MUNNA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was indicted before the learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area and Additional Sessions Judge, Karauli in Session Case No. 83/94 for having committed murder of Ramji vide judgment dated July 12, 1995. He was found guilty and convicted and sentenced under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default to further suffer six months, simple imprisonment.

(2.) The prosecution case as pictured during trial was that on Sept. 18, 1994 around 7:30 A.M., informant Kamod PW 2 submitted a written report Ex.P-2 with the Police Station Masalpur stating therein that around 11:00 P.M. in the preceding night he rushed to the house of the appellant on hearing hue and cry where he found Ramji dead having injuries on his head. At that time Smt. Santa PW 7, the wife of the appellant intimated him that the appellant inflicted axe blow on the head of Ramji and fled. A case under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered and investigation commenced. Inquest Report Ex.P-4 was drawn. Autopsy on the dead body of deceased was conducted. Site was inspected and other necessary memos' were drawn. Statements of the witnesses under Sec. 161 Crimial P.C. were recorded. The appellant was arrested and on the basis of his disclosure statement axe allegedly used in commission of the offence was recovered. On completion of the investigation, charge - sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Special Judge. Charge under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code was framed. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C., the appellant claimed innocence. No witness was however examined in defence. The learned trial judge on hearing the final submissions, convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated here-in-above.

(3.) Mrs. Alka Bhatnagar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently canvassed that the appellant could not have been convicted as only eye - witness in the case Smt. Santa PW 7 did not toe the line of the prosecution story and was declared hostile. But the learned Court below placing reliance on the statement of Santa and considering the other circumstances, convicted and sentenced the appellant and committed illegality.