SITA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Sitaram has filed this appeal against his conviction by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotara, for the offence under Section 302. I.P.C.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: The appellant as well as deceased Moti were employed as semi-skilled Pump drivers and they were posted at the Railway village well at Samdari on 10-10-1976, the duty of the appellant was from 2.00 p.m. till 10.00 p.m. and the duty hours of deceased Moti were from 10.00 p.m. till 6.00 a.m. As the pump stopped functioning at 10.30 pm., Banshilal (P.W. 3). Pump-man, telephoned at the railway village well. The telephone call was received by the appellant, who informed Banshilal that Moti had died and that he was starting the pump. After receiving this in formation about the death of Moti, Banshilal informed Phool Singh (P.W. 6), Shed-man at the Loco-shed, Samdari, that Moti had died and asked him to send the information about it to the Charge-man. Phool Singh sent a Khalasi to the house of Madanlal Bajaj (P.W. 13), Charge-man, and at about 11.15 p.m., Madanlal (P.W. 13) called Nathulal, Pump Driver, and went with him to the Railway Station from where he telephoned at the railway village well. This telephone-call was also received by the appellant, who informed Madanlal that he was alive, but Moti had died. Madanlal asked as to how it had happened, but no reply was given by the appellant. Thereupon, Madanlal along with Jagdish Singh, fire man (P.W.5) and Punjraj Singh (P.W. 4), wireman, went first to G.R.P. Office, at Railway Station, Samdari and submitted a memo (Ex. P/iS) informing about the death of Moti and requesting that the matter be investigated. He also gave a similar memo at Police Station, Samdari, and thereafter he proceeded to the railway village well. On reaching there, he found the dead body of Moti lying in the open area between the quarters and the well and he called the appellant from his quarter. When he asked the appellant as to what had happened, the appellant stated that at 10.00 p.m. he was to be relieved from duty and Moti was to take over, but he did not come and that he (appellant) waited for about 15 minutes, but when Moti did not come the appellant called him and thereupon Moti came. He was in a drunken condition and, therefore, the appellant did not hand over charge to him and went to his quarter along with the log book. Mati followed him and an altercation took place, in which Moti caught hold of throat of the appellant. The appellant had a knife with him and he inflicted injuries with the knife, as a result of which Moti died. The appellant also stated that since there were unhappy relation between the appellant and deceased Moti, the appellant carried a knife with him. While Madanlal was talking to the appellant, Tapasvilal (P.W. 15), S.H.O., Police Station, Samdari, reached there and. thereafter Madanlal submitted a written report (Ex. P116) to Tapsvilal on 11-10-1976 at 3.15 am, and it was received at P.S. Samdari on 11-10-1976 at 5.00 a.m. On the basis of the said report, a case under Section 302, I.P.C., was registered at Police Station, Samdari, and investigation was commenced.

(3.) During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared the memo of site inspection (Ex. P/8), site plan (Ex. P/9), the memo of inspection of the house of the deceased (Ex P/5), Memo (Ex. P/10) of the description of the dead body of the deceased and seized the blood stained earth found near the dead body. The clothes found on the person of the deceased, were seized vide memo Ex. P/li .The appellant was arrested on 11-10.1976 at 9.30 a.m., vide memo Ex. P/4. At the time of his arrest a wrist watch a ring, a Baniyan and an underwear, which, were all stained with blood, were also seized. On the basis of the information (Ex. P/i) given by the appellant a knife and the log book were seized vide memo Ex. P/12. The post-mortem examination of the dead body of deceased Moti was conducted by Shri Bherulal (P.W 8). the Medical Officer, Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Samdari, on 11-10-1976 at 1.00 p.m. The report of the postmortem examination is Ex. P/6. According to the said report, the deceased had five incised wounds on his person, out of which one was on the forehead, the other was situated 3 cm above and 1 cm medial to the right nipple, the third at the right side of chest 2 cm lateral to the midline at the level of nipple, the fourth was situated just lateral to the left nipple and it had pierced heart and the fifth injury was on the left side of the abdomen below the umbilicus and had pierced the peritoneum. Faint smell of alcohol was found present in the contents of the stomach. According to the opinion of the Medical Officer, the deceased had died from shock and haemorrhage due to injuries on the heart and lung caused by stab wounds. The appellant was also examined by Dr. Bherulal on 11.10.1976 at 4.00, p.m and according to injury report (Ex- P/7 there were three injuries (abrasions) on his person. One abrasion was over left shoulder and it was 12 to 18 hours old, but the others two a brasions were healed a brasions and were about one to two weeks old. The blood stained baniyan and underwear as well as the wrist watch and the ring, which were seized from the person of the appellant at the time of his arrest and the knife, which was seized from the possession of the accused, and the blood stained earth seized from near the dead body, were sent for chemical as well as for serological examination and the reports (Ex. P/26 and Ex. P/27) of those examinations, showed that the wrist watch, the ring, the underwear, the baniyan and the knife were all stained with human blood and that the blood group of the blood found on the underwear of the appellant, was the same as the blood group of the blood stained earth, which were recovered from the place, where the dead body was found lying. After completing the investigation the police filed the charge-sheet against the appellant in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Balotara, who committed the case for trial to the Court of Session and, there upon the appellant was charged with the offence under Section 302, I.P.C., before the Sessions Judge, Balotara. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.