CHANDRABHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the instant criminal appeal has been made by the appellant to the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.4.2016 passed by the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.3, Bharatpur [for short 'the learned trial Court'] in Sessions Case No.153/2012, State of Rajasthan Vs. Chandrabhan Singh, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:- U/s.302 IPC:

(2.) Facts of the case in nutshell are that complainant Pritam Singh (PW-1) submitted a written report (Ex-P1) on 12.4.2012 to the SHO, Police Station Udhyog Nagar, Bharatpur to the effect that on 12.4.2012 at about 12:00 a.m. he left the home for Jaipur. At about 11:30 a.m. when he reached Mahwa his cousin brother Vinayveer made a telephonic call and told him regarding murder of his daughter Bhavna by slitting her neck with sharp edged weapon. He immediately returned to his village and after seeing the dead body of Bhavna he found that some unknown culprit had slit the neck of Bhavna from different places and she sustained injuries on her hands and legs. The dead body of Bhavna was lying in the room fully smeared with blood.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid written report (Ex.P1), FIR No.100/2012 was registered for the offence under section 302 IPC. The police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Learned trial court framed charge against the accusedappellant for the aforesaid offence under Section 302 IPC. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case recorded statements of twenty two witnesses and thirty eight documents were got exhibited. Thereafter, the accused/appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence the accused appellant did not produce any witness but exhibited four documents. The appellant aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment/order of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial court dated 30.4.2016 has preferred this criminal appeal.