KESHA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., 1973 to challenge impugned judgment dated 24th of August, 2015, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge No.4, Udaipur (for short, 'learned trial Court'), whereby appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 447 and 326 IPC. The learned trial Court, by the impugned judgment, while indicting appellant for offence under Section 447 IPC has handed down sentence of three months' simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo fifteen days' simple imprisonment. Likewise, for offence under Section 326 IPC, appellant has been sentenced to simple imprisonment of four years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' simple imprisonment. The learned trial Court has ordered to run both the sentences concurrently.

(2.) In brief, facts of the case are that, on 19.04.2014, complainant Nathuram submitted an oral information before Police Station Sayra stating that at about 5:00 PM, while he was working at his home, on hearing shout/cry of his cousin Hanklaram, he rushed towards his house. On the way, Malaram and Gunjaram informed him that accused-appellant had given axe blow on the head of Hankla. When he reached to the house of Hanklaram, he saw him lying on floor and blood oozing from his head and left hand. On the basis of said information, FIR No.64/2014 for offence under Sections 447 and 307 IPC was registered and after investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against accused-appellant under Section 447, 326 and 307 IPC before the Court concerned wherefrom the case was committed to the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court heard on charge and framed charge against accused appellant for the said offence.

(3.) During trial, in order to prove charge against accused-appellant, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses and exhibited twenty-one witnesses. On conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 however, he produced no witness in his defence.