RAJ KUMAR @ RAJU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE impugned judgment dated 8.3.2001, the appellant has been convicted for the murder of his wife.

(2.) TWO co -accused persons, namely Siya Ram and Faqira have been exonerated.

(3.) THUS , the first and the foremost submission made by learned Counsel for the appellant is that on account of the unexplainable delay in registration of the FIR, the appellant is entitled to an acquittal. Second contention urged is that the learned Trial Judge has disbelieved the testimony of Bhajan Lal while acquitting Siya Ram and Faqira and hence the appellant should also be entitled to the same benefit for the reason the intertwined truth and lies in the statement of Bhajan Lal has rendered it impossible to separate the grain from the chaff. Lastly, it is urged that the conduct of Bhajan Lal in not reporting the matter promptly to the police and his falsely implicating the appellant cannot be ruled out.