RUMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is a matter of concern that lawyers are not appearing in final hearing matters.

(2.) Be that as it may, with the assistance of Mr. B.N.Sandu, learned AAG appearing for the State I have perused the trial Court record and have gone through the impugned judgment dated 03.10.2013. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, Section 511 IPC and Section 306 IPC. The conviction rests on the testimony of Bherulal, P.W.2, Draupdi Bai, P.W.3 and Surendra, P.W.7. The forensic evidence relied upon is Exhibit-P/16. The forensic report concerning the viscera of the deceased as per which Organochloro insecticide was detected. The cause of death of the deceased was obviously the insecticide which she had consumed. The postmortem report Ex.P-1 opines that the cause of death was respiratory arrest.

(3.) The process of criminal law was set into motion when statement Ex.P-2 was recorded at the police station on 25.08.2012. The maker of the statement is Bherulal. He is the father of the deceased. In the statement Ex.P-2, Bherulal disclosed that he is the father of five daughters and three sons. The deceased aged 16 years was his unmarried daughter. His wife Draupdi Bai was in his company at 10-11 A.M in their field. A boy named Surendra, aged 15-16 years, who was a student of Class Xth came to the field and informed him that he had seen the appellant and his daughter in a remote place in the village and both of them were talking. At that very moment his daughter came to the field and all of a sudden started vomiting. He and his wife got the daughter to their house where his daughter died and at that time froth was oozing from her mouth.