BRIJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS jail appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order dated 17. 5. 2004 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindaun City, district Karauli, in Sessions Case No. 09/03 (69/02) whereby the accused appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- u/s. 302 IPC, to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to further suffer three months additional rigorous imprisonment. u/s. 324 IPC, to suffer two years simple imprisonment. u/s. 323 IPC, to suffer six months simple imprisonment. u/s. 448 IPC, to suffer six months simple imprisonment. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case is that on June 27, 2002, at 2. 15 PM a written report (Ex. P. 11) was handed over by Narsi (PW. 12) R/o Jindaun-ka-Pura (Kamri) to the SHO, Police Station Nadauti, Camp P. H. C. wherein it was stated that on 26. 6. 2002 at about 11. 45 PM, he was sleeping in his `bakhar' while his father Malliram and younger brother Mukesh were sleeping in front of the house and elder brother Khushiram was sleeping in the `bakhar'. On hearing cries of the ladies, he awoke and saw his uncle's son Brijendra came with a sharp edged weapon and inflicted blow to his father Malliram, who died at the spot. Then he inflicted injury to Mukesh who was wounded and then he inflicted blow to Khushiram, sleeping by his side, who also died at the spot. Brijendra also inflicted a blow to Smt. Vidhya W/o Hakeem, who was also injured. On being followed by the informant, Brijendra along with one boy of village Patirampura and one more person to whom he could recognise by face, ran away from the `bakhar' towards road. Thereafter the informant along with other villagers brought Mukesh and Smt. Vidhya to the hospital at Nadauti. On receipt of the above report by the SHO, Nadauti, a case under Section 302 IPC was registered at the police station. The investigation commenced. The police got conducted autopsy of dead bodies of Malliram and Khushiram. The necessary memos were drawn, statements of the witnesses were recorded and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course, the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City, District Karauli. Charges under Sections 302, 324, 323 and 448 IPC were framed. The accused denied charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 21 witnesses. In the explanation under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , the accused claimed innocence and stated that he was falsely implicated so as to grab his hand. However, no witness was examined in defence.

(3.) ON cross examination of the eye witnesses, some contradictions and improvements are found to have appeared in the testimony but in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is quite natural for these witnesses to re-act to the happening of the occurrence in their own manner and they are bound to be some minor contradictions and inconsistencies as the occurrence has taken place at the dead of night when all these witnesses were asleep.