PAPPU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant faced trial in Sessions Case No. 56/1999 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Baran who vide Judgment dated December 2, 2000 convicted the appellant for the offence under section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment.

(2.) THE allegations against the appellant in the written report submitted by informant Ram Swaroop Mali on June 9, 1999 at 10. 00 PM with the Police Station Mangrol, were that at 9 PM on the said day he inflicted knife blows on the person of Om Prakash (now deceased) who was admitted to the hospital. A case under sections 307 and 342 IPC was registered against the appellant by Police Station Mangrol and investigation commenced. On June 10, 1999 Om Prakash succumbed to his injuries and section 302 IPC came to be added. Post mortem on the dead body was performed, statements of witnesses were recorded, the accused was arrested necessary memos were drawn and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course of case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Baran. Charge under section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of the case examined as many as 14 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the accused 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.) FROM the material on record it is established that there was no premeditation on the part of the appellant to inflict the injury on the person of the deceased. It does not appear that the appellant attacked the deceased with the intention of causing his death, nor with the intention of causing such bodily injury as he knew to be likely to cause death, nor with the intention of causing bodily injury sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The cause behind the incident was illegal ousting of the appellant from his house. Before inflicting the injury the appellant and deceased fought together. The appellant also sustained injuries and the deceased died on the next day of the incident. The offence is, therefore, reduced to one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder falling within the ambit of Part I of Section 304 IPC.