GOBARI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was indicted before the learned Judge Special Court (Women Atricities & Dowry Cases) Kota in Sessions Case No. 378/97 for having committed murder of Madhu. Learned Judge vide judgment dated January 20, 2001 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:- Sec. 302 IPc To suffer imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 2000/-, in default further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. Sec. 376 IPc To suffer ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine Rs. 2000/-, in default further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. Sec. 201 IPc To suffer three years rigorous imprisonment and fine Rs. 1000/-, in default further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment. Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) MADHU, a girl of 16 years of age, who left her house on May 4, 1997 at 5. 00 PM for jungle in order to attend the call of nature, did not return back and her half naked dead body was found lying in a trench. A written report (Ex. P-5) was lodged by informant Shri Nath (PW. 2) with the Police Station Kanwas where a case under Section 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Inquest report was drawn, dead body was subjected to post mortem, statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr. P. C. were recorded, the appellant was arrested and injuries found on his person were examined. On the basis of information supplied by the appellant Chhurri, pant, shirt and shoes were recovered and recovery memos were drawn. On completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Special Judge (Women Atrocities & Dowry Cases) Kota. Charge under Sections 302, 376 and 201 IPC was framed against the appellant who denied the charge and claimed trial. As many as 25 witnesses were examined by the prosecution in support of its case. In the explanation under Section 313 Cr. P. C. the appellant claimed innocence and stated that he was falsely implicated in the case. No witness in defence was however examined. On hearing final submissions the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.

(3.) WE have pondered over the rival submissions and scanned the material on record.