NARAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Click here to view full judgement.
M.C.JAIN, J. -
(1.)THE appellant Narain was convicted of the offence under Section 302 and also for the offence under Section 201 IPC by the Sessions Judge, Dungarpur and on the first count he was sentenced to imprisonment for life and on the second count no separate sentence was awarded.
(2.)THE prosecution story in brief is that Mohan, the brother of the accused Narain lodged a report Ex. P. 8 at the Police Station Dhamola at about 9.45 P.M. that this youngar brother's wife Mst. Kali had gone from the house in the evening with a earthern pitcher, metal pitcher and a string along with a blouse but she did not return for a sufficient time. Thereupon his brother Narain went to the well. He found the pitchers and blouse lying their but he did not see his wife.He then raised an alarm which attracted Bhaga s/o Rama and kalu s/o Nava. The dead body was taken out. On this report, proceeding under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were initiated and autopsy on the dead body was got conducted and on receipt of the post mortem report, it was revealed that the death was not caused on account of drowning and the deceased met with homicidal death. The post mortem report was received on 5th June 1982. Thereupon case under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. was registered. The investigation was under taken PW 11 Raj Singh conducted the investigation. He arrested the accused on 12th June, 1982. Before that he conducted the spot investigation and on the information Ex. P. 10 he recovered one Kose article 1 vide recovery memo Ex. P. 6. Investigation was conducted from the witnesses and alter completion of the investigation charge sheet was presented against the appellant. The learned Magistrate before whom the charge -thea was presented committed the accused to the court of Sessions Judge, Dungarpur for trial
The appellant was charged for the offence under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Al the trial the prosecution examined P W. I Usman khan, P.W.W. Bhura, the father Mst. Kali P.W. 3 Dariyati, the sister of the deceased aged about ten years; P.W. 4 Jamra, the mother of the deceased P. W. 5 Punja, the uncle of the deceased P.W. 6 Nava r/o Sadariya P.W, 7 Dr. Bihari Lal Berwa P.W. 8 Kashi Ram, Motbir of spot investigation. P.W. 9 Bhagwati, Motbir of recovery of Kose P.W. 10 Ganesh Lal Motbir of Panchnama and P.W. 11 Raj Sitgh, Investigating Officer. Statement of the accused was recorded in which he denied the prosecution case. No evidence was led in defence. The learned Sessions Judge placed reliance on the testimony of P.W. 2 to P.W. 5 and has disbelieved the testimony of P.W. 6 Nava and in the light of the medical evidence and the statements of the above four witnesses found that office has been brought home to the accused. Consequently he convicted the accused appellant for the offences under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. Hence this appeal by the appellant.
(3.)WE have heard Mr. N.N. Mathur, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. L.S. Udawat, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and we have perused the case record.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.