State Of Rajasthan Th.Secy. Home Dept vs Abdul Mannan

Hearing the noise of the stampede and uproar, he entered his house and closed the door. After a while a crowd came from the side of Hathai and started pelting stones at his house.

The prosecution had examined seven witnesses including three eye-witnesses (namely, PW7 and complainant Satyanarain, PW4 Mahesh and PW5 Kanhiyalal) as well as PW2 medical examiner Dr. Chandra Prakash, and the investigating officer, PW3 Shri Rajendra Ojha. The incriminating evidence against the accused was put to the accused while recording their statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. The plea taken by the accused was that these witnesses are deposing falsely, and have implicated them in 13 commission of the crime at the instance of the police. Abdul Mannan took the plea of false implication, and claimed that he was in a school at a distance of 18 km away from the Malpura.

10. For these reasons we allow the instant appeals and set aside the judgment dated September 7, 1999 of the learned Special Judge Shri G.C. Sharma, Communal Riots and Man Singh Murder Case, Jaipur in Sessions Case No.1/1997. We acquit the appellants Abdul Zabbar, Afzal and Abdul Mannan of the charges under Sections 148, 302/149, 324/149 and 449 IPC. The appellants Abdul is on bail, he need not surrender and his bail bonds stand discharged. The appellants Abdul Zabbar and Afzal, who are in jail, shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case."

In light of the above stated principles, we revert to the facts of the present case. As already noticed, three eye witnesses PWs.4, 5 and 7 were found to be truthful and 28 reliable witnesses by the trial court whereas those very witnesses were held to be untrustworthy witnesses by the High Court. We shall shortly proceed to discuss the statements of these three witnesses in some detail, as it is necessary for us to practically re-appreciate the entire evidence in view of the serious conflict, on findings of fact, in the two judgments under consideration in the present appeal.

5 formed an unlawful assembly wherein A1 and A2 were 52 armed with axes and A3, A4 and A5 with sticks in order to assault the two deceased persons amongst others. While A3 did not participate, A4 and A5 only dealt blows on legs and arms with their sticks but A1 and A2 dealt blows to the head with the butt end of their axes which proved to be fatal.

For the reasons afore-recorded, we find the present case a fit case for interference in the judgment of acquittal recorded by the High Court. Consequently, the appeals of the State are allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and that of the trial court is restored. We concur with the finding of guilt and the quantum of punishment awarded by the trial court.

The bail bonds of the accused, if any, who are on bail, are cancelled. They are directed to surrender within four weeks from today failing which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Tonk, Rajasthan shall ensure to take them into custody and they shall undergo the remaining part of their sentence in terms of the judgment of conviction and punishment awarded by the trial court.

A copy of the judgment be sent to the concerned CJM for information and action.

July 7, 2011 59