BABU SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the judgment dated 25.5.2005, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Rajsamand, accused appellant Babu Singh son of Tej Singh, by caste Rawat-Rajput, resident of Siyaji Ki Guwar, Police Station Bheem, District Rajsamand, was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000.00 and further to undergo three months additional imprisonment in the event of default in payment of fine. The jail appeal giving challenge to the judgment and order aforesaid is before us.

(2.) IN brief, facts of the case are that on 17.2.2004 at about 08:30 AM, the Station House Officer of Police Station Rajnagar, District Rajsamand, reduced in writing a statement given by Shri Udailal son of Mohanlal at opposite Moonlight Marbal, National High Way No.8, Badarda, District Rajsamand. As per the statement reduced in writing (Ex.P/1), At about 07:00 AM Udailal, a tea trolley vendor, came to his trolley installed outside the Moonlight Marble. A closed body parcel van bearing No.GJ-18-T-9084 was parked close to the tea trolley having face towards the direction of Town Nathdwara. Udailal was under impression that the driver etc. of the van concerned must either be sleeping or may have gone to have tea etc. Udailal involved himself in his routine work and certain drivers of other vehicles came to him to have tea. Someone amongst those conveyed that one person was lying in the cabin of the parcel van and was breathing rapidly. Udailal then saw inside the parcel van, where a man was lying in cabin wrapped with a blanket and was breathing too fast. Udailal made a call for the person responsible with the parcel van, but of no consequence. Udailal then saw the person lying in the parcel van from close and found that he was having serious injuries on his face and blood was oozing. He also found blood stains on the seat and ceiling of the parcel van. He then conveyed this fact to Raju Bhai Gujar, a staff member working at Neelam Marbles. Raju Bhai Gujar then gave a telephonic information to Police Station Nathdwara. After some time police personnels arrived at the spot.

(3.) THE prosecution supported its case with the aid of 24 witnesses (PW-1 to PW-24) and by exhibiting the documents Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/26. An opportunity was given to the accused appellant to explain the adverse circumstances available in prosecution evidence, wherein he termed all the adverse circumstances as false and pleaded innocence. No evidence was adduced in defence.