GAJANAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused appellant Gajanand s/o Leelu, by caste Chamar, r/o Kasampura ,Police Station Bagar, District Jhunjhunu has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 22.06.04 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge Deedwana in Sessions Case No.06/2003. The nub of the prosecution story is that on 04.12.02 injured Gajanand reported orally at Police Station Molasar that he had been a cleaner in truck No. H.R.61-0457 for the previous three months , the truck driver was Kesardev and the truck belonged to Ram Karan Jat. He, along with driver Kesardev, started from Parbatpura four days after Diwali. In the evening of the day before reporting, they loaded gwar-kichuri in the truck at Sivani and started for Vijaynagar at 06.30 PM. At 12.00 in the night, they took a hotel in Jhunjhunu Depot. Then they went to Adgasar, where the driver went home to sleep and the complainant slept in the truck itself. In the night at about 02.00 AM, they started from Adgasar for Vijaynagar. In the morning at 04.00 or 05.00 AM when they were going towards Deeedwana, after crossing Banwasar Circle, a D.I.Jeep came chasing them and was parked in front of the truck in such a way as to stop the truck. There were 5 to 6 persons in the jeep. All the 5 to 6 persons demanded the money lying with the driver. Three persons from the side of the driver entered the truck. Frightened by this incident, immediately the complainant jumped from the truck and ran towards the nearby fields. After some time, on being called by him, two persons from the near by Well came up to help him and all the three of them went near the truck. The body of Kesardev was found between the seat and the bonnet of the truck. There were injuries on the head of the deceased and the blood was oozing . The tool box of the truck was lying open. The jeep was not there. The persons who had come in the jeep, after demanding money from the driver, caused his death and looted all the money which Kesardev had with him . He could not read the number of the jeep as he was an illiterate . One person out of those, was wearing a blue coloured jacket. The accused were of about 20-25 years of age. On the basis of the oral report, Ex.P/15, FIR, criminal case No.126/2002 under section 396 IPC was registered and the investigation commenced. On the basis of suspicion, the lodger of the FIR, Gajanand was arrested and information under section 27 of the Evidence Act was recorded by the Investigating Officer and in pursuance of the information of the accused appellant, the weapon of offence and money were recovered and after usual investigation, a charge sheet of commission of offence under section 394 and 302 IPC was presented in the court of Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana from where the case was committed for trial to the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Deedwana.

(2.) The learned trial Court, framed charges against the accused appellant Gajanand under sections 302 and 394 IPC to which he denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 15 witnesses , namely, PW/1 Umed Khan, PW/2 Danaram, PW/3 Nathu Ram, PW/4 Bajrrang Lal, PW/5 Bhaguram, PW/6 Dr.Arvind Bohra, PW/7 Madho Singh, PW/8 Govind Ram, PW/9 Budharam, PW/10 Richhpal Singh, PW/11 Sanjay, PW/12 Ramkaran, PW/13 Lichhmanram, PW/14 Sunita, PW/15 Harphool, PW/16 Hukmaram, PW/17 Rameshwar Singh, PW/18 Dharampal , PW/19 Kamalkishore, PW/20 Rawtaram, PW/21 Nanuram, PW/22 Apdaram, PW/23 Sohanram, PW/24 Ganpatpuri, and PW/25 Jitendra Singh and also produced documentary evidence.

(3.) The statement of the accused appellant Gajanand was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that he had been falsely implicated in the criminal case. After hearing the learned counsel for the accused appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and appreciating the evidence on record, the learned trial Court, vide impugned judgment and order dated 22.06.2004 convicted and sentenced the accused appellant Gajanand , for the offence under Sections 302 and 394 IPC and for the commission of offence under section 302 IPC sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/-,and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months' simple imprisonment and for the commission of offence under section 394 IPC, sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo four months' simple imprisonment.