(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C) against the judgment dated 09/03/2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Beohari, District- Shahdol in Sessions Trial No. 254/2001 convicting the appellant under section 302 IPC for committing murder of Khoob Chand sentencing him to life imprisonment and with fine of Rs.2,000/-.
(2.) FACTS of the case, in short, are that on 28//08/2001 at about 3.00 P Sukhilal (PW-7) was taking meal in his house and appellant was sitting there. Booti Bai, sister of Sukhilal (PW-3) was also present in the house. Khoob Chand (since deceased), brother of PW-3 and PW-7, used to live in a separate house situated nearby. Deceased had some differences and disputes with appellant since last summer. While deceased came from field carrying heap of grass, appellant assaulted him with knife stating that he is creating troubles to him since last summer. Deceased sustained single knife injury in the neck. This incident was witnessed by PW-3 and PW-7. Appellant ran away from the place leaving his chappals and transistor there. PW-7 lodged FIR Ex.P-16 at Police Station-Jaisingh Nagar, District-Shahdol. A case at crime no. 350/2001 under section 302 IPC was registered against the appellant. On 29/08/2001 appellant was arrested. His blood stained clothes were seized. At his instance, blood stained knife was also seized. Dr. A.K. Verma (PW-6) conducted postmortem of deceased and prepared postmortem report Ex.P-13 showing death due to shock on account of excessive bleeding.
(3.) ), Dr. A.K. Verma (PW-6), Sukhilal, brother of deceased (PW-7), Khanti Bai, wife of deceased (PW-8), Khudulal (PW-9), Dinesh Prasad Shukla, Patwari (PW-10), Vimla Bai, mother of appellant (PW-11) and Raghavendra Diwvedi, Investigating Officer (PW- 12) were recorded. After appreciating the aforesaid evidence, trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as above. 5. Challenging the impugned judgment, this appeal has been preferred on the grounds that evidence of prosecution is suffering with contradictions and omissions. Appreciation of evidence is not proper and the conviction is bad in law. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate supported the impugned judgment and the finding of conviction.