SHEO CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE these two appeals one by the accused and the other by the State are directed against one and the same judgment of the Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu dated June 30, 1979, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment. By the impugned judgment, accused Sheo Chand was convicted U/s. 304 (II) IPC and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment. He has come up in appeal and challenges his conviction. The State in its appeal challenges his acquittal of the offence U/s. 302 IPC.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Deepa Ram Jat was a resident of village Choradi P. S. Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu where he lived with his wife Sarwani (PW 1), sister-in law Rukhmani (PW 2), brothers and parents. The appellant Sheo Chand and Bhagwana, Bhagu, Guru and Dhanna Ram who have been acquitted by the court below are also residents of the same village Choradi. Around 10. 00 a. m. on 26. 2. 1979, Bhagwana appellant Sheo Chand came to the house of Deepa Ram and had a smoking with him at his house. After some time, the three left together the quarries. When they reached under 'keeker tree' situate outside the house of Deepa Ram deceased, accused Sheo Chand struck a blow of jelly on the head of Deepa Ram. Deepa Ram fell down and became unconscious. Accused Sheo Chand thereafter again struck some blows to Deepa Ram on his head with a jelly. (PW 1) Sarwani and (PW 2) Rukhmani rushed to the spot. (PW 3) Harphool, (PW 4) Mangla Ram and (PW 4) Sheoram also came there. Kamal Singh (PW 10) brought his jeep RJP-2458. Deepa Ram was placed therein and was taken to the clinic of Dr. Jain (PW 9) at Jhunjhunu. Dr. Jain stitched the wound of Deepa Ram and advised Kamal Singh to take him to the Government hospital. The doctor issued certificate Ex. P. 4 but before Deepa Ram could be taken to the Government hospital, he breatched his last. PW 10 Kamal Singh, PW 11 Pyarelal and others who were in the jeep brought back Deepa Ram's dead body to village Choradi. Lateron the dead body of Deepa Ram was cremated by Bhagwana, Bhagu, Goru and Dhanna Ram (accused acquitted ). No information was given to police and no post mortem was got conducted before the cremation. At 9. 00 p. m. on 5. 3. 1979, PW 1 Sarwani presented written report Ex,p. 1 of the incident before the Superintendent of Police, Jhunjhunu who directed the Station House Officer, Nawalgarh to register the case and make investigation. The police registered a case U/s. 302 and 201 IPC and proceeded with the investigation. (PW 13) Hanuman Singh, A. S. I. arrived on the spot, inspected the site and prepared the site plan Ex. P. 2. He also lifted the blood stained soil from there and sealed it. Accused Sheo Chand was arrested and in consequence of the information furnished by him on 14. 3. 1979, one jelly was recovered. It transpired during investigate on that the dead body of Deepa Ram was cremated by Bhagwana, Bhagu, Goru and Dhanna Ram with the aim and object to screen accused Sheo Chand from the offence of murder. They thus, caused the disappearance of the evidence of murder. On the completion of the investigation, the police submitted a crime report against accused Sheo Chand for an offence U/s. 302 and against Bhagwana, Bhagu, Goru and Dhanna Ram for an offence U/s. 201 IPC in the court of Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Nawalgarh, who in his turn committed the cases for trial to the court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed a charge U/s. 302 against Sheo Chand and u/s 201 IPC against the remaining four to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, no evidence was adduced. On the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge found no evidence for convicting accused Bhagwana, Bhagu, Goru and Dhanna Ram u/s 201 IPC. They were consequently acquitted of the aforesaid offence. The Sessions Judge took the view that the offence made out against accused Sheo Chand was that of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Sheo Chand was, therefore, convicted and sentenced U/s. 304 (if) IPC as mentioned at the very out-set. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, accused Sheo Chand has taken this appeal while the State in his appeal challenges his acquittal from the offence u/s 302 IPC.

(3.) EQUALLY important is the want of motive. F. I. R. Ex. P-l lodged by the widow of the victim, no motive good, bad or indifferent has been mentioned. However in her statement the victim's widow Sarwani (PW. i) stated that on the complaint filed by the deceased victim, the Panchayat had demolished and removed a Jhonpada of the appellant Sheo Chand which he had unlawfully raised in the way. This irked and annoyed the appellant Sheo Chand. The motive alleged is false. PW, 1 Sarwani stated that accused Sheo Chand had come to her house where co-accused Bhagwana was already sitting with her husband Deepa Ram. They all had a smoking in her house and then they all the three. left the house to go to the quarries where they used to work as labourers. If there were strained relations and bad blood between the deceased and the appellant Sheo Chand, appellant Sheo Chand would not have come to the deceased's house and would not have smoked with him. If the relations were strained the accused and the deceased would not have left together to go to the quarries. The motive thus alleged does not stand proved.