RAJU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJU impugns his conviction under Sections 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) vide judgment dated 2 nd May, 2009. By order dated 4th May, 2009, the appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years for the offence under Section 364 IPC and fine of Rs.500/- and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment of one month. For the offence under Section 302 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, simple imprisonment for one month.

(2.) AS far as homicidal death of Bablu is concerned, the same stands proved by the statement of PW-9, Dr. Arvind Kumar, Senior Resident, Department of Forensic Medicine, AIIMS, New Delhi. He has proved on record the postmortem report given by Dr. Prashant Kulshrestha and Dr. Varun Dixit. As per the postmortem report Ex.PW 9/A, the deceased had sustained the following injuries:-

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the appellant, however, submitted that DNA test of the said body was not undertaken and, therefore, it cannot be said certainly that the body was of Bablu. The second contention raised is with regard to involvement of the appellant in the commission of the said offence. The said contentions will be examined when we consider and evaluate the evidence produced and relied upon by the prosecution. The present case is one of circumstantial evidence as there is no eye witness.