RATAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by accused Ratan Lal against the judgment dated 20.09.2001 passed by Additional Session Judge (Fast Tract), Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 33/2001. By the aforesaid judgment, the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant for offence under Sec. 302, Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000.00 and in default to suffer two years simple imprisonment.

(2.) Prosecution was initiated by lodging of First Information Report on 06 04.1997 at Police Station Raashmi. District Chittorgarh by Devi Lal which is Exhibit 6 on record. According to the first informant, he was informed by Narain that Ratan has killed his wife and the dead body is lying near the well in his field. This report was lodged at 8.00 p.m. According to the First Information Report the time of occurrence was 6 p.m on 06.04.1997. After lodging of the First Information Report investigation was conducted and charge-sheet was filed in the Court of "Judicial Magistrate, Raashmi who in turn sent to it to the Court of Sessions from where the matter was assigned to the trial Court

(3.) At the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 36 witnesses and Exhibited 30 documents. Accused has been examined under Sec. 313, Cr.PC. and has produced, defence witnesses at the trial. The learned trial Court has considered the case of the prosecution and heard the prosecution. According to the judgment of the learned trial Court, no eye-witness was coming forth. P.W. 6 Narain examined by the prosecution, is said to have informed the first informant about the incident, alleging that he had seen the occurrence taking place. He has not said the fact in his examination before the Court that he was witness of the occurrence. He only stated that at the field of the accused dead body of the deceased was lying. Thus, the case is without any direct evidence. A witness of extra judicial confession was also designated. However, he has not given out any such version, which can be said to be an extra judicial confession. This left the Court with only circumstantial pieces of evidence, which go in the nature of being last seen and recovery of blood stained axe and clothes and dead body being found on the well of the accused. The trial Court considered the case of the prosecution and convicted the accused appellant after relating the aforesaid circumstances.