(1.) SONU @ Raghuvendra, the appellant herein, was put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Alwar, who vide judgment dated October 5, 2001 convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1000, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) A written report (Ex. P. 8) was submitted at Government Hospital Alwar to the SHO Police Station Aravali Vihar Alwar by informant Bhagwan (PW. 5) on April 4, 2000 at 9. 30 PM stating therein that Sonu (appellant) caused knife injuries on the person of Babu Lal (since deceased), who was admitted to the hospital. On that report case under Section 324/307 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. During treatment Babu Lal succumbed to his injuries and case was converted into one under Section 302 IPC. After usual investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast track) Alwar. Charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 19 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. the appellant claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.
(3.) THE eye witness account of Sushila and Phoolwati gets further corroboration from the recovery of knife stained with human blood at the instance of the appellant. In our opinion the learned trial Court has dealt with the intrinsic merit of the evidence of the witnesses. Facts of Nain Singh vs. State of UP (1991 SCC (Cri.) 421), Ram Kumar Pande vs. THE State of MP (AIR 1975 SC 1026) and Shankar Lal vs. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1981 SC 765) on which reliance is placed by learned counsel for the appellant are distinguishable and do not provide any help to the appellant.