ANIL KUMAR SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) of Cr.PC feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 18-8-2009 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, District Gwalior in Sessions Trial No. 195/1992, whereby held the appellant/accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine further ordered to suffer imprisonment for 6 months.

(2.) IT is admitted fact that in the intervening night of 18th and 19th of January, 1989, appellant/accused was posted as Sub-Inspector at Police Station, Purani Chhawni, Gwalior, where in the morning on 19-1-1989, one lady Ramkali Bai w/o Shiv Singh was found dead in the suspicious circumstances.

(3.) BEFORE the Trial Court, all the three accused persons abjured the guilt and their defence was of false implication. The defence of the present appellant is to the effect that one Pawan Kumar Jain, probationer IPS was In-charge of the Police Station who was also conducting investigation of the concerning case and if any incident took place with regard to misbehaviour with the lady concerned then he is the only person who can be made liable for this custodial death. Accused had also examined one R.B.S. Bhadoria, the then Dy. Superintendent of Police and In-charge of the area concerned, as D.W. 1 to prove the fact that on the date of incident the aforesaid Pawan Kumar Jain, the probationer IPS was In-charge of the police station concerned. Learned Trial Court after due appreciation of the entire prosecution evidence on record by the impugned judgment dated 18-8-2009 acquitted two co-accused Ashok and Harcharan from all the offences and also acquitted the present appellant for the offence under Sections 330 and 348 of IPC and alternative charge of Section 306 of IPC but held the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him as stated hereinabove, feeling aggrieved by which the appellant/accused has preferred this appeal.