BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. STATE.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant Bhagwan Singh against his conviction for offence under section.302 Indian Penal Code by judgement of the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), No.4, Jhalawar Camp, Aklera dated 5.9.2003. Upon his conviction, petitioner was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.1,000 and in default of which, he is required to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year. The order of sentence is also under challenge.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this appeal are that one Narsingh Dass Vairagi, resident of Thanavad submitted a written report to SHO, Police Station Aklera at 2.30 PM on 2.11.2002 inter alia alleging that he and his son on the night of the previous day at 7.00 PM had gone to their agriculture field for guarding the harvest. His wife Sita Bai and daughters Nani Bai and Parvati stayed back in the house. When he returned back to his house at 6.00 AM, he found that main gate of the house was open. He saw his wife sleeping under the shed (Agdalya) and daughters on the cot at another place. He milked the cow. His son Rakesh went back to the agriculture field with the bullocks. He asked her daughter Nani Bai to awake her mother to prepare tea. When Nani Bai went to wake up her mother, she found her murdered and cried that somebody had murdered her. The complainant himself checked and found that Sita Bai had received grievous injuries behind her left ear and blood was oozing out of the injuries. One of her ear-ring was not present in the ear, but found lying nearby. She was still wearing the bangles and silver necklace and the ornaments of the fingers of foot. When he raised hue and cry that someone had murdered his wife, neighbours Bheru Lal Kumhar, Ram Bharose, Dhuli Chand, Moti Lal and other residents of the village assembled in her house. The police after investigation filed challan against the accused-appellant for offence under section.450 and 302 of Indian Penal Code and thereafter, charges were also framed against him for the aforesaid offences to which the accused-appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Prosecution in support of its case, examined sixteen witnesses, whereas defence produced two witnesses. The learned trial court after conclusion of the trial, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant in the manner indicated above.

(3.) We have heard Shri Rajesh Choudhary, learned counsel for the accused-appellant and Shri J.R. Bijarniya, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.