RAJENDRA YADAV Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant jail appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 22.7.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court No. 2, Siddharth Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 240 of 2002 under Sections 302/376 IPC whereby the Appellant has been convicted and sentenced for a life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, he had to undergo six months further imprisonment and further he was directed to serve out the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 IPC with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default, the Appellant had to undergo two months further imprisonment.

(2.) The genesis of the prosecution case narrated in a nut shell is that the complainant Sati Ram Yadav lodged a first information report on 13.7.2002 at about 12.45 p.m. against unknown persons alleging therein that his mother Durpati Devi aged about 70 years had gone on the same day at about 9.00 a.m. one kilometre away from his village Seewan for grazing cow. The complainant heard in the village at about 11.45 a.m. on 13.7.2002 that his mother was done to death and the corpse of her mother was lying beneath the tree of Babool in the field of Jagdambika Dwivedi. On getting this information, the complainant along with other persons of the village went at the place of occurrence and found that his mother was done to death by tying the Sari around her neck by the miscreant. The complainant got the information of the said incident from Bhim Prakash Azad on the basis of which the first information report was lodged under Section 302 IPC vide case Crime No. 104 of 2002 Police Station Dhebaruwa District Siddharth Nagar. After registration of the first information report, the police came into action and inspected the place of occurrence where he found a blood stained lathi. Recovery memo was prepared on 15.7.2002 which was marked as Ex. Ka.2 and plain and blood stained earth were collected from the spot on 13.7.2002 which was marked as Ex. Ka.3. After conducting the inquest, the body was sent to mortuary for autopsy and the autopsy of the deceased was conducted on 14.7.2002 at 4.00 p.m in which abraded contusion around the neck having dark congestion and the abrasion in the inner part of labia majora were found. According to the opinion of the doctor, the death had occurred due to asphyxia and throttling. The blood stained clothes, mud and lathi were sent for chemical examination and according to the Serelogist Report human blood was found on the incriminating articles but was disintegrated. The investigating officer collected credible and clinching evidence on the basis of which charge sheet was submitted against the Appellant. The charges were framed against the Appellant under Sections 376/302 IPC. The Appellant denied the charges and claimed for his innocence. The accused Appellant was directed to be tried for trial.

(3.) The prosecution had examined P.W.1 Sati Ram the son of the deceased who had lodged the first information report and Shahid Husain P.W.2 before whom the accused Appellant had confessed his guilt. The P.W.3 Bheem Prakash Azad and the P.W.4 Inamullah were examined before whom the Appellant had confessed his guilt and at the pointing of the Appellant, lathi was recovered. Dr. R.S. Shukla who had conducted autopsy of the deceased was examined as P.W.5. P.W.6 Vanshraj S.I. had investigated the case. P.W.7 Abid Husain, P.W.8 Mahesh Yadav, P.W.9 Abdul Khalid were also examined. They proved that the accused Appellant had confessed towards his guilt. Thereafter statement of the accused Appellant under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded who had completely denied the allegations and stated that he was falsely implicated in the said offence. No other evidence was adduced by him. The P.W.1 Rati Ram Yadav, the son of the deceased stated that his mother had gone for grazing the cow. After some time he heard that his mother was killed and her body was lying beneath the tree of Babool in the field of Jagdambika Dwivedi. When the complainant reached there, he found that the corpse of his mother was lying tied with Sari around her neck. The complainant had witnessed this incident at 11.45 p.m and thereafter he lodged the first information report at 12.45 p.m. against unknown persons. The accused Appellant was wandering around in the village stating that he had committed serious offence by killing Durpati Devi. The investigating officer had recovered incriminating articles including blood stained lathi at the pointing of the accused Appellant which was within the special knowledge of the miscreants. The dead body of his mother was given to him after post mortem. Thereafter he performed the last rites. The accused Appellant had made confessional statement before the police P.W.2 Shahid Husain, P.W.4 Inamullah who is the witness of the recovery of blood stained bamboo used by the Appellant. The P.W. 3 Bhim Prakash Azad & P.W.4 Inamullah are also the witness of the inquest. The P.W.4 Inamullah had specifically stated that the blood was found at the place where the dead body was lying. At the time of recovery of lathi, investigating officer had found blood stain on the earth which was collected and pieces of the lathi were kept in sealed cover in his presence. It has been stated by the P.W.4 Inamullah that confessional statement was made by the accused before the police in the presence of the P.W.2 Shahid Husain. The accused Appellant had divulged that after committing rape on the victim Durpati Devi, the victim was throttled by tethering Sari around her neck and had also penetrated lathi in her private part. Dr. R.S. Shukla, the P.W.5 who had conducted autopsy of the deceased found that the death was caused on account of suffocation by strangulating the neck and the injuries were found on the private part of the deceased. Blood was also oozing from nostril and mouth. It was opined by the doctor that the death could have been caused on account of injury No. 1. The investigating officer Vanshraj the P.W.6 deposed before the court that he had arrested the accused Appellant on 15.7.2002 before whom the accused Appellant had confessed towards his guilt that he raped the victim and when the victim asked to unearth this incident to others, the accused Appellant penetrated the danda in her private part and also strangulated by tethering sari around her neck resulting in loss of life and on the pointing of the accused Appellant lathi used in the said crime was recovered from the field of Deena Nath which was marked as Ex. Ka.2. The investigating officer had recorded the statement of the witnesses and prepared the site plan, recovery memo of lathi and conducted the inquest and after collecting credible and clinching evidence submitted charge sheet against the accused Appellant. The P.W.7 Abid Husain had stated on oath before the court that he was running a poultry farm and the accused Appellant was his servant. On the fateful day of occurrence the accused Appellant was sent for ploughing the field and on the next day, he came in very perplexed and confounded manner entreating for his guilt. In a fazed manner, the accused Appellant unearthed how he had committed rape on the victim taking advantage of her loneliness and on account of fear the victim was killed to death. It was stated by the P.W.7 Abid Husain that inquest was conducted before him by the investigating officer. The accused Appellant had confessed towards his guilt before hundred of persons present at the police station. The P.W.8 Mahesh Yadav stated that he was present at the poultry farm of the P.W.7 Abid Husain when the accused Appellant repented confessing towards his guilt. Similar is the statement of Abdul Khalid, the P.W.9 who happened to be present at the poultry farm of the P.W.7 Abid Husain before whom the accused Appellant had repented confessing towards his guilt.