HUKMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals: D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 200 of 1972: Hukma v. State of Rajasthan D. B. , Criminal Appeal No. 218 of 1972. Sobha v. State of Rajasthan filed by the appellants from Jail, while the D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 349 of 1972: Hukma and Sobha filed through a counsel, arise out of the judgment dated January 20, 1972 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udaipur whereby he convicted the accused-appellant Hukma under Section 302, I. P. C. for committing the murder of Logariya and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. He was also convicted under Section 392, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-; in default of the payment of which to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. Accused-appellant Sobha was convicted under Section 411, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ -. in default of payment of which to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months.

(2.) THE prosecution story as disclosed at the trial in a nutshell is that on March 3, 1975 in the early morning Logariya (since deceased) went in the company of P. W. 7 Sawa to graze his cattle in the jungle. In the evening Logariya did not return with the cattle. Sawa returned to his house. As Logariya did not return to his house an enquiry was made from Sawa as to the whereabouts of Logariya. Sawa informed them that in the day time while they were grazing the cattle near the field of Hukma accused, Hukma invited Logariya (since deceased) and took him in his field where the sugar-cane crop was standing. Thereafter a large number of persons went in search of Logariya. The dead body of Logariya was found lying in the field of Hukma. A piece of turban was also found around the neck of Logariya and it was found that he had died owing to strangulation. When Logariya left his house in the morning for grazing the cattle, he was wearing 'kaduliyas' (Ex. 6) 'hansali (Ex. 5) and gold 'murkies' (Ex. 4 ). All these ornaments were found missing from the person of the dead body. The persons who went in search of Logariya came back to the house of Gokal (P. W. 2 ). Shri Bherulal Dangi, Advocate from Udaipur was also there. A first information report of this occurrence was lodged at the Police Station, Mavli at 9. 30 p. m. on the same day by P. W. 2 Gokal. In the first information report a suspicion was raised against Hukma accused. The Station House Officer, Mavli after registering the case under Section 302, I. P. C. came on the spot. He inspected the site on March 4, 1971 and prepared inquest memo. Exhibit P-8. The autopsy on the dead body of Logariya was conducted on the same day by P. W. 16 Dr. Omprakash Purohit. Accused Hukma was arrested by the Police on March 5, 1971. After his arrest the accused expressed his desire to get the gold 'murkies' Ex. 4 worn by the deceased discovered. The information memo is Ex. P-17. In consequence of the information given by the accused the gold 'murkies' Ex. 4 were sot recovered from the house of the accused where he had concealed them. The seizure memo is Ex. P-9. The accused Sobha was arrested on March 7, 1971. He expressed his desire to get the other articles discovered. The information memo is Ex. P-18. In consequence of the above information the Articles 'hansali' Ex. 5, pair of silver 'kaduliyas' Ex. 6 and silver 'kandora' Ex. 7 were recovered at the instance of accused Sobha from the place where he had concealed them. The recovery memo is Ex. P-12. The accused Hukma was produced before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Vallabhanagar from the Judiciallock-up for recording his confessional statement under Section 164, Criminal P. C. The learned Magistrate gave him some time to consider about the advisability of the making of a confessional statement or not. The learned Magistrate after putting a number of questions satisfied himself that the accused was making a voluntary statement and then recorded the statement. On March 16, 1971 the confessional statement was recorded by the learned Magistrate and the confessional statement is Ex. P-15. The Police after usual investigation submitted a challan against both the accused in the Court of Munsiff and First Class Magistrate, Mavli who after taking proceedings under Section 207-A. Criminal P. C. committedi both the accused to the Court of Sessions Judge to stand their trial under various offences.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge transferred this case for trial to the Court of Additional Sessiona Judge, Udaipur. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge, and the prosecution examined is witnesses in support of their case. The statement of the accused persons recorded by the learned Magistrate during committal proceedings were brought on the record of the Sessions Court. Both the accused denied their complicity in the crime. Accused Hukma stated that he had made confessional statement Eat. P-15 out of fear of the police. He denied to have given any information to the Police leading to the discovery of the pair of 'murkies'. He further stated that a beating was given to him by the Sarpanch and other persons and later on he was handed over to the Police. Accused Solatia while denying his complicity in the crime, stated that he had not got any article discovered. He further resiled from his statement given before the committing Court, and stated that Hukma had not given to him those articles. The accused persons examined Uda (D. W. 1) in defence. Uda stated that the pair of 'murkies' Ex. 4 belonged to Mm and he had produced the same before the Station House Officer. He also produced a document Ex. P-2 alleged to be relating to the purchase of the pair of 'murkies'. The learned Additional Sessions Judge placing reliance on the confessional statement made by the accused Hukma as well as on the discovery of 'murkies' at his instance and the evidence regarding the deceased being last seen in the company of the accused, convicted the accused Hukma under Section 302, I. P. C. and sentenced him as mentioned above. The other accused Sobha was convicted under Section 411, I. P. C. and was sentenced as mentioned above.