JOGINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the appellant through jail against the judgment, dated 28.9.2006, of the court of ld. Sessions Judge, Chamba, vide which the appellant was held guilty under Sections 302 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and was convicted and sentenced as under : - Under Section 302 IPC: Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - In default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years. Under Section 506 IPC: rigorous imprisonment for one year. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution story in brief is that on 6.2.2004, at about 12.05 p.m., a telephonic message was received at Police Station, Sadar, Chamba from one Manjit Kumar that one Joginder Kumar has murdered his son and further proceedings be conducted in this regard. This information was entered in rapat rojnamcha No. 9, dated 6.2.2004, by the Inspector/SHO Khub Ram, who proceeded to the spot alongwith other police officials. He reached the spot and recorded the statement of one Smt. Guddi Devi under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. at 1.30 p.m. In the said statement, the complainant had alleged that she remains in her house alongwith her husband Manjit Kumar and Joginder Kumar, the elder brother of her husband, who also lives in the same house but they are living separate in 2 -room sets and are having separate kitchens, but these are adjacent to one another. She alleged that her Jeth Joginder Kumar (accused) has got two sons, the elder one is named Rohit Kumar aged 4 -1/2 years and the younger one is Abhishek, who is aged about 2 years. She further stated that today in the morning at about 11.45 a.m.,. she was sitting in the courtyard, basking in the Sun and her son Ajay Kumar aged 3 years was also sitting with her. Her husband Manjit Kumar had gone to the shop to make purchases and her Jethani Achhroo Devi, wife of accused Joginder Kumar, had gone to some persons house for work. Her Jeth Joginder Kumar was sitting in the courtyard and his two sons were playing there. She further stated that her Jeth Joginder Kumar got up, went to the kitchen and his minor son Abhishek followed him to the kitchen and Joginder Kumar picked up a drat lying in the kitchen and gave a blow on the neck of his son Abhishek, who was present in the kitchen. Abhishek fell down, Joginder Kumar came outside the kitchen and told her that he has killed his son Abhishek with drat and if she told this fact to any person, he will kill her and her family. She further stated that she was pregnant and with great difficulty she took her son Ajay Kumar and her Jeths son Rohit to the house of her neighbour Pan Raj and left both the children there and went to the shop and informed her husband about the occurrence, who gave a telephonic call to the police who came to the spot and recorded her statement. Thus, the appellant stands charged for committing murder of his minor son Abhishek, aged about 2 years and for giving a threat to take the life of the complainant Smt. Guddi Devi.

(3.) THE appellant had filed the present appeal through jail and, therefore, he was provided a counsel at state expense by the High Court Legal Aid Committee. The only submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant was that the deceased was suffering from schizophrenia and as such he deserves lesser punishment than imprisonment for life, as awarded by the learned trial Court. He did not substantiate his plea if the appellant was suffering from schizophrenia at the time of commission of offence or at present or was found to be suffering from schizophrenia during the trial of the case. The learned Counsel for the appellant persisted with his plea for lesser punishment for the appellant in view of the fact that he was suffering from schizophrenia even after he had been told that once the person is held guilty under Section 302 of the IPC, the Court has no discretion and it has to award either of the two sentences prescribed there, meaning thereby that either he can be sentenced for life or death sentence, but the court has no option to sentence him for lesser period than life imprisonment.