DEEP RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 26.5.2009 rendered by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi, in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2008, whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused) who was charged with and tried for offences under Sections 302, 201 and 506 IPC, was convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ - and in default of payment of fine amount he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 506 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. In default of payment of fine amount the convict was further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. He was also convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under Section 201 IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and imposed a fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default of payment of fine amount he was further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The period of detention w.e.f. 15.2.2008 till 26.5.2009 was ordered to be set off for the offences punishable under Section 506 and 201 IPC, as per Section 428 Cr.P.C.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 14.2.2008 Inspector/SHO P.S. Sarkaghat Sh. Jhomphi Ram Thakur, received a telephonic information from retired Major Rattan Chand that a dead body was lying in Baah Khad. Rapat was lodged in the Rapat Rojnamcha of Police Station Sarkaghat. He alongwith other police personnel reached the place Bihal, near Shon Khad, where the respectable persons of the village were already present. The dead body was at a distance of 10 feet below the 'meind' of the field of Sant Ram above Shon Khad. The dead body was identified to be of Tegu Ram son of late Ishru Ram, resident of village Baah, PO Gahar, Tehsil Sarkaghat. SHO Jhomphi Ram took the photographs of the dead body. After inspection of the dead body, he filled the inquest form. The dead body was taken for conducting post mortem at Civil Hospital Sarkaghat. Sh. Roshan Lal son of Sh. Tegu Ram gave his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. to the effect that he was a labourer. On 31.1.2008, he had gone to Jamni for doing the labour work. Before this date he was present on 29/30.01.2008 at his house. At that time, his father was alive. He came to know at Jamni when he was doing the house construction work that his father is missing from the house. They had gone to search for his father with their relations, but his whereabouts could not be known. Vyasa Devi brought the police from Police Station and Pardhan of the Panchayat opened the room of his father and conducted search in the village. His father was not traced. On 14.2.2008, Rattan Chand resident of Patti during day time has seen the dead body of his father at Bihal. The dead body of his father was kept in mortuary. On 14.2.2008, he alongwith his nephew Raju Ram and elder brother Deep Ram (accused) were guarding and looking after the dead body. They were sitting near the mortuary. When they were talking with each other his elder brother (accused) told that on 31.1.2008 his father at about 3 -4:00 PM came to his courtyard and started saying to him that he had stolen his 'arhon' (rectangular piece of iron). On this he told him that he had also uprooted the Haldi and Banana trees and constructed a cow -shed. Altercation took place with his father. He picked up a stone. He hit his father's head with the stone in the courtyard due to which his father died. Thereafter, he had thrown the dead body at Bihal near the edge of Khad. On the basis of statement made by Roshan Lal under Section 154 Cr.P.C., FIR under Sections 302 and 201 was registered. Post mortem was conducted at Zonal Hospital Mandi. Viscera was also preserved. The accused was arrested on 15.2.2008. On the basis of the disclosure statement, recoveries were effected. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) MR . N.K. Thakur, Sr. Advocate, appearing for the accused has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. Parmod Thakur, learned Addl. Advocate General, has supported the judgment of the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi, H.P. dated 26.5.2009.