GAURAV VERMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against the judgment and order dated 21.2.2014 and 25.2.2014, respectively, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge (Forests), Shimla, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 29 -S/7 of 2012/11, whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for six months.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that the accused was student of Engineering in IIT Rurkee and deceased Pragti was student of Engineering at IIT Delhi. On 25.2.2010, both of them came to Shimla and stayed in room No. 26, Hotel Rasik at 2:30 AM. On 26.2.2010, they stayed in the room. On 27.2.2010 when the room was found locked from outside and no reply was coming from inside, the police was called and the room was opened with duplicate key and dead body of deceased Pragti was found in the room. The police recorded the statement of PW -4 Raj Kumar vide Ext. PW -4/A and rukka was sent to the Police Station. On the basis of the rukka, FIR Ext. PW -25/A was registered. The spot proceedings were photographed. The police took into possession various articles belonging to the accused and deceased. The dead body was handed over to the Uncle and Sister of Pragti. The accused had left Shimla and stayed at Hotel Haryana, Chandigarh and thereafter, he was nabbed from Jagadhari. The police took specimen handwriting and finger prints of the accused. The accused was got medically examined and his MLC Ext. PW -32/A was obtained. The post mortem of the deceased was also got conducted. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) MR . Ajay Kochhar, Advocate for the accused has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. P.M. Negi, learned Dy. Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, has supported the judgment and order of the learned trial Court dated 21.2.2014 and 25.2.2014, respectively.