SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant D.B. Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant-accused against the judgment dtd. 30/11/2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Abu Road, District Sirohi in Sessions Case No. 65/2016 (12/2015) whereby, the appellant-accused was convicted and sentenced as under:-

(2.) Briefly put the facts of the case are that on 1/11/2014 at around 12:30 a.m., Om Prakash - PW-1 lodged a written report (Ex.P/1) for the offence committed on 31/10/2014. It was alleged in the report that on 31/10/2014 at around 09:00 p.m., he received an information that his younger brother Rajendra was missing from his house and his motorcycle was parked outside the same residence. The compound gate of house was open. Then, he and his son Nitesh Kumar went to Rajendra's house at Patel Colony, Santpur and saw that the compound gate (fatak) was open and the main door of the house was locked. Then he looked round from outside and reached corner of the house and saw from the window that fan was switched on and through the flash of torch light he also saw a hand, then he called Jaswant Kumawat from the neighbourhood to break open the lock of the house and after that he entered the house and upon switching on the lights, saw the Rajendra's body lying on the floor which was smeared in blood and there were multiple wounds on his body. In the adjoining room, he and his son saw that the Almirah was open and all the jewellery boxes were empty. The boxes contained ornaments which his brother had purchased for his own wedding. He also found that three rings, a bracelet and a chain worn by his brother were missing on his body. Thereafter, he informed the police that some unknown person had murdered his brother and had stolen the ornaments from the house. Rajendra last met him in the society meeting on 30/10/2014. On this report, an FIR (No.290/2014) came to be registered for the offences under Ss. 302, 201 and 380 IPC and investigation was commenced. After concluding the investigation, the IO proceeded to file a charge-sheet against the accused Sunil Kumar for the aforestated offences.

(3.) After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties on charge-framing, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Abu Road read over and explained the charges for the offences punishable under Ss. 302, 201 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code to the accused Sunil Kumar, who denied the charges and claimed to be tried.