MAGANLAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, No. 1 Udaipur whereby he has convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Sections 302 and 379 IPC. For the offence under Sec. 302, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, sentenced the accused-appellant for life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.100.00, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year's S.I. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has sentenced the accused-appellant for three years R.I. under Sec. 379 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that an F.I.R. was lodged on 6.2.1988 at Police Station, Gogunda at 3.00 P.M. by Naval Ram alleging that a dead body of unidentified lady is lying in his field viz. Pipalawla Khet situated at north-east of Gogunda. It seems that somebody after killing the lady has looted her ornaments. On the basis of this report, the S.H.O. registered the case under Sec. 302 Penal Code and started investigation. The Investigating Officer went to the place of occurrence and prepared 'Panchnama' of the dead lady, site plan and recovered blood stained earth soil along with clothes of the deceased. The body was sent for post-mortem examination. As per the post-mortem report, there were nine injuries on the person of the deceased. Her both the legs were fully choped but cause of her death was due to strangulation. During the course of investigation, it was found that the dead body was of Smt. Mungari wife of P.W. 2 Roop Singh. On the basis of circumstantial evidence, the accused-persons were arrested. At the instance of accused-Maganlal, blood stained cloth of both the accused Maganlal and Ghisu Singh @ Gulab Singh, the weapon i.e 'Basola' by which the murder was committed and the ornaments of the deceased were recovered. Six Oganiye of the deceased which were sold by the accused-persons were recovered from P.W. 7 Mohammed Khan at Surat. It was further found during the course of investigation that the accused-Maganlal took the deceased Mungari with him from her house and thereafter she was not seen alive. After usual investigation, the police submitted the challan against the accused-persons and the case was ultimately committed to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, No.1 Udaipur. Charges were framed against the accused persons but they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 20 witnesses. The accused in their statement under Sec. 313 Criminal Procedure Code. stated that they are innocent. However, in defence, the accused-persons did not examine any witness. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge after completion of the trial convicted and sentenced the accused-persons as stated above.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the learned trial Court has erred in convicting the accused on the basis of material evidence on record particularly when on the same evidence the accused Ghisu Singh was acquitted. He has contended that the circumstantial evidence of last seen and the recovery do not point out towards the guilty of the accused, and therefore, his conviction is liable to be set aside and at the most his conviction does not travel beyond Under section 411.