KAMLESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals owe, its origin in the judgment dated September 15, 1999 of the learned Sessions Judge Baran rendered in Sessions Case No. 132/1998, whereby the appellants, three in number, were convicted and sentenced as under:- U/s. 302/34 IPC: Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, in default to further suffer five years rigorous imprisonment. U/s. 307/34 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default to further suffer two years rigorous imprisonment. Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution story runs as under:- Champa Lal, ASI, Police Station Baran (Pw. 16) on receiving telephonic message at 10. 15 PM on September 14, 1998 from the Hospital that Madhusudan, Hemant (now deceased) and Hitesh (Pw. 2) were admitted in injured condition, rushed to the Hospital where he found Madhusudan and Hemant dead and Hitesh admitted at Bed No. 1 in the Medical Ward. Champa Lal recorded the Parcha Bayan of Hitesh wherein he stated that around 9 PM on the said day when he along with Hemant, Madhusudan and Maharaj were sitting in Hanuman Temple, the appellants came over there, opened knives and on account of previous enmity inflicted knife blows on them. Hitesh sustained knife blows on the right side of the abdomen and armpit. Case under sections 307 and 302/34 IPC was registered against the appellants and investigation commenced. Autopsy on dead bodies was performed, statements of witnesses were recorded, appellants were arrested, necessary memos were drawn and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge Baran. Charges under section 307/34 and 302/34 IPC were framed against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 24 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellants claimed innocence and stated that they have been implicated falsely. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that four hours delay in lodging the report was not explained by the prosecution. The incident did occur around 9. 00 PM on September 14, 1998 whereas the report was registered at 1. 15 AM on September 15, 1998. This delay according to learned counsel in lodging the report is fatal to the prosecution case. We see no merit in the submission. Admittedly Parcha bayan of Hitesh Galav was recorded in the Hospital at 11. 30 PM and after parcha bayan was sent to police station Kotwali Baran formal FIR was registered at 1. 15 AM on September 15, 1998.