AMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal under section 374 (2) of CrPC feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 6/8/2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Sessions Trial No. 173/04, whereby the appellant has been found guilty for the offence under section 302 of IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000.00 in default of payment of fine further ordered to imprisonment for three months.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that complainant Rajkumari is the wedded wife of the present appellant. She was having a minor child Lokendra, the deceased aged about 4 years. On 7.2.2004 near about 10:30 am, the appellant/accused gave one rupee to the minor child Lokendra to purchase cream roll. When the deceased Lokendra did not return to home then her mother complainant Rajkumari searched him and thereafter lodged report on 11.2.2004 for missing of her minor son Lokendra and also suggested her doubt on her husband, the present appellant Amar Singh. Thereafter, it is alleged that Amar Singh confessed before the witnesses that he had strangulated minor son and thrown him into a well situated near railway line. After his alleged extrajudicial confession, the appellant was brought by the witnesses to the Police Station Gwalior where he was arrested by the police and the police officer recorded his statement under section 27 of the Evidence Act and on his information reached on the spot and recovered dead body from the well. Necessary panchnama also prepared by the investigating officer. Thereafter, on the basis of the investigation, case under section 302 of IPC, was registered against the appellant and after due investigation, charge sheet was filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that no eye witness account is available for involvement of the appellant/accused in this incident of murder. The learned trial Court has only believed the statement of Santosh (PW 2), Baburam (PW 3) and Kishorilal (PW-8) with regard to the alleged extra judicial confession of the appellant/accused which is a very weak type of evidence and trial Court has wrongly held the appellant/accused guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC. Therefore, firstly prayed for setting aside of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court and in the alternative it is further submitted that at the most, the act of the appellant/ accused can be held punishable under section 304 Part-2 of IPC, therefore, prayed for just reduction of the jail sentence.