BHANWAR LAL ALIAS BHANWARA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a classic case of haphazard investigation. It is clearly a matter of great concern that the Investigating Officer did not become alive to the situation and implicate an innocent person Bhanwar Lal @ Bhanwara (appellant herein), who was ultimately put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), No. 1, Jhunjhunu. Learned Judge vide judgment dated June 20, 2004 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:- U/s. 302 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. U/s. 201 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) AS per the prosecution story Natthu Khan (since deceased) and Mahaveer Chamar were close friends. On July 8, 2002 at 11 PM Bhanwara son of Mahaveer Chamar came to the house of Natthu Khan and asked Natthu Khan to accompany him. Natthu Khan while leaving his house told his family members that he would return on the next day but he never returned back. On July 9, 2002 a dead body was found in the Bada of Chandgi Ram, which was subsequently identified as of Natthu Khan. A written report (Ex. P-43) thereafter was handed over by Shamshad Ali s/o Natthu Khan (Pw. 11) at Police Station Bisau with the averments that it was Bhanwara son of Mahaveer Chamar, who took Natthu Khan with him and killed him with the help of his family members. On that report, case under sections 302 and 201 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Necessary memos were drawn and statements of witnesses were recorded. The appellant was arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Jhunjhunu. Charges under sections 302 and 201 IPC were framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 19 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Crpc, the appellant claimed innocence and stated that he was falsely implicated in the case. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated above.

(3.) LEARNED trial court in the impugned judgment found following circumstances established against the appellant:- (i) Appellant and the deceased both had illicit relationship with the wife of Mahaveer Chamar. Appellant had threatened to kill the deceased if he would continue the said relationship. (ii) Gandasi, allegedly used in commission of offence, got recovered at the instance of appellant. (iii) Shirt, worn by appellant at the time of incident, also got recovered at the instance of the appellant. (iv) Appellant was seen chasing the deceased by Inayat Khan (Pw. 9) and Aslam (Pw. 18 ).