RADHA KISHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment dated 3rd June, 1978 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mathura in Criminal Appeal no. 74 of 1978.

(2.) ON 12th of June, 1972, at about 9 p. m. Ram Prasad along with his brother Tillu was going to Laxmi Talkies to see a cinema show. When they reached near Pathwari in Sadar Bazar, the applicant stabbed the complainant with a knife. He was accompanied with another person name Jamuna about whom it was alleged that he had caught hold of the complainant when the applicant had stabbed him. ON these allegations the applicant was sent up for prosecution along with Tillu for offences under sections 326 and 324 IPC. The applicant as well as the other accused denied the prosecution case and pleaded that they had been falsely implicated. The applicant also pleaded alibi. The trial court, on a consideration of the evidence on record accepted the prosecution case in so far as the applicant was concerned and, convicting him under sections 326 and 324, IPC sentenced him to two years RI under the former count and to one years' RI under the latter count. Jamuna accused was acquitted as the case against him, in the opinion of the trial court, was not free from doubt. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence the applicant preferred an appeal in the court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the applicant under section 326 IPC but maintained the conviction and sentence recorded against him under section 324 IPC. The present revision is directed against that judgment.

(3.) LEARNED counsel then urged with some vehemence that there was no light in which the witnesses could recognise the applicant. LEARNED counsel pointed out that, according to the prosecution witnesses, the only light available at the place of occurrence was the light flashed by Munnan (P. W. 2). LEARNED counsel urged that since the evidence of Munnan was discarded, it followed that there was no torch light present at the place of occurrence. LEARNED counsel added that once the torch light is excluded, there remains to light in which the prosecution witnesses could recognise the applicant. I have given my careful thought to this contention, but I regret my inability to agree.