MITHU SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, Mitthu Singh, aged 18 years approximately at the time of incident, was tried before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Beawar, in Sessions Case No. 20/93 for committing murder of Narain Singh at 10 a.m. on 5.2.93 in village Neemri Khera. He was convicted under Sec. 302 Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo six months imprisonment vide judgment and order dated 21.1.94.

(2.) The facts of the case have been extensively set out in the impugned judgment and they indicate that the deceased Narain Singh was a close relative of the appellant, in as much as, the appellants sister was married to Ghewar Singh, younger brother of the deceased. It is alleged that Rs. 3,000.00 were outstanding against the appellant towards the deceased, which were borrowed by him for his treatment at Bombay. On the relevant day and time, the deceased had gone to tin appellants house for recovery of the amount where some oral altercation ensued between them. The charge against the appellant is that he inflicted a solitary blow with an ordinary knife on left lateral side of neck, 1" below the left angled mendible. This injury proved to be fatal as it cut internal and external carroted arteries and left internal jugular vein. The post-mortem examination of the dead body was performed by Dr. Pramod Kumar Saxena (RW 12) on 5.2.93 vide postmortem examination report (Ex.P 11). The cause of death was stated to be shock due to excessive haemorrhage. The report of the incident was made by RW. 1, Mohan Singh at Police Station, Jawaja, district Ajmer on the same day at 12.30 p.m. After registration of the case, the investigation commenced. Site-plan (Ex.P 1) of the scene of occurrence was prepared on the same day. The inquest report (Ex.P 2) of the dead body was prepared and thereafter, the dead body was handed over for post-mortem examination. After usual investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate Beawar on 23.4.93. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions I Judge, it was committed to the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Beawar. During trial, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses. The plea of the accused, in his statement under Sec. 313 Cr.PC. was of denial. In defence, one witness, namely, Gaji Singh was examined, who stated that a scuffle took place between the eye-witness Tej Singh and Narain Singh and Narain Singh fell down on a bullock-cart when he was pushed by Tej Singh and sustained the injury by pointed nail. Out of the prosecution witnesses, P.w. 1, Narain Singh was examined as an eye-witness. The learned trial Court placing reliance on the testimony of the eye-witnesses and corroborative piece of evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.

(3.) At the out-set, it may be stated that the learned counsel for the appellant did not challenge infliction of the injury to the deceased by the appellant and he restricted his argument about the nature of the offence and the sentence to be awarded to him. Still for our satisfaction, we minutely examined the entire evidence on record and the judgment under challenge in the appeal. After going through the statements of the prosecution witnesses, specially of the eye-witness Narain Singh, we are satisfied that the finding of the trial Court that the appellant inflicted fatal injury to the deceased is well founded. The evidence of the solitary eyewitness Narain Singh is quite natural, consistent and straight-away. We find no error in the judgment of the trial Court placing reliance on his testimony.