STATE OF J&K Vs. KULDEEP RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A freak but few facts attracting a recondite provision of the penal code constitute the subject matter of the criminal case, which ended in acquittal of offences under section 302/403/34 RPC in the Sessions Court at Rajouri and is re -agitated before us to impugne its correctness in this appeal.

(2.) PRECISELY , the facts of the case in the narration are that an FIR No. 41/98 under section 302 RPC stood registered with police station Dharamsal, on the receipt of information on source relating to dead body of deceased Darshan Lal resident of Amritsar lying in the field at Thangriot (Seru). During autopsy of the dead body, wound and injuries on neck, head and face were found on the body of deceased. A slip depicting the name of Kuldeep Raj was also recovered from the pocket of the pant of the deceased. The investigation revealed that the deceased was running a business in second hand goods at Bharak for the last about  ¾ years and Kuldeep Raj accused was frequent visitor on his shop. That the accused committed a theft of Rs 1.800/ -from the shop of the deceased and the latter when groused, the accused returned Rs 1,5007 - with an assurance to return the balance of Rs 300/ - also, but developed a revengeful attitude towards the deceased. On invitation, Darshan Lal deceased accompanied the accused to the latters house on 7 -8 -1998 at 6.00 p.m. The accused, however, made him to sit in the land of his father and himself went to the house and returned alongwith his mother Kailo Devi armed with an axe (Tabbar) intending to liquidate the deceased Darshan Lal. Kailo Devi accused engaged the deceased in conversation and the accused Kuldeep Raj inflicted blows with the Tabbar to the deceased from the back on the head, neck and face, as a result of which, the deceased died on spot. Accused removed Rs 1,805/ - from the pocket of the deceased, gave them to her mother and after hiding the Tabbar in the drain near the Panchayati road fled away from the place of occurrence.

(3.) EVIDENCE assembled, according to the prosecution, consists of the statements of eye -witnesses, namely, Chuni Lal and Joginder Pal, besides other witnesses of disclosure statement of seizure of weapon of offence, medical tests by the investigating officer. The trial court after perusing the evidence gathered during trial and hearing the rival contentions of the parties found evidence unreliable and prosecution miserably failed to connect the accused with the commission of the crime and consequently, recorded the order of acquittal on 29 -6 -2001.