SITORI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Sitori has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur city, under Section 302, I. P. C, by his judgment dated 22nd October, 1971, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that Sitori suspected illicit connections between his wife Smt. Jugro P. W. 5 and the deceased Ramphool. It is alleged that on the night intervening 2nd and 3rd September, 1968 Ramphool's cry was heard from his house situated in village Kotri that Sitori had fatally wounded him. P. W. 1 Sanwalia and P. W. 2 Parma who are neighbours of Ramphool were attracted to the spot. Parma reached the spot first and saw the accused Sitori coming out from Ramphool's house with a knife about 12" long in his hand. Sanwalia arrived a little later and before both of them the deceased Ramphool declared that Sitori had fatally struck him. Both of them then took Ramphool to the Ayurvedic Hospital where P. W. 4 Vaidya Jagdish Narayan bandaged the wound and asked them to take the injured to the hospital at Hindaun. Consequently Sanwalia and Parma along with the injured Ramphool left for Hindaun but on the way Ramphool breathed his last at about 10 a. m. on 3rd September, 1968. They, therefore, returned to the house of Ramphool and placed the dead body there. P. W. 1 Sanwalia, then, orally lodged a First Information Report of the occurrence at the Police Station Hindaun situated at a distance of about 12 miles from village Kotri. In the course of investigation, P. W. 7 Dr. Narayanlal per:-formed post-mortem examination on the dead body on 3rd September, 1968. The accused was not found at his house and was arrested on 4th June, 1971.

(3.) IN the course of trial, the accused denied having committed the offence, The case against the accused rests on the evidence of two witnesses namely, P. W. 1 Sanwalia and P. W. 2 Parma. P. W. 1 Sanwalia has stated that there are only two houses between his house and the house of the deceased Ramphool one is of Parma and the other is of Ramcharan Nai. The house of Ramcharan was vacant in those days. He states that he was sleeping on his Patore and he heard the voice of Ramphool that Sitori had hurt him and thereupon he went towards Ramphool's house and saw Sitori running away from Ramphool's house. There he also saw Parma who had reached at the spot before him and in the presence, of both of them Ramphool stated that Sitori had inflicted blows to him with a dagger. Thereupon, both of them went to Sitori's house, but Sitori was not there. learned Counsel has criticized the evidence of this witness on the ground that in the F. I. R. lodged by him (Ex. P-l) he had stated that only Parma had seen the accused coming out from Ramphool's house and in the trial Court the witness has stated that he had also seen Sitori coming out of Ramphool's house and, therefore, the witness is not reliable. It appears to us that Sanwalia has, no doubt, improved his statement to the extent that he had stated that he had also seen Sitori coming out of Ramphool's house. But he fully corroborates the F. I. R. as regards the rest of its contents. He is a neighbour of Ramphool and it is very natural that the cries of Ramphool must have attracted him to the scene of occurrence. He has also stated in a forthright manner that he heard the cries of Ramphool in the first instance that Sitoria had struck him and later on Ramphool made a dying declaration also in his presence as well as that of Parma that the accused Sitori had struck him. learned Counsel has also criticised the testimony of this witness on the ground that this witness states that Ramphool had stated that Sitori had struck him with a 'katar', whereas P. W. 2 Parma states that Ramphool simply stated that he had been struck by Sitori. We do not see any material contradiction in this respect and we are satisfied that both these witnesses have given a truthful version that Ramphool had made a dying declaration before them that Sitoria had inflicted injuries to him. The statement of P. W. 1 Sanwalia has been corroborated in all material particulars by P. W. 2 Parma, who in addition to the evidence given by Sanwalia, also deposes that he clearly identified the person coming out of the house of Ramphool as the accused Sitori who had a knife-like article in his hand measuring about 12". The evidence of these witnesses is further corroborated by the fact that Sanwalia lodged the F. I. R. quite promptly in the afternoon of 3rd September, 1968 at 3. 30 p. m. The evidence of these witnesses is further corroborated by the statement of P. W. 4 Jagdish Narayan Vaidya of the Ayurvedic Hospital at Kotri. He has stated that on the night between 2nd and 3rd September, 1968 at about 2 to 3 a. m. Sanwalia brought the injured Ramphool to his house and the witness gave first-aid and bandaged the wound and asked him to take the injured to the Hindaun Hospital. We do not see any reason to reject the testimony of P. W. 1 Sanwalia and P. W. 2 Parma and hold that prosecution has succeeded in proving that the accused had caused injuries to the deceased Ramphool by a sharp weapon like knife or dagger.