MOHANLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE charge against the accused Mohanlal was that he murdered a woman named Mst. Goran and thereby committed an offence under Section 302, IPC. The other charge against him was that he committed trespass in order to the committing of an offence punishable with death and thereby committed an offence under Section 449 IPC. The third accusation against him was that he committed theft in the house of Mst. Goran and thereby committed crime falling under Section 380, IPC. The accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, and was found guilty of the indictments under the above sections of the Penal Code and sentenced as follows:

(2.) THE story placed for the prosecution is that Mst. Goran, a resident of Bikaner, had been married to Poonamchand. Her husband breathed his last when she was of tender age. She had adopted a son Gyan Chand, brother of PW 1 Dharam Chand, Gyan Chand lived in Calcutta, where he carried on some business. Mst. Goran resided in her own house in Bikaner. Mst. Siria was employed by Mst Goran to cook meals and do miscelleneous domestic work. The accused Mohanlal is the son of Mst. Siria who lived in Golechan line, Bikaner. Mohanlal got a job of a serveillance worker, Malaria Department, Ghadyala. Whenever he came to Bikaner, he had had the occasion to visit the house of Mst. Goran, as his mother was engaged there. Dharam Chand, younger brother of Gyan Chand, also called on Mst. Goran off and on. Lastly he met her on Baisakh Badi 7 (April 13, 1966), At that time Mst. Siria was also present there. On April 14, 1966, Dharam Chand again wanted to meet Mst. Goran, but he found her house locked from outside. On April, 15, 1966, Dharam Chand made further attempt to see Mst. Goran,but he found her house locked. He felt disguestingly filthy and stinking smell coming out of her house. Some neiehbours advised Dharam Chand to inform the police officer concerned of the matter. Consequently he lodged first information report, as contained in Ex. P3, in the night of April 15, 1966. Next day, that is, on April 16, 1966. PW 22, Mukand Singh, Station House Officer, Bikaner, got the lock of Mst. Goran's house broken. On his entering the house along with some Motbirs, it was found that certain articles of Mst. Coran were lying strewn in the courtyard. On search having been effected, Mst. Goran was found dead in a water cistern. Her dead body was taken out from the water reservior by Nenu Khan (PW 4). No ornament was found on the body of the deceased. The corpse contained only a 'Lengha' Ex. 7, 'Ordhna' Ex. 8 and blouse Ex. 9. The dead body was sent to PW 15 Dr. G. K. Bhatnagar, Medical Jurist, Associated Group of Hospitals, Bikaner, for autopsy. Following injuries were found on the person of the deceased:

(3.) BOTH the accused denied to have committed any offence. The accused Mohanlal further stated that he had lived separately from his mother Mst. Siria. He left Ghadyala on April 7, 1966, and went away to Bikaner to attend a meeting and stayed there upto April 11, 1966. He further said that he left Ghadyala on April 15, 1966, by bus. He denied to have absent from his duty and asserted that he was at Ghadyala during the relevant period. He admitted that the leather bag enzed by the pole belonged to him, but it did not contain the gold bangles and the 'Choth . He also denied to have got recovered articles as contained in Ex P 11. He further denied to have got the key of the lock of Mst. Goran's house recovered. He admitted to have purchased the watch from Bhagirath at Nagaur and some ready made clothes from the shop of Hotchand at Jodhpur. On behalf of the prosecution 22 witnesr were examined by the trial court. The accused Mohanlal in his defence of alibi examined one witness Jesha, his father -in -law. The trial court gave finding that the ornaments were recoverdd on the information and at the instance of the accused and that these ornaments Mst. Goran used to wear. They were taken away by the accused Mohanlal and that it was he who committed her murder. Consequently, it convicted and sentenced the accused Mohanlal, as as stated abave. Mst. Siria was, however, given benefit of the doubt and was acquitted of the indictments with which she stood charged. .