Decided on March 13,1984

MALARAM Appellant
STATE Respondents

Referred Judgements :-



Shyam Sunder Byas, J. - (1.)This is a jail appeal by accused Malaram against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Churu conviction the appellant under Sec. 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine .to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
(2.)Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased-victim Aaduram Jat was the first cousin of the appellant. Their fathers were real brother inter se. At about 2.00 P.M. on 16-2-79, PW 1 Pannalal appeared at Police Station, Manipura, District Churu and verbally lodged a export Ex.P/1. It was stated therein that in the :preceding night at about 3.00 A.M., the accused came at his residence and told him that the deceased-victim Aaduram had sustained some injuries on his person by means of some shat p edged instruments. He went there at the house of the deceased- victim. Many persons of the village collected there. A truck was being arranged to take the injured- victim to the hospital for treatment. But before the truck could be arranged, Aaduram did not survive and passed away. It was also stated in Ex. P/I that the death of Aaduram was not natural, some-body, who could not be ascertained had killed him. The police registered a Case under Sec. 302, I P.C. The investigation followed. . The Station House Officer, Om Prakash, arrived on the spot, inspected the site and prepared the inquest report of the victims dead only. He seized the blood stained earth. The post-mortem examination of the victims dead body was conducted at about 2.00 P.M. on 17-2-79 by Doctor Hanuman Singh Kaswan (P. W. 5)-the then Medical Officer- in-charge, Government Hospital, Sardar Sahar. He noticed some stab wounds on the person of the deceased victim, as stated in his statement and was further mentioned in the post-mortem examination report Ex. P/6. In the opinion of Dr. Hanuman Singh, the cause of death of Aaduram was synnose as a result of extensive haemorrhage, which was because of the injuries inflicted on his person. The injuries were also stated as sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. It is alleged that the accused went to PW 9 Mana Ram, who is the real brother-in-law of the deceased-victim and confessed before him that he had committed the murder of Aaduram. He sought the help of Manaram in the matter and requested him to take him to the police station. Manaram contacted to PW II Birbal. Both of them took the accused to the police station where he was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. P112. It is further alleged that in consequence of the informations furnished by the accused from time to time, a pair of scissors, his blood stained clothes and a quilt were recovered. The recovery memo of these articles arc Ex. P19, Ex. P/10 and Ex. P/14. After when the investigation was over, the police presented a challan against the accused in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chum, who in his turn committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed a charge under Sec. 302, I.P.C., against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 32 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused examined one witness. The defence was that there was a dispute over the truck between the deceased victim and PW 9 Manaram. On the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge held the charge proved against the accused. The accused was consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned above. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, the accused has filed this appeal.
(3.)We have heard the learned amicus curiae and the learned public prosecutor. We have also gone through the case file carefully.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.