BHANWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 31/10/2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Kota (Raj.), in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (State of Rajasthan vs. Bhanwar Singh), whereby accused-appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sec. 302 I.P.C. and Sec. 4/25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.15,000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 6 months' additional simple imprisonment and one year's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's additional simple imprisonment, respectively and both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that on 28/12/2010, complainant-Manohar Singh lodged a written report (Ex.P-1), at Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural) with regard to murder of his brother-Satyanarayan Singh on the basis of which, Police registered the First Information Report No.154/2010 (Ex.P-16) at Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural) for the offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C. and after conducting investigation, Police submitted the charge-sheet against the accused-appellant for the offences under Sec. 302 I.P.C. and Sec. 4/25 of the Arms Act. Learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused-appellant for abovementioned offences. Accused-appellant denied charges and claimed trial. Prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses (PW-1 to PW-15) and 22 documents were exhibited. In defence, Police statement of Babu Singh (Ex.D-1) was also exhibited. Explanation of the appellant-Bhanwar Singh was recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., wherein accused stated that he did not commit any offence and that he was falsely made an accused on account of enmity. Learned Trial Court after hearing the arguments vide impugned judgment dtd. 31/10/2015, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant for offence under Sec. 302 of I.P.C. and Sec. 4/25 of the Arms Act, aggrieved by which, the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) It is contended by counsel for the accused-appellant that all the material witnesses who were named in the F.I.R. have turned hostile. As per the F.I.R., Manohar Singh (P.W.-1), who is the complainant was an eye-witness and was actually present at the place of occurrence but he clearly stated in his cross-examination that at the time of incident he was at home and he only saw the back of assailant. It is also contended that Gupti, which was recovered vide Ex.P-8, is said to have been recovered at the instance of accused on the basis of information given by him under Sec. 27 of the Evidence Act (Ex.P-14), but same was not found to be stained with blood. It is further contended that none of the witnesses in their statements have shown the presence of the accused-appellant at the place, where the incident occurred.