VIJAI @ TALWAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS jail appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.4.2004 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo im­prisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment for six months. Briefly stated according to the prose­cution case on 14.12.1999 informant's brother Hulasi had gone to answer the call of nature outside village and on account of enmity Vijai son of Ramdhani in order to kill his brother assaulted him by sword. His brother Hulasi son of Mathose sustained grievous injuries and his condition was serious. On raising alarm by Hulasi Jagdish Prachat Rai, Udhal reached there to rescue him and accused person leaving his brother ran away. On account of previous enmity his brother was assaulted by Vijay. While going away he also abused him and threat­ened to kill. Jagdish and Udhal and other family members carried injured to the po­lice station and lodged the report. Hulasi was medically examined on 14.12.1999 at 1.50 P.M.

(2.) THE injured subsequently on 24.12.1999 succumbed to his injuries and in the opinion of Doctor cause of death was due to Cardiac failure as a result of multi­ple injuries and its complication. The F.I.R. was registered on 14.12.1999 at 10.15 A.M. under sections 326, 504, 506 and 307 I.P.C.. The investigation was com­menced by S.I. Girish Kumar Verma. He prepared the site plan and recorded the statement of the witnesses. After the medi­cal examination Investigating Officer added section 325 I.P.C. also. Thereafter, S.I. Subhash Singh Gaur started the inves­tigation and after the death of Hulasi case was converted under section 302 I.P.C. Af­ter concluding the investigation he submit­ted charge-sheet under sections 302, 307, 326, 325, 504 and 506 I.P.C.. Case was committed to the Court of sessions and charge under section 302 I.P.C. was framed.

(3.) THE Counsel for the appellant submitted that on account of previous enmity he has been falsely implicated in this case. The testimonies of the witnesses are not reliable and independent witnesses present at the time of occurrence have not been examined and lastly submitted that the Sessions Judge has wrongly convicted the appellant under section 302 I.P.C. The time and place of occurrence is not challenged. The testimony of P.W.1 and P.W.2 proves that occurrence took place at 8.30 a.m. when deceased had gone to re­turn the call of nature. The Investigating Officer collected blood from the place of occurrence and prepared recovery memo Ex.Ka6. The deceased was medically exam­ined in injured condition by Dr Ashok Ku­mar Paliwal P.W.4 on 14.12.99 at 1.50 p.m. and in his opinion injuries could be caused at 8.30 a.m. we are of the opinion that prosecution has proved time and place of the occurrence beyond reasonable doubt.