KAILASH ALIAS KAILASH CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A cobber sitting outside the house of kindhearted old lady, used to visit her daily. One day he could not control his instinct of greed and he killed her and removed golden chain out of her neck. The cobbler Kailash @ Kailash Chand, appellant herein, was put to trial before the learned Special Court (Sati Nivaran) Rajasthan and Additional Sessions Judge Jaipur City Jaipur, who vide judgment dated June 8, 2001 convicted and sentenced him as under:- u/s. 302/34 IPC: = To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. u/s. 392 IPC: = To suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case is as under:- On January 14, 2000 informant Balkrishna Satya (PW. 3) handed over a written report (Ex. P. 10) to SHO Police Station Jawahar Nagar Jaipur with the averments that he was residing in house No. B-16 Govind Marg Jaipur on rent. In the same house Rajkumari Girdhar (since deceased) was also residing along with her niece Radha. In the preceding night at 11. 30 PM Radha called him to see her aunt. THE informant along with his wife went to see and found that Rajkumari Girdhar was lying dead on 8th stair of the staircase in a pool of blood. On that report a case under Section 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. On the basis of circumstantial evidence gather during investigation, appellant was nabbed and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Special Court (Sati Navaran) Rajasthan and Additional Sessions Judge Jaipur City Jaipur. Charges under Sections 302 and 392 IPC were framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. THE prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 16 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence. Three witnesses in defence were examined Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.

(3.) BEARING these principles in mind we proceed to consider the circumstances exist in the instance case. FOOT PRINTS: