MADAN LAL GURU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant Madan Lal being aggrieved of the judgment dated 1.2.1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Phalodi in Sessions Case No. 11/1993, whereby he has been convicted for the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo one months simple imprisonment.

(2.) Learned Counsel Mr. Pritam Solanki, representing the appellant, submits that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The appellant has been convicted on the basis of the extra-judicial confession allegedly made before the prosecution witnesses Pahad Singh (PW-1), Bhagwanaram (PW-2), Ummed Singh (PW-5) and Khemaram (PW-7). He urges that even if the evidence of these witnesses is accepted to be true on the face value, all that can be inferred from their testimony is that the appellant herein and the two deceased women Chhoti and Bhaga were indulged in a quadruple incestuous love affair. Their relations were exposed in the Society, on which Bhirmaram, his wife Bhaga, his sister-in-law Chhoti wife of Bholaram and the accused-appellant decided to voluntarily end their lives through a suicide pact. Bhirmaram, Bhaga and Chhoti succeeded in ending their lives, whereas the accused appellant could not do so. He urges that even if this theory set up by the prosecution is accepted to be true on the face of the record, then also, no inference can be drawn that it was the accused appellant who instigated or abetted the three deceased persons, namely, Bhiramram, Bhaga and Chhoti, to commit suicide. He urges that the suicides were committed by the three deceased persons because of the ignominy and humiliation which they were facing after exposure of their incestuous relationship in the Society. He further submits that the so-called extra-judicial confession of the accused was made in the presence of the S.D.M. and the police officers and as such, the same cannot be relied upon for any purpose. He, thus, urges that the impugned judgment is bad on facts as well as in law and the appellant deserves to be acquitted of the charge under Section 306 I.P.C.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant. He submitted that the independent witnesses Pahad Singh (PW-1), Bhagwanaram (PW-2), Ummed Singh (PW-5) and Khemaram (PW-7) have given cogent evidence to the effect that the accused made a candid extra judicial confession in their presence. In this extra-judicial confession, he clearly admitted that he had instigated three deceased persons to commit suicide. The fact that the accused initially made the deceased persons to believe that he too would be ending his life and then smartly wriggled out of the pact is ample proof of his culpable mental state. He further submits that the SDM, Phalodi even recorded the confessional statement of the accused, which could not be exhibited due to inadvertence and thus, there is strong material on the record of the case proving the guilt of the accused beyond all manner of doubt and hence, he does not deserve to be acquitted and the appeal should be dismissed.