LALLA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was indicted before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City in Sessions Case No. 13/1997 for having committed murder of Ramjan vide judgment dated January 22, 1999. He was convicted and sentenced under Sec. 302 IPC to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment. Against the said judgment present action for filing instant appeal has been resorted to by the appellant.

(2.) ON the basis of Parcha Bayan of injured Ramjan (since deceased) recorded on January 9, 1997, FIR No. 32/97 came to be registered at Police Station Hindaun City against the appellant and three others. It was interalia stated in the Parcha Bayan that on that day around 9. 00 a. m. while Ramjan was standing outside his residential house the appellant and three others namely Battu, Hussain and Pintu came to the spot and appellant inflicted injury with Santoor (a cutting instrument) on his head which resulted in profused bleeding. Ramjan was removed to Hospital by Babu and Fakira. Initially a case under Section 307 read with section 34 IPC was registered but after the death of Ramjan on January 21, 1997 the case was converted to section 302 IPC. Autopsy on the dead body of Ramjan was conducted and other necessary memos were drawn. The statements of the witnesses under section 161 Cr. P. C. were recorded. The appellant and other accused persons were arrested. At the instance of the appellant Santoor was recovered. ON conclusion of the investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Hindaun City. Charge under section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant who denied the charge and claimed to be tried. As many as 13 witnesses were examined in support of the prosecution case. In the statement recorded under section 313 Cr. P. C. the appellant claimed innocence. ONe witness was examined in defence. The learned trial Court on hearing final submissions acquitted Hussain, Battu and Pintu but convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated hereinabove.

(3.) PER contra Mr. S. S. Rathore learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. N. A. Naqvi, learned counsel for the complainant urged that Fakira is a reliable witness and the learned trial judge had rightly believed his evidence. The case of the appellant is covered under clause Thirdly of section 300 IPC. In support of their contentions the learned counsel cited Jai Prakash vs. State (2), and State of Karnataka vs. Vedanayagam