MAHAVEER KEVAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal seeks to challenge judgment and order dated 06.08.2013 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramganjmandi, District Kota(for short 'the trial court') whereby the accused-appellant Mahaveer Kevat was convicted for offence under Sec. 302 Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000.00, in default whereof he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months.

(2.) Facts of the case are that Dhanraj Kevat(P.W.3) at 1.00 A.M. on 22.02.2008 submitted a written report(Exhibit P-5) to S.H.O., Police Station Kanwas, District Kota alleging that deceased Govind had come to village Rupaheda for taking part in the feast of the 'kevat' community on 17.02.2008 and was staying with maternal uncle Chauthmal @ Chauthraj(P.W.8). The deceased Govind had gone along with Chauthmal @ Chauthraj(P.W.8) around 3-4 A.M. on 20.02.2008 to the river bed wherefrom sand is collected for the purpose of masonry construction. They met Mahaveer Kevat son of Bherulal Kevat in the river bed. Thereafter, all three of them went to Dhanaheda on tractor, which was being driven by Amar Lal Nayak. Chauthmal @ Chauthraj(P.W.8) gave sum of Rs. 100.00 to Govind for bringing meat. Govind and Mahaveer together went on tractor for Sangod whereas Chauthmal @ Chauthraj(P.W.8) stayed back at Dhanaheda. While Chauthmal @ Chauthraj(P.W.8) returned back to his house at about 5.00 P.M. on that day, but Mahaveer and Govind did not turn up till late in the evening. Mahaveer around 10-11 P.M. came to the house of informant. The informant enquired from Mahaveer about Govind as to why he has not come back, Mahaveer thereupon told that he had left him at bridge of Sangod. When informant still insisted on clear reply, Mahaveer gave explanation that Govind had alighted from the vehicle at Village Laxmipura. Thereafter, when the informant and other family members still insisted that he should speak the truth, Mahaveer stated that he lastly saw Govind in the colony of Khatiks in Sangod. When they further pressurised him at about 8-9 A.M. on the following day, i.e. 21.02.2008, he stated that Govind had alighted from the vehicle at village Dhanaheda and he did not know anything more. Contradictory answers given by Mahaveer raised doubt against him. Even then, informant and other family members kept searching for Govind for 7-8 hours. Rukmani(P.W.7) and Nandu Bai(P.W.10) saw the dead body of Govind near the bridge of Kali Sindh river in agricultural field of Mahaveer. Both the them came crying to village Rupaheda. On hearing their hue and cry, several people assembled in agricultural field of Mahaveer. People turned around the body of the deceased, which was covered by a shawl. Informant and others expressed doubt that Mahaveer might have sodomised him and thereafter, put him to death by strangulation.

(3.) The police on the basis of aforesaid report, registered regular FIR No. 22/2008(Exhibit P-6) for offences under Sections 302 and 377 Penal Code and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, accused-appellant was arrested. Charge sheet was filed against him for offence under Sec. 302 IPC. Investigation was kept pending with respect to offence under Sec. 377 IPC, awaiting report of Forensic Science Laboratory. The trial court framed charges against the accused-appellant under Sec. 302 IPC, which the appellant denied and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses and got exhibited 18 documents. Thereafter, statement of the accused-appellant under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. was recorded by the trial court wherein he pleaded innocence. No witness was produced by the appellant in his defence. The trial court, on conclusion of the trial, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant vide impugned judgment dated 06.08.2013 as indicated herein above.