RAMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8.1.1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar convicting the appellant for offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C.and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10000.00.

(2.) The prosecution case as disclosed during the trial is that P.W.1. Rajendra alias Raju, Hari Singh and deceased Ram Dutt all residents of Khoda were staying in a rented house of one Gulab Ram at Rawatsar for appearing in the examination. In the neighbourhood P.W. 4 Mamraj and P.W.2 Har Dutt were living in the house of Lal Chand. On 13.4.98 Hari Singh was sent to khoda for collecting ration. Therefore, P.W. 1. Rajendra and deceased Ram Dutt went to the house of P.W.4 Mamraj for dinner. While P.W.4 Mamraj, P.W.2 Har Dutt, P.W.1 Rajendra and deceased Ram Dutt were taking food, the appellant Ramesh arrived. He was a driver on a Jeep. All the five dinnered together. After finishing the food, deceased Ram Dutt reminded appellant Ramesh of repayment of loan of Rs. 200.00. He stated that Rs. 150.00 was paid and as such only a sum of Rs. 50.00 was outstanding. The appellant Ramesh expressed that at the moment, he was having only Rs. 10.00 with him and that too he required for seeing movie. A verbal altercation took place between them and they went outside the house. All of a sudden, the appellant Ramesh stabbed knife in the fell down. Ram Dutt was taken to the hospital, where he succumbed to the injuries. A report of the incident was lodged by P.W.1 Rajendra alias Raju at police Station, Rawatsar on 13.4.98. at 8.30 RM. The Police registered a case for offence 302 Penal Code Station 302 and I.P.C.and proceeded with investigation. The police prepared the inquest and sent the dead body for autopsy. The appellant was apprehended. The knife was recovered in pursuance of the information given by him. After usual investigation, the police laid charge-sheet against the appellant for offence under section 302 I.P.C.

(3.) The appellant pleaded not guilty and faced trial. The prosecution in support of the case examined 9 witnesses and produced certain documents. The appellant in his statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure denied the correctness of the prosecution evidence appearing him. The trial court relying on the testimony of the eye witnesses corroborated by the prompt F.I.R. medical evidence and recovery of the knife found the prosecution case proved. He convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner noticed above.