BABU LAL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.09.1990 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Kota (for short 'the trial court') whereby the accused-appellant Babu Lal has been convicted for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment and accused-appellant Kanha @ Kanhiya Lal for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) At the outset, it may be noted that during pendency of this appeal, accused-appellant Babu Lal expired on 25.02.2006 and this Court vide its order dated 22.08.2017 dismissed the appeal qua accused-appellant Babu Lal as having abated. Therefore, present appeal now survives only against accusedappellant Kanha @ Kanhiya Lal.

(3.) Facts of the case are that informant Radha Kishan Gujar of Village Arna submitted a written report (Exhibit P-2) at Police Station Kanwas stating therein that he had come to the Police Station in connection with the murder of one Hira Lal, who died in a quarrel and there was a possibility of breach of peace in the village. On the basis of aforesaid written report, the police registered FIR No. 21/1989 (Exhibit P-3) for offence under Sections 302/34 IPC and commenced investigation. Upon completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused-appellant for the aforementioned offence in the competent Court wherefrom the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Kota. Charges for offences under Sections 302 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against the accused-appellants which they denied and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case produced six witnesses and exhibited seven documents. Thereafter, the accused-appellants were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they pleaded false implication. In defence, no witness was produced but one document was exhibited. Upon completion of trial, the trail court convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants in the manner indicated above. Hence, this appeal.