BHANWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein stands convicted and sentenced as below vide the judgment dated 08.07.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.36/2014 (F.I.R. No.344/2013, Police Station Bheem) : Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded Section 341 IPC Three months' simple imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo 5 days' additional simple imprisonment Section 323 IPC Six months' simple imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo ten days' additional simple imprisonment Section 302 IPC Life term imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.10,00/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo six months' additional rigorous imprisonment All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Being aggrieved of his conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) CrPC.

(2.) The brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted hereinbelow.

(3.) The Investigating Officer arrested the accused Bhanwar Singh and claims to have effected recovery of iron Kassi at his instance after recording his information under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. After concluding the investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused appellant Bhanwar Singh for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 302 IPC. Since the offence under Section 302 was Sessions triable, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Rajsamand, who framed charges against the accused for the above offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. While the trial was underway, the case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand. As many as 18 witnesses were examined and 34 documents were exhibited by the prosecution to prove its case. The accused was questioned under Section 313 CrPC and upon being confronted with the circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence, he claimed to have been falsely implicated and took a pertinent plea that he was beaten by the members of the complainant party. Three witnesses including the accused himself were examined in defence. After hearing the arguments advanced by the prosecution and the defence and appreciating the evidence available on record, learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above by the impugned judgment dated 08.07.2016. Hence, this appeal.