RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. Since matter relates to interpretation of Section 329 Cr. P. C. , we proceed to finally dispose of the instant appeal at this stage.

(2.) THE appellant in the instant appeal has impugned the judgment dated May 12, 2006 of the learned Special Judge, SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jhunjhunu, whereby the appellant was convicted u/s. 302 I. P. C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default, to further suffer one month's rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) IT is mandatory that where the court decides that the accused is of unsound mind and consequently incapable of making his defence the trial should be postponed. Flouting the mandate of section 329 will vitiate the trial. In the case of hand learned trial judge completely overlooked the mandate of Section 329. Despite the fact that the appellant was of unsound mind and was under treatment, the learned trial judge proceeded with the trial. There is no material on record, which could establish that the appellant was cured. Learned trial Judge was required to follow the provisions contained in Section 329 Cr. P. C. Non compliance of the mandatory provisions has vitiated the trial and the impugned judgment rendered by the learned trial judge is liable to be set aside on this ground alone.