TEJA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED Tejaram was convicted under Section 302 and 201, I.P.C. and was sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of 500/ -, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months simple imprisonment on the first count and five years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default of the payment of fine to further undergo three months like imprisonment on the second count by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, vide his judgment dated December 2, 1980. Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. The accused has come up in appeal to challenge his conviction and sentence.

(2.) KHURNA Ram Bishnoi (50) was the father of PW 14 Bhagirath and was living with him in village Bhunwar P.S. Serva district Banner. 10 -12 days before Chetra Sudi 12 of 1980 (corresponding to March 28, 1980)Khuma Ram went to village Phoolan P.S. Samdari to purchase cattle -fodder. He had taken a sum of Rs. 4000/ - with him for this purpose. He was also wearing gold -ring (Article 1) with him, which he had borrowed from PW 1 Haidar. Khuma Ram did not return to village Bhunwar. His son Bhagirath went in his search and came to village Phoolan. He there learnt that his father Khumaram had stayed with accused Tejaram upto March 28, 1980. Bhagirath contacted the accused Tejaram and asked about the whereabouts of his father. Accused Tejaram total him that his father had left his(accused's) house in the afternoon of March 28, 1980. Bhagirath was not satisfied with the information furnished to him by the accused. He therefore, presented written report Ex. P 2 at about 6.00 p.m. on June 18, 1980 at Police Station, Samdari reciting all these facts therein. He expressed his suspicion on the accused Tejaram. The police entered this report in the Rojnamcha, but did not register a case. The Investigating Officer Prem Singh (PW 15) made inquiries and found substantial truth in the report submitted by Bhagirath. Suspicion laid on the accused by Bhagirath was not found baseless. The Station House Officer, therefore, registered a case under Sections 302 and 201, I.P.C. at about 11.00 A.M. on June 20, 1980. The accused was arrested around 1.00 p.m. on June 20, 1980 vide arrest memo Ex. D.1. The accused, after his arrest, made disclosure statement at about 2.30 P.M. on June 20, 1980 that he had burried the dead body of Khumaram a few yards away from his Dhani. The information furnished by accused was reduced into writing in EX. P 13. Since the dead body of Khumaram had already been interred, the S.H.O. approached the Sub -Divisional Magistrate Mr. Banshi Dhar (PW 16) and requested him to cause the dead body of Khumaram to be disinterred. Mr. Banshi Dhar arrived at village Phoolan. The accused took him and the police -party to a place shown by mark 'A' in site plan Ex. P 14, which is a few yards away from his Dhani and there dug a portion. The pit was dug nearly five feet deep. In the pit was found the deadbody of Khumaram. The deadbody was wearing the Dhoti (Article 3) and Chola (shirt) (Article 4). PW 14 Bhagirath, who was present there on the spot, identified the dead body and the clothes Articles 1 and 2 to be of his deceased father Khumaram. The Sub -Divisional Magistrate Mr. Banshi Dhar prepared the report Ex. P 18 of taking out the dead body of Khumaram from the pit. The dead body recovered had no skin or muscles. It was a skeleton. The post -mortem examination was conducted by PW 10 Dr. Harish Bapna the then Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Siwana, who was called on the spot by the Investigating Officer. Dr. Bapna was of the opinion that the skeleton was of a Hindu male aged about fifty years. He found that the skull -vault having fractured on left side of both the temporal and parietal bones. An injury was also noticed on the neck. The diameter of the fracture was 2 -1/2' long going upto mastoid process. Dr. Bapna was of the opinion that the cause of death was the two injuries noted by him. He was also of the opinion that these two injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The post mortem examination report prepared by him is Ex. P 6. The accused again gave information to the Investigating Officer at about 1 J.30 A.M. on June 22, 1980 that he had given the gold ring of deceased Khumaram to Nagga Sonar of Tilwara, which he was prepared to get produced. This information was recorded in Ex. P 15 by the Investigating Officer. In pursuance of this information, the accused took the Investigating Officer and Motbirs to the house of PW 4 Nagga Sonar where Nagga Sonar produced gold ring Article 1. It transpired that the accused had given this gold ring of the deceased Khumaram to PW4 Nagga Sonar in exchange of two ear rings. The gold ring was seized and sealed. Again, on June 27, 1980 the accused whilst in police custody, furnished information to the Investigating Officer that he had concealed the Lathi, which he had used in the commission of the offence, the shoes, Dhoti, Thela (cloth -bag) and the currency notes of Rs. 1000/ - of the deceased -victim in his Dhani and that he was prepared to get them recovered. This information was reduced into writing in Ex. P 16. In pursuance to this information, the accused took the Motbirs and the Investigating Officer to his Dhani and from there took out Lathi (Article 5), Shoes (Article 6), Dhoti (Article 7) and Thela (cloth -bag) (Article 8). These articles were seized and sealed and seizure memo Ex. P8 was prepared. In the test identification conducted on July 2, 1980 by the Judicial Magistrate Mr. Ganesh Dan Charan (PW 13), gold ring (Article 1), shoes (Article 6), Dhoti (Article 7) and Thela (Article 8) were correctly identified by Bhagirath to be of his deceased father. The identification memo Ex. P 11/1 was prepared. After when the investigation was over, the police submitted a challan against the accused in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Siwana, who, in his turn, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 302 and 201, IPC against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and demanded the trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses and filed some documents. In his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.PC, the accused admitted that the deceased Khumaram had come to his Dhani and left it on Chetra Sudi 12 i.e. March 28, 1980. He also admitted that the dead body was disinterred at his instance. But that dead body was not of Khumaram but that of one Chuna Bishnoi. The deadbody of Chuna Bishnoi was hurried there by his (Chuna's) brother. He also denied that the clothes found on the disinterred deadbody were of the deceased Khumaram. According to him, those clothes were of the deceased Chuna Bishnoi. He denied to have given information relating to the recovery of gold ring and other articles. One witness Mangla (DW 1), who is the accused's father -in -law, was examined in defence. On the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge held both the charges duly proved against the accused. The accused was consequently convicted and sentenced, as mentioned at the very out -set. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, the accused has taken this appeal.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , there is no ocular witness speaking about the occurrence. The prosecution case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence may, for convience, be classified as under: