RAMESH THAPA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 14.12.2011 rendered by the Sessions Judge, Solan in Sessions Trial No. 4 -NL/7 of 2011, whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as the "accused" for convenience sake), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 19.10.2010 at about 7.15 A.M., one Geeta Ram Bharadwaj informed the police telephonically that a boy Raghubir Singh, who was working in a Dhaba of PW -1 Rattan Lal in front of State Bank of Patiala was found dead. Police party headed by S.I. Dharam Singh accompanied by other police officials after recording the information in the daily diary went to the spot and recorded the statement of Rattan Lal under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Raghubir Singh son of Sh. Kalu was resident of Rampur. He was assisting Rattan Lal. Accused was also working in his Dhaba. Accused had left Dhaba after the settlement of his accounts about 15 days back. Raghubir Singh used to sleep in the first floor in the room. On 18.10.2010 at about 11.30 P.M., Ramesh Thapa accompanied by another Nepali came to his Dhaba and went to sleep with Raghubir Singh in the same room. During mid -night at about 2.00 A.M., the shutter of his Dhaba was knocked from outside as Dhaba owner was sleeping inside his Dhaba. He found Ramesh Thapa accompanied by another Nepali outside his shutter. Ramesh Thapa demanded water for drinking. He handed over to him the water and the shutter was closed. These persons remained outside talking with each other. Next morning, he woke up and went to the room of Raghubir Singh. He found Raghubir Singh dead. FIR was registered. Dead body was taken into possession by the police after preparing inquest reports. It was sent for post -mortem. The doctor opined the cause of death as vagal inhibition and respiratory obstructions combined resulting from strangulation. Police investigated the case and the challan was put up in the court after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) MR . Avneesh Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the accused, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused.