RAM KISHAN ALIAS KISHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, dated August, 14, 1980, whereby he convicted the accused -appellants as under: Ram Kishan : Convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 400/ - and in default of payment of fine to undergo RI for three months, under Section 201 IPC to three years' RI and a fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default of payment of fine to undergo RI for three months and under Section 380 IPC to one years' RI and a fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default of payment of fine to undergo RI for three months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently; Parma Nand : Convicted under Section 411 IPC and sentenced to one year's RI; Mst. Juni Bai and Siriya: Convicted under Section 411 IPC and sentenced to one year's RI.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that at police station Jawar, District Jhalawar a report was lodged on April 25, 1979 at 3.00 p m. by one Mangilal PW 1, where in it was alleged by him that he and his family members had gone to Sultanpur, Madhya Pradesh, along with a marriage party of his nephew leaving behind Parmanand PW 2, his son and his mother Seeta who stays separately from all the brothers. It was stated that since after the death of his father his mother has been living separately all alone in a house and was not even on talking terms with her grand children. She used to put on silver kadies in her legs, a khungali in her neck and four silver bangles in her hands On April 23, 1979, when the marriage party returned to the village his son Parmanand informed him that his mother Seeta had gone to worship Sheetlamata on Sunday and since then she is not seen. On this information it is alleged that he accompanied with Ram Gopal PW 13 and Ram Chandra PW 3 went to the house of the deceased Seeta where she used to stay but she was not traceable. On the contrary they found the goods of the house scattered and some portion of the floor dug. He thereafter went in search of his mother and enquired from his brother Ram Chandra and also went to Rajgarh and Margbas where his sisters stayed but she was not traceable in those villages also. Thereafter they made a futile search at village Chandipur where too some relations stayed. Thus, they inferred that she has been enticed with an intention to take away her goods and has been hidden at some secret place. It was further mentioned in the report that he does not know as to what are the goods which have been removed from the house as she was too secretive to disclose anything even to her sons or grand -children. On the receipt of this report a case under Section 364. 365 and 380 IPC was registered and investigation commended.

(3.) AT trial the prosecution examined 28 witnesses in support of its case. The accused in heir statements recorded Section 313 Cr.PC denied the prosecution story. Accused Laxmi Narain however, stated that Parmanand had pawned with him two gold Bejayanti through Dhulilal and at that time Parmanand had stated that it was his own property. Radhey Shyam stated that Kankati and Newli recovered belong to his brother's wife Gayatri Devi which had been made by Ram Narain Sunar. Ram Kishan pleaded alibi and Parmanand also claimed the property saying it to be his own. The defence examined Ram Narain, Gayatri Devi, Tejbai and Asharam as their witnesses to substantiate their case.