KISHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Kishan Singh along with co- accused Birbal and Kalyan Singh faced trial before the learned Special Judge (Sati Prevention) Rajasthan cum Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 40/52. The learned trial judge by his impugned judgment dated July 5, 1995 found appellant Kishan Singh guilty for the offence under section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Co-accused Kirpal Singh and Kalyan Singh were however acquitted. APPELLANT Kishan Singh has assailed the findings of the learned trial judge in the instant appeal.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated, the relevant facts for the disposal of the instant appeal are, that in the evening of December 15, 1988 Jagdish (deceased) was sitting at the booking counter of Beniwal Travellers which is situated near Bikaner Hotel, Station Road, Jaipur. His uncle PW. 3 Birbal Singh was sitting in the office of the said Travel Agency nearby. At about 8. 45 p. m. appellant Kishan Singh alongwith his companion came there and asked some money from Jagdish for liquor. However, Jagdish did not oblige them. Whereupon appellant Kishan Singh and his companion assaulted him. It is alleged that appellant Kishan Singh took out a knife and waved towards Jagdish. Thereupon Jagdish ran away on the road towards railway station. Appellant and his companion followed him and the companion of the appellant caught hold of Jagdish just near Shriram Bhojnalaya, where appellant Kishan Singh dealt three blows with knife on the back of Jagdish. Jagdish fell down and it is alleged that the appellant again inflicted knife blows on his body. Thereafter the assailants fled away.

(3.) TO prove its case the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses. Appellant Kishan Singh in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. denied all the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence and asserted that he has been falsely implicated. However, he did not adduce any evidence in defence. Learned trial judge on hearing the final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated hereinabove.