- (1.)This appeal has been filed by accused-appellant Balram against the judgement dated 5.12.2003 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bharatpur whereby he was convicted for offence u/s.302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000 and in default of payment thereof, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of one month. He was also convicted for offence u/s.307 IPC and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500 and in default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment of 15 days. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.)Facts giving rise to this appeal are that one Vijendra Singh S/o Pooran Singh lodged a report on 3.6.2003 at Police Station Sewar alleging that on 3.6.2003 at about 11.00 PM in the night when his brother Ratan Singh and father Pooran Singh were sleeping in village Golpura in front of their house, one Balram of their village came there armed with farsa and inflicted farsa blows on his brother Ratan Singh and father Pooran Singh. When his father and brother raised hue and cry, his mother, uncle Jagdish, Rajendra and other pesons of the village reached there. However, Balram continued to give beating to his father and brother with farsa. They were taken to the hospital in serious condition, however, in the course of treatment Ratan Singh expired.
(3.)On receipt of the aforesaid written report, regular first information report was chalked out for offence u/s.302 and 307 IPC and investigation commenced. The accused was arrested and after completion of investigation, police filed challan against him for offence u/Ss. 302, 307, 324 and 326 IPC. During trial, however, charges against the accused-appellant were framed only for offence u/Ss. 302 and 307 IPC. Accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Prosecution produced as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 19 documents in support of its case. The defence has not produced any witness, however exhibited four documents. The accused in his examination u/s.313 Cr.P.C. alleged false implication. The accused-appellant was eventually convicted and sentenced in the manner indicated as above. Hence this appeal.