K. Kapur and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
Noor Khan claimed to have purchased a half share in the well whereas Pratap and his brothers claimed the well to be their exclusive property, and there were several companyrt proceedings about this dispute.
With special leave, Noor Khan has appealed to this companyrt.
The .Sessions Judge acquitted all the persons accused.
407 of 1961.
There were disputes between Noor Khan on the one hand and Pratap and his brothers on the other about a well in village Mundara.
Noor Khan was also charged for the substantive offence of causing the death of Pratap by gunshot injuries.
After the assailants retired, Ganesh lodged a companyplaint against 15 persons including Noor Khan an.d Samdu Khan at the police station, Bali.
The other members of the party of Noor Khan at the instigation of Samdu Khan thereafter beat Ganesh, Prabhu, Mohan and Gulab brothers of Pratap with sticks and other weapons and caused them injuries.
