(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment of Sessions Court, whereby respondent Jarmu who was tried for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly murdering one Raj Kumar, has been acquitted.
(2.) CASE of the prosecution, as it emerges from the evidence on record, may be stated thus. On 25.5.1991, deceased Raj Kumar went to the house of PW -3 Prithia to see his ailing mother. The time was around 9 p.m. He stayed there for 10 -15 minutes and left for his own house. About thirty minutes later PW -3 Prithia heard PW -6 Jai Fali crying "MAR DIYA, MAR DIYA, BACHAO." Hearing the cries, Prithia accompanied by his brother Nikku Ram, came out of the room to the Verandah of his house, switched on the light and saw Raj Kumar lying in the Verandah of respondent Jarmu with an injury on the back of his head and blood coming out from his mouth and ears. He also saw respondent Jarmu standing near Raj Kumar with a 'Kulharu ' in his hand. Respondent was proclaiming that whosoever come to the rescue of Raj Kumar, would be killed. Respondent tried to attack the mother of Raj Kumar, when she tried to intervene, but she was saved by PW -4 Karmu, a brother of the respondent. Raj Kumar was then lifted by Misso, wife of the respondent and taken to his house situated nearby. Next morning PW -3 Prithia went to inform PW -15 Ranjha Ram, President of Gram Panchayat, who advised that the matter be reported to the police. Ranjha Ram himself went to the house of the deceased and saw him in injured condition. Assisted by other residents of the village, he carried the deceased, who was still breathing, to the hospital at Bharmour. From there he was shifted to Civil Hospital, Chamba on 3.6.1991, where he died the same day at 6.20 p.m.
(3.) PROSECUTION examined PW -3 Prithia, PW -6 Jai Fali, mother of the deceased and PW -4 Karmu, brother of the respondent, as eye -witnesses. PW -4 Karmu did not support the prosecution version apparently because of his being biased in favour of the respondent on account of close relationship. He was cross -examined by the prosecution with the leave of the Court. In the cross - examination he stated certain facts favourable to the prosecution. Trial Court has not considered his testimony at all apparently because of his having been declared hostile. Evidence of PW -3 Prithia has been rejected with the observation that he himself was a suspect. Testimony of PW -6 Jai Fali, mother of the deceased, has been disbelieved on the ground that she being the mother of the deceased, her evidence could not be accepted without corroboration and also it being inconsistent with the testimony of PW -3 Prithia.