SATYANARAYAN ALIAS CHHINGA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE allegation against the appellant was that at the behest of a rapist (who was facing trial in a rape case and confined in jail) the appellant forced the rape-victim to change her statement and when she did not agree she was mercilessly stabbed and killed by the appellant. In the court of learned Sessions Judge Karauli the appellant faced the trial in Sessions Case No. 80/2000 and vide Judgment dated December 21, 1999 he was convicted and sentenced as under:- U/s. 302 IPC: To suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment. U/s. 458 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment seven years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment. Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) IT is the prosecution case that on June 4, 1999 the informant Jeetmal (Pw. 1) submitted a written report (Ex. P-1) and alleged that on May 7, 1999 Bhagli Jat committed rape with informant's wife Santra. Bhagli Jat was taken in custody and a criminal case was registered against him. The appellant being a friend of Bhagli Jat, came to Santra on June 2, 1999 and pursuaded her to enter into compromise with Bhagli Jat. When Santra declined the offer, the appellant gave a fist blow on her face. On June 3, 1999 around 11. 30 PM while informant, his younger brother Sarupa, his son Narendra and wife Santra were sleeping, the informant heard cries of Santra. The informant got up and saw the appellant inflicting knife blows on the person of Santra. Injured Santra was removed to hospital but on the way she died. On the basis of said report case was registered for the offences under sections 456 and 302 IPC and investigation commenced. Autopsy on the dead body was performed. Accused was arrested, necessary memos were drawn and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge Karauli. Charges under sections 449, 458 and 302 IPC were framed. The accused denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 17 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions decided the case as indicated above.

(3.) FOR these reasons, the appeal being devoid of merit stands dismissed. .