RAHUL KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the allegations of the prosecution on 16.07.2010 Kishan Mohan Prasad (the deceased), had, as was usual, gone to his place of work at Sadar Bazar. But he did not return home that evening. When his relatives made inquiries from his employer, they were told that he had left the shop (where he worked) in the evening. A search was carried out for the deceased but he could not be traced. The next day, i.e., on 17.07.2010, since he was still nowhere to be found, his cousin, Pankaj Kumar, lodged a "missing person" report with the police. On 19.07.2010, when the position still stood thus, the same cousin had lodged a written complaint in which he voiced suspicion against the appellant Rahul Kumar. On the basis of the complaint, a case under Section 365 IPC was registered by concerned Police Station.

(2.) THE prosecution alleged that the Appellant was interrogated by the Police and arrested. His statement was recorded where it was revealed that he was in love with the deceased's wife and this compelled him to murder the deceased. Pursuant to an alleged disclosure statement (of the accused), the body of the deceased was recovered from a jungle abutting the Ring Road; it was then sent for post mortem. Upon completion of the investigation, the accused was charged under Section 302/365 IPC, and the case was tried by the Court of Sessions. The Appellant/accused denied guilt, and claimed trial.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Appellant urged that the prosecution story was utterly implausible, and the materials placed on the record of the Trial Court did not justify a conviction. It was argued that there was no reason for the complainant, PW -11 to suspect the accused, a fact testified by the record itself. Concededly, when the deceased went missing on 16 -7 -2010, there was no suspicion in the minds of any of his relatives. The position remained unchanged till 19 -7 -2010, when all on a sudden, the complaint was lodged; it translated into an FIR, and the police managed to acquire all the leads and even solved the case within few hours. It was submitted that this story was incredible, and the Trial Court fell into error in not scrutinizing the various prosecution witnesses, and evidence with the care needed in a criminal case.