BANSHI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Banshi Lal, by this appeal seeks to challenge the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur dated 15.11.1983, passed in Sessions Case No. 28/1983, convicting him for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and sentencing him to imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs. 100/-.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the necessary facts are, that on 24.10.1982, one Uday Singh lodged a First Report at Police Station Ghantaghar, informing that informant's brother Jagannath Singh was employed on the shop of accused Banshi Lal in Bombay and that some two months ago, as there was some dispute between the accused and his brother Jagannath, his brother came to Udaipur and sought employment at the shop of Raju Nai. It was then alleged that some 10-15 days ago accused Banshi Lal, who lives in Ganeshghati, came to Udaipur, as grandfather of Banshi Lal expired, and for the last 8-10 days there was altercation between the two. With this it was alleged that on that day at about 3 in the afternoon, the informant's brother was going to the shop of Raju, after seeing the shooting of a film, which was being enacted in Jagdish Chowk, while the informant was also going from his house, at Gadiadevra to Jadiyon Ki Hol after taking lunch, at that time, Deepak Gaur and Ram Lal Khatik met him, coming from opposite direction from towards Ganeshghati, and informed him, that Banshi Lal has inflicted knife injuries to Jagannath Singh, who is lying near Hanumanji temple, and that Radheyshyam and Madan Lal are standing there. Thereupon the informant rushed to the spot, and found Jagannath Singh lying upside down, in the pool of blood, and was bleeding. The victim was taken in a tempo by Deepak and Devi Lal Constable to General Hospital in emergency ward, where doctor declared him dead. Then leaving Deepak and Radheyshyam at General Hospital, he has come to lodge the report. On this report a case for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. was registered, and after completing investigation, charge sheet was submitted, and the case was committed.

(3.) Learned trial Court framed charge under Section 302 I.P.C. against the accused appellant, who obviously denied it. During trial, the prosecution examined 18 witnesses, including 4 purportedly eye-witnesses, being PW-4, PW,7, PW-8, PW-13, and the doctor, who conducted post mortem report has been produced as PW-3 Dr. G.L. Dad. The prosecution tendered in evidence some 25 documents, while defence tendered in evidence some police statements of some witnesses being Ex.D1 to D5 and also examined DW-1 Raghunath Lal in defence. After so completing the trial, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as above.