LexHARI CHARAN AND ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A HARi CHARAN AND ANR. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN OCTOBER 22, I 997 B [G.T. NANA VA TI AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.] Indian Penal Code, 1860: S.302 rlw S.49-Armed men stop bus at gun point, shoot at the deceased and assault him with other weapons, and run C away together after commilling crime -Held, they were members of an unlawful assembly acting ir. prosecution of their common object. The two appellants were part of an armed group which stopped a bus at gun point, asked the passengers to get down, then attempted to drag out its conductor, failing which A-1 fired at him and injured him, and others assaulted D him with their weapons resulting in his death. Eye witnesses, PW-1, a passenger of the said bus and its driver, PW-6 informed PW-2 of the incident, who immediately prepared a report and submitted it at the police station. The trial court relying upon the evidence of PW-1 convicted A-1 under S.302 IPC, and the appellants and others under S.302 read with S.49. The E appellants were granted leave to appeal. F G H It was contended for the appellants that there was no clear evidence regarding any overt act suggesting that they were acting in prostcution of the common object of the unlawful assembly, and further that there was no evidence to prove that they had taken any part in killing the deceased. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. The appellants were rightly convicted under S.302 IPC read with S.49. 1681-Dj 2. Both the courts below relied on the evidence of PW-1. He had in clear terms stated that the bus in which he was travelling was stopped by five persons. They were armed with weapons and A-1 had carried a gun, who had put it at the chest of the driver with a threat not to move the bus. They had then tried to pull down the deceased, failing which A-1 fired two shots and injured him. 678 HARi CHARAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [NANA VA TI, J.] 679 The other accused also assaulted him with their weapons. They ran away after A killing him. [680-E] 3. This witness stands corroborated by the evidence of PW-2, who stated that PW-1 had informed him about the incident, on the basis of the said information he had immediately prepared a report and submitted it at the police station. That report also contains the names of PW-1 and PW-6 as the persons B who had seen the incident and informed PW-2 about it PW-6 had deposed in cross-examination that PW-1 was travelling in the bus with bags offertilizers. The evidence of PW-1 has thus been rightly appreciated.(680-G-H; 681-A) 4. All the five accused had gone to the place of the incident armed with C weapons, stopped the bus, put the gun on the chest of the driver and threatened to shoot if he drove the bus ahead. They caught hold of the deceased and tried to drag him out. The accused armed with gun had fired shots at the deceased and other accused had assaulted him with other weapons. They had run away together. It cannot, therefore, be said that they were not acting in prosecution of their common object. [680-F; 681-C) D CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 89 of 1988 From the Judgment and Order dated 20.1.87 of the Rajasthan High Court in Crl.A. No. 120of1984. E Kailash Vasdev for the Appellants. K.S. Bhati for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by F NANA VA TI, J. The two appellants, along with two others have been convicted for committing murder of Ram Babu. What has been proved against them is that they formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly, on 27.2.81 at about 1.00 p.m., they G armed with weapons, stopped the bus going from Dholpur to Khuthiyana Ghat, asked the passengers to get down, attempted to drag out Ram Babu conductor of the bus and then appellant Rammo by firing two shots from his gun and others by their weapons injured and thereby killed Ram Babu. In order to prove its case, the prosecution had examined 3 eye-witnesses H 680 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. A PW-I Kedarnath, PW-3 Ramjilal and PW-6 Satpal Singh the driver of the bus. PW-7 did not support the prosecution and he was requ'ired to be crc,ss- examined by the Public Prosecutor. Learned trial court did not believe PW- 3 Ramjilal who was the brother of the deceased on the ground that he was not present in the bus. Relying upon the evidence of Kedarnath the trial B court convicted Rammo(A-1) under Section 302 !PC and others under Sectio
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.