MANNA LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by appellant Manna Lal aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 10.10.2007 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhabra, District Baran, in Sessions Case No.93/2006, whereby the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellant for the offence u/s 302 for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000.00 ; in default of payment thereof, to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 13.9.2006 at about 6.30 A.M., complainant Gangaram S/o Shri Narayan Meena R/o Bardawada, accompanied by his brother Hajari Lal, submitted a written report (Ex.P-1) to Shri Jodha Ram, SHO, Police Station Chhibabarod, camp at Chandwardi, Eklera Road, to the effect that today morning at about 5.30 AM, Rajesh S/o Shri Kastoor Chand Meena R/o Bardawada came to his house and taken away his son Suresh for jogging to a Nala towards Chaunch Badi. Rajesh and Manna Lal - Master S/o Shri Dev Lal Meena, R/o Bardawada killed his son Suresh by sword. Shreelal S/o Shri Dev Lal, R/o Bardawada and Parmanand S/o Shri Dhanna Lal Meena, R/o Kolukheda have seen the occurrence. Dead body of Suresh is lying at the spot. On receipt of this information, SHO found the dead body lying in an agricultural field. On inspection, a bleeding wound on left side of neck, a bleeding wound in front of neck, a bleeding wound on left ear, three wounds of cut on fingers of left hand were found and the dead body was completely blood stained. SHO endorsed the report (Ex.P-1) accordingly and sent it for registration of formal FIR to the police station through constable Anil Singh. On the same day at about 7.15 A.M., formal FIR No.282/2006 was registered at Police Station Chhepabarod. During investigation, an inquest of dead body (Ex.P-2), site inspection memo (Ex.P-3), memo of handing over the dead body to the complainant Ganga Ram (Ex.P-4), Memo of taking photography (Ex.P-5), memo of photography of dead body (Ex.P-6), memo of seizure of blood smeared soil (Ex.P-7), memo of blood stained grass and control soil (Ex.P- 8) and seizure memo of shirt and Baniyan stained with blood found on the dead body (Ex.P-9) were prepared in presence of witnesses - Morpal (PW-3) and Durga Lal (PW-6). After recording statements u/s 161 Crimial P.C. of the witnesses, accused appellant was arrested on 15.9.2006 vide memo of arrest (Ex.P-22). While in custody, the accused appellant Manna Lal gave an information that he had hidden a sword in his house, which he wanted to get recovered. The information u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, was recorded vide memo (Ex.P-23). The sword having blood stains was recovered vide memo (Ex.P-10). Site memo of place of recovery of sword (Ex.P-11) also prepared. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted vide memo (Ex.P-50). Seized articles were deposited in Malkhana of police station, wherefrom, they were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. FSL report (Ex.P-51) was obtained. After completing investigation, charge-sheet against the appellant was filed before Judicial Magistrate, Chhipabarod, for the offence punishable u/s 302 and 34 Penal Code and a separate charge-sheet was also filed before the Juvenile Justice Board, Kota against another - Rajesh Meena, being juvenile. The Judicial Magistrate, Chhipabarod committed the case for trial to Additional Sessions Judge, Chhabra, wherefrom, the case was transferred to the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhabra, District Baran.

(3.) Learned trial court examined 23 witnesses produced on behalf of prosecution. The accused appellant was examined u/s 313 Crimial P.C. The accused appellant replied that the prosecution has submitted wrong evidence. Due to enmity, he was implicated in this matter. He was working as Lab. Assistant. On 12.9.2006, he was on duty from 7-00 to 12.00 O'clock. Thereafter, he traveled in a bus for in-laws house at Moreli (Iklera) village. There, he got pain in his teeth and jaw. His brother-in-law, Ram Swaroop took him to Government Hospital there. He remained in his in-laws house on 13.9.2006 day and night at Moreli. He does not know this incident. He is innocent. In defence, four witnesses were examined. In all, 51 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution and five documents were exhibited on behalf of defence. After hearing the final arguments of both the parties, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid, vide impugned judgment dated 10.10.2007.