NEMI CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASHTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals,one sent from jail, directly to the High Court and another submitted through counsel. Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded no instruction in regular appeal DB Criminal Appeal No. 978/02. In both the appeals amicus Curiae was appointed. The appeals have been preferred by the appellant Nemi chand against the judgment and order dated 14. 8. 2002 passed by learned Special Judge, sc/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act cases, merta in Sessions Case No. 40/2002 (23/ 2001), by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 has been imposed and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's simple imprisonment.

(2.) AS per the prosecution case, on 28. 6. 2001, just after mid-night at 2. 45 a. m. Shri Jahangir Singh, SHO, Merta, City received one information on telephone from chhagan Lal, brother-in-law of appellant accused that appellant accused Nemi Chand mali, has burnt his wife and mother after pouring kerosene over them. The report was entered in the Rojnamcha (Ex. P26) and the information was sent to Jagdish Prasad, ASI on wireless and thereafter, the Police reached on the spot and took the injured to the hospital. The SHO Jahangir Khan also reached to Government Hospital, Merta and obtained report about the condition of the two ladies, Smt. Kolki and Smt. Chuka Devi from the doctor and after obtaining report from doctor, recorded parch-bayan (Ex. P15)of Smt. Chuka Devi at 3. 20 a. m. Thumb impression of Smt. Chuki Devi was also obtained on Ex. P 15. In parcha-bayan, Smt. Chuki Devi stated that her husband Nemi chand poured the kerosene over her and her mother-in-law (mother of the appellant himself) and lit the fire. On the basis of above report, case No. 185/01 under Sections 498a and 307, IPC was registered and the investigation started. During investigation, the investigating Officer Jahangir Khan (PW14)inspected the site on 28. 6. 2001 itself and prepared the site report and map which are ex. P1 and Ex. P2. He recovered the tin in which kerosene was there, seized the injured ladies burnt clothes, match-sticks and prepared seizure memo Ex. P3. He also got the photographs taken there. The witnesses were examined and Smt. Chuka Devi's state-ment was recorded which is Ex P. 30. The accused was arrested and the arrest memo ex. P31 was drawn. Thereafter, the investigation was continued by the new Investigating Officer. During investigation both the ladies Smt. Chuka Devi and Smt. Kolki Devi died. Post-mortem report of Smt. Chuka devi Ex. P4 and the post-mortem report of smt. Kolki Devi Ex. P24 were obtained. After investigation, challan was filed under section 498a and 302, IPC against the appellant in the court of Judicial Magistrate, merta City, from where, the case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge. The charges under Sections 302 and 498a, IPC were framed against the accused, who denied the charges and sought trial.

(3.) THE prosecution produced 15 witnesses including PW1 Miss Sharda and PW4 Dinesh, who are daughter and son of appellant and smt. Chuka Devi and are eyewitnesses, who supported the prosecution case. In total 31 documents were produced, reference of some of which have been given in the preceding paras. The statement of accused under Section 313, Cr. P. C. was recorded wherein the accused merely denied the allegations and did not take any specific defence in his statement under Section 313, cr. P. C. He did not produce any witness in defence. The earlier statements which were recorded during investigation of the witnesses miss Sharda, Smt. Vimla, Dinesh and chhagan Lal were exhibited in cross-examination of above prosecution witnesses by the accused. The trial court, after considering the evidence relied upon oral evidence supported by corroborative other evidence and held the appellant guilty under Section 302, IPC. However, acquitted him from charge under section 498a, IPC. Hence the appellant has preferred these two appeals, one represented appeal and other through jail, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 14. 8. 2002 passed by the trial court.