The State of Rajasthan Vs. Ganpat Singh & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 386 of 1992
Petitioner: The State of Rajasthan
Respondent: Ganpat Singh & Ors.
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 386 of 1992
Judges: Dr. A.S. ANAND, CJI., R.C. LAHOTI & SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jun 02, 2001
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAWS
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 302, 326, 147, 148 read with Section 149 – Conviction – Accused acquitted of charge under Section 302 but convicted for offences under Sections 326/149, 148, 147 – Appeal by accused against conviction – Appeal by State against acquittal. Held that High Court rightly dismissed the appeal of State. No grounds to interfere. (Para 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Respondents were sent up for trial in connection with an occurrence which took place on 23rd February, 1987, in which Mohd. Safi sustained injuries with lathis and barchhis at the hands of the respondents and died. The respondents were tried for offences under Sections 302/149, 147 and 148 IPC. After recording of evidence, the learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 23rd November, 1989, acquitted all the respondents of the charges under Section 302/149 IPC. They were, however, convicted for offences under Sections 326/149, 147 and 148 IPC and sentenced Ganpat Singh and Lal Singh to undergo R.I for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/- each for the offence under Section 326/149 IPC, 6 months R.I. for the offence under Section 147 IPC, and one year R.I. for the offence under Section 148 IPC. In default of payment of fine the accused were to undergo six month’s R.I. So far as respondents Sawant Singh, Sumer Singh and Rameshwar Lal are concerned, they were convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 326/149 and 148 IPC and awarded the same sentence as Ganpat Singh and Lal Singh but they were not convicted for the offence under Section 147 IPC. The State sought leave to prefer an appeal against acquittal of the respondents for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC before the High Court. Leave was re-fused by the High Court vide order dated 22nd February, 1991. By special leave, the State is before us.
2. We find that the accused respondents had also preferred an appeal against their conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner on 23rd November, 1989 in the High Court. That appeal (S.B. Cr.A.No. 450/1989) was dismissed by a detailed order by the High Court on 28th July, 1999. After reappreciating, the evidence carefully the conviction and sen-tence, as recorded by the Sessions Judge, against the respondents was maintained.
3. We have perused the judgments of the trial court as well as of the High Court in S.B. Cr.A.No. 450/1989. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and examining the record, the medical evidence in particular, we find that the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner dated 23rd November, 1989 is based on correct appreciation of evidence and indeed required no interference at the hands of the High Court as it suffered from no perversity or unreasonableness. The High Court, therefore, rightly refused to grant leave against the acquittal of the respondents for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC. We are not persuaded to take a different view.
4. The present appeal has no merits. It fails and is dismissed.
5. The respondents are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged.
1. Respondents were sent up for trial in connection with an occurrence which took place on 23rd February, 1987, in which Mohd. Safi sustained injuries with lathis and barchhis at the hands of the respondents and died. The respondents were tried for offences under Sections 302/149, 147 and 148 IPC. After recording of evidence, the learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 23rd November, 1989, acquitted all the respondents of the charges under Section 302/149 IPC. They were, however, convicted for offences under Sections 326/149, 147 and 148 IPC and sentenced Ganpat Singh and Lal Singh to undergo R.I for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/- each for the offence under Section 326/149 IPC, 6 months R.I. for the offence under Section 147 IPC, and one year R.I. for the offence under Section 148 IPC. In default of payment of fine the accused were to undergo six month’s R.I. So far as respondents Sawant Singh, Sumer Singh and Rameshwar Lal are concerned, they were convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 326/149 and 148 IPC and awarded the same sentence as Ganpat Singh and Lal Singh but they were not convicted for the offence under Section 147 IPC. The State sought leave to prefer an appeal against acquittal of the respondents for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC before the High Court. Leave was re-fused by the High Court vide order dated 22nd February, 1991. By special leave, the State is before us.
2. We find that the accused respondents had also preferred an appeal against their conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner on 23rd November, 1989 in the High Court. That appeal (S.B. Cr.A.No. 450/1989) was dismissed by a detailed order by the High Court on 28th July, 1999. After reappreciating, the evidence carefully the conviction and sen-tence, as recorded by the Sessions Judge, against the respondents was maintained.
3. We have perused the judgments of the trial court as well as of the High Court in S.B. Cr.A.No. 450/1989. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and examining the record, the medical evidence in particular, we find that the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner dated 23rd November, 1989 is based on correct appreciation of evidence and indeed required no interference at the hands of the High Court as it suffered from no perversity or unreasonableness. The High Court, therefore, rightly refused to grant leave against the acquittal of the respondents for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC. We are not persuaded to take a different view.
4. The present appeal has no merits. It fails and is dismissed.
5. The respondents are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged.
