NATHIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed that against the judgment dt. 1-9-92 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur in Criminal Case No. 1/91 convicting the appellant-accused of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

(2.) The prosecution story stated briefly is that at about 1.30 p.m. on 24th October, 1990, first information report was lodged in Police Station, Parsola to the effect that one Paduri aged about 55 years has been killed by the accused as he wanted to take up the land belonging to Paduri who was a childless woman. It was alleged in the first information report that one Nathia s/o Chokha Meena has killed Paduri and this information was given to Kesia who lodged the first information report by Kalu s/o Roopa who directed to lodge the information with the Police. On the basis of this report, investigation was taken up and on completion of investigation, the accused was prosecuted as aforesaid and convicted by the impugned judgment. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the judgment of conviction is unsustainable in law. According to the learned counsel, only one person was named as eye-witness in the first information report whereas, three persons have been examined as eye-witnesses by the prosecution, even those who claimed to be an eye-witness in their deposition exclude each other as an eye-witness. According to the learned counsel, therefore, there is no eye-witness to the killing and therefore, merely because, there was possibility of a motive for the accused-appellant to have killed Paduri. It cannot be inferred that there is enough evidence to record a judgment of conviction.

(3.) With the assistance of the learned counsel for the accused-appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor, we have re-examined and reappreciated the evidence on record. PW 1 is the person who lodged the first information report. He had PWs. 2, 4 and 5 heard that the accused