BABU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals arise out of the judgment dated June 24, 2000 of the learned Special Judge SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Jaipur whereby the three appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:- Mahendra Singh and Ishaq @ Yusuf: + U/s. 302 IPc to undergo Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. U/s. 302/120b IPc to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. U/s. 201 IPc to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Babu Lal: + U/s. 302/120b IPc to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. U/s. 201/120b IPc to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) ACCUSATIONS that laid the foundation of the prosecution case demonstrate that the information was communicated on telephone on September 15, 1998 to Richhpal Singh, SHO Police Station Renwal (PW. 26), that a dead body was lying in Metha river. Richhpal Singh along with other Police Officials rushed to the spot and recovered a dead body covered with sand. First Information Report was lodged under Section 302 and 201 IPC and investigation commenced. Dead body was identified as of Chetan Verma who was missing since September 11, 1998. The appellants were found involved in commission of offence, they were arrested and charge sheet was filed against them. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Special Judge, SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities Cases) Jaipur. Charges under Sections 302, 302/120-B, 201, 201/120b IPC and Section 3 (2) (5) SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were framed against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 28 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 herein above.

(3.) PER contra, learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment and contended that chain of circumstances is complete and involvement of appellants in the guilt is fully established. HOMICIDAL DEATh