RAJ KUMAR, Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of impugned judgment and order dated 30.4.2004 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in S.T. No.10/2003 convicting appellants- Achhelal and Rajkumar under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC sentencing them imprisonment for life.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, deceased- Uday Prakash Choudhary and the deceased/accused Acchelal were the scrap purchasers. There was some monetary transaction between them. It is stated that deceased Uday Prasad Choudhary was required to give about Rs.70,000/- to deceased/accused Acchelal and when he refused to give the same, on 3.9.2002 at 8:30 PM, deceased/accused Acchelal, with the connivance of accused Rajkumar, committed murder of the deceased by causing several injuries to him by knife and dagger. On 9.3.2002 itself, dehati nalishi, Ex.P-12 was recorded at 10:30 PM at the instance of Rakesh Singh, P.W.10 against unknown person. On the basis of such dehati nalishi, FIR, Ex.P-13 was registered under Section 302 IPC against unknown person. Merg intimation, Ex.P- 14 was recorded on 4.9.2002 based on the information received from the hospital. Inquest over the dead body was conducted on 4.9.2002 vide Ex.P-2 and the dead body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on 4.9.2002 by Dr. Neeraj Shende, P.W.11 vide Ex.P-15, who noticed about 11 incised wounds on various parts of the body including the vital ones such as temporal region, neck, and one abrasion on the neck. According to him, cause of death was shock and hemorrhage as a result of injury to vital organs. While framing the charges, the trial Judge has framed the charge against the deceased/accused Acchelal under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and against the appellant Rajkumar under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 25 (1B) of the Arms Act, 1959.

(3.) In order to prove guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. The statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. where they pleaded their innocence and false implication. By the impugned judgment, the trial Court convicted both the appellants/accused persons under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC but has acquitted appellant Rajkumar of the offence under Section 25 (1B) of the Arms Act.