GOPAL NAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Gopal Nai was indicated before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 7/2001 for having committed murder of Sukhpal. Learned trial Judge vide judgment dated June 23, 2001 convicted and sentenced the appellant under Sec. 302 Penal Code to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 100.00, in default to further suffer one Month Rigorous Imprisonment.

(2.) Put briefly the prosecution case is that Babu Lal SHO Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur recorded parcha bayan of informant Sugan Chand (PW 2) on June 21,1998, wherein Sugan Chand stated that as house over plot No. D-53, Vaishali Nagar belonging to Dr. Jai Kumar Motwani was under construction, he along with his family were residing there. Sukhpal chowkidar (now deceased) had also his abode there. Some two months back the appellant was also residing with Sukhpal but Contractor Laxmi Narain got the appellant replaced from the said plot. The appellant thought that Sukhpal was behind all this, therefore he became angry with Sukhpal. On June 20, 1998 around 3 AM in the night the informant awoke on hearing hue and cry of his wife Maya and found Sukhpal badly injured. He then tied bandage on the cut wound appeared on the neck of Sukhpal and took him near the gate in the meanwhile the assailants scaled the wall and fled. Sukhpal died around 3.30 AM on account of injuries sustained by him on his neck, shoulder and head caused by sharp edged weapon. The informant raised hue and cry but no one from the neighborhood reached at the spot. On the basis of Parcha Bayan a case under Sec. 302 Penal Code was registered and investigation commenced and the appellant was arrested. On completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur. Charge under section 302 Penal Code was framed against the appellant who denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 12 witnesses. In his explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P.C. the appellant claimed innocence and stated that the Contractor Laxmi Narayan had illicit relationship with the wife of informant Sugan Chand and because he and Sukhpal were against the relationship, the Contractor implicated him in the case falsely. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned Trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.

(3.) Mr. Bhanwar Lal Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant pointed out following infirmities in the prosecution case:-