SAHIB RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Hanumangarh dated July 28, 1981 convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Prithvi Singh was going to village Hadhai. He met the accused there. The accused was indebted to him for Rs. 550/ -. The deceased asked the accused to make the payment of the money. Thereupon the accused took out a knife and plunged it to the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down. He was removed to the hospital. A report of the occurrence was lodged by the deceased in the mid -night on the same day.i.e., 7 -7 -1980, at the Police Station, Sangariya. The police registered a case under Section 307, I.P.C. and proceeded with investigation. The deceased was removed to the hospital where, despite medical treatment, he passed away on July 10, 1980. The police added Section 302, I.P.C. during investigation, The accused was arrested. Before the deceased breathed his last, his dying declaration Ex P. 27 was recorded by a Judicial Magistrate. On the information furnished by the accused, the knife was recovered. On the completion of investigation, the police submitted a challan against the accused in the Court of the Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, Sangariya, who, in his turn, committed the case for trial in the Court of Sessions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed a charge under Section 302, I.P.C. against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty. According to him, he was innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In support of its case, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused adduced no evidence. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the charge duly brought home to the accused. The accused was consequently convicted and sentenced, as mentioned at the very out -set. Aggrieved against his conviction, the accused has taken this appeal.

(3.) KEEPING in view the two dying declarations one in the shape of the First Information Report and the other Ex. P. 57 recorded by the Judicial Magistrate Mr. Doongar Singh learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, did not challenge the incident. The only submission made by him pertains to the offence made out against the accused. It was argued by him that it was per chance that the accused met the deceased. There was no pre -meditation nor an intention on the part of the accused to cause the death of the victim. It was further submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge crept into an error in arriving at the conclusion that the offence made out is that under Section 302, I.P.C. It was argued that the case does not travel beyond the Second Part of Section 304, I.P.C.