TEKA ALIAS TEKCHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two appellants namely, Teka @ Tekchand and Bhushan were placed on trial before the learned Sessions Judge Jaipur Distt. in Sessions Case No. 30/95 for having committed murder of Surendra Singh Banjara. Learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated August 25, 2001 convicted the appellants under sections 302/34 IPC and sentenced each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000 in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) FACTS of the prosecution case leading to the instant appeal are these : On October 17, 1994 informant Bhanwar Lal (PW. 2) orally lodged report with the Police Station Sanganer that at 7. 30 a. m. while he was standing near Mahadev Temple, he saw two jeeps coming from the side of Tonk. Jeep of green colour which was ahead suddenly took turn towards Ganesh Colony and got halted. Two persons got down from the Jeep. The person who was driving the jeep entered into Ganesh Colony while the other got himself seated on a Tempo and proceeded towards Jaipur. After sometime the informant and other persons went near the abandoned jeep and found a dead body lying on the back side of the jeep. The Police Station Sanganer on the basis of the said information, registered a case under Sections 302, 201 IPC and recovered the dead body which was identified as of Surendra Singh Banjara. In the course of investigation the police came to the conclusion that deceased Surendra Singh Banjara was driver of the said jeep and the appellants who got the jeep hired from Kota, killed Surendra Singh Banjara on the way and left the jeep abandoned at Sanganer. After usual investigation the police filed charge sheet against the appellants. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge Jaipur Distt. Charges under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC were framed against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 26 witnesses. In the explanation under Section 313 Cr. P. C. the appellants claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated above.

(3.) HAVING scanned the material on record we find that the evidence adduced by the prosecution can broadly be divided under four heads: (i) Evidence that death of deceased was homicidal. (ii) Evidence which establishes that the deceased and appellants proceeded together in jeep No. RJ-20c 1917 from Kota on October 16, 1994. (iii) Evidence which proves that at about 7. 30 AM on October 17, 1994 the appellants got down from Jeep No. RJ-20c 1917 and escaped leaving the jeep abandoned. At that time the jeep contained a dead body. (iv) Evidence of identification of appellants. HOMICIDAL DEATh