JHUNTHA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Jhuntha Ram and one Smt. Shyalu @ Shyaldi were indicted in Sessions Case No. 132/98 before the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu for having committed murder of Smt. Santosh. Learned trial judge vide judgment dated Aug. 24, 1999 convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 302 and 498-A Penal Code and sentenced as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_63_LAWS(RAJ)8_2003_1.html</FRM> The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Smt. Shalu Shyaldi was, however, acquitted.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that Gopi Ram, elder brother of the appellant submitted a written report on June 28, 1998 at 1.15 F.M. with the Station House Officer, Police Station Maisisar, District Jhunjhunu stating therein that he and his brother Jhuntha Ram had gone to take part in a feast hosted in a village on the occasion of some marriage there he received the message that Smt. Santosh Devi wife of his brother Jhuntha Ram suddenly died. A prayer was made in the report to conduct the inquiry. The Station House Officer, Police Station Malsisar initiated proceedings under Sec. 174 Cr.PC. and forwarded the report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jhunjhunu.

(3.) On June 28, 1998 itself, Mohan Lal PW 1 also handed 0ye; a written report to the In-charge Police Station Maisisar at 9.30 PM. with the averments that his sister Santosh used to be harassed and humiliated by the appellant in connection with dowry. The appellant had also illicit relationship with his Bhabhi Snyaldi On June 28. 1998 Sarnosh was killed by the appellant, Shyaldi and Gopi. On the basis of the said report a case under Sections 304-B and 498-A Penal Code was registered and investigation commenced. On completion of the investigation. charge sheet was piled. in due course, the case came up before the learned Sessions Judge. Jhuejhunu for trial. Charges under Sections 120-B, 302 in the alternative 498-A, 306 in the to alternative 304-6 were framed. The appellant denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case, examined' as many as 21 witnesses. In his explanation under Sec. 313 Cr.PC. the appellant claimed innocence and steed that he was falsely implicated in the case. No defence witness was, however. examined. The learned trial court on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated above.