- (1.) AMAR Saran, J. Capital Criminal Jail Appeal No. 813 of 2006 has been preferred by the appellant Raju alias Raja Ram against the sentence of death under section 302 IPC awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, District Mahoba, by his order dated 13. 1. 2006. As a death sentence was awarded in this case a Criminal Reference No. 2 of 2006 has also been submitted to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence under section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) AS an application under section 391 read with 367 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has also been moved on behalf of the appellant by Sri L. K. Pandey, Advocate on 16. 11. 2006 for summoning the general diary of police station Mahobkanth, District Mahoba, pertaining to the period from 22. 11. 2004 to 28. 11. 2004 and injury report of the appellant who was examined by the doctor in jail on 26. 11. 2004, 27. 11. 2004, 28. 11. 2004 and the mulahija register from District Jail, Mahoba, in respect of which we had reserved orders, the same shall also be disposed of by the present judgement. Heard Sri K. P. Pathak, Sri L. C. Pandey and Sri Manoj Gautam for the appellant and Sri R. K. Singh and Sri A. K. Singh, learned A. G. A. for the State. The prosecution allegations were that on 22. 11. 2004 at about 5 p. m. Km. Dropadi aged about 10 years, niece of the informant Ram Pal had left her house to fetch some sugarcane for Puja (prayers), which was to be performed in her home. When the informant's brother Thakur Das returned from his field, his wife disclosed that Dropadi had gone to fetch sugarcane and had not returned, although it had become dark. Then Thakur Das and the informant went out to search for Dropadi. One Khiladi Pal told them that Drppadi had come to the Athai (village platform) at about 6 p. m. , when the appellant, who was standing nearby, told her that she should follow him and he would get her some sugarcane. Then Dropadi left with Raju, the appellant. The informant and his brother kept searching for Dropadi and Raju, but they were unsuccessful. They even looked for Dropadi and Raju among their relations and among the relations of Raju.
(3.) ON 25. 11. 2004 the Station Master of Railway Station Ghutai Sri Lalluram Gupta and Ramkishun Patel informed them that they had met Raju Kachhi, the appellant, who had told them that he had to go to Delhi. ON 26. 11. 2004 at about 9 a. m. when the informant and his relations accompanied by the villagers of his village viz. Murlidhar, Ramlal, Ramsanehi, Raju son of Babulal Tiwari, Bhaarat Singh, Bharat lal, Jaichandra Shivdayal, Arvind, Jairam and Ram Sahai were searching for his niece and reached near the railway line of Ghutai railway station, they were informed by Ganeshi Nai of village Pipari that Raju alias Raja Ram was standing near the railway quarters. Thereupon, the aforesaid team of persons went towards the railway quarters. As they did not find Raju there, they started walking along the railway line towards the bridge where they saw Raju standing by the river. He began to run on seeing these persons but they apprehended him at about 10 a. m. , after administering a beating to him. When the informant and the villagers inquired about Dropadi. he was initially silent, but when he was given a beating, then Raju revealed that he had hidden the dead body of Dropadi in the Arhar field near the railway station and that he was regretting his mistake. He admitted to having committed rape on the girl and to have murdered her and admitted hiding her dead body. ON the direction of the appellant Raju Kachhi, a search party reached near the thickly grown Arhar field of Tai Rajput, where Raju pointed out the dead body of Dropadi, which was lying in a naked condition. The informant and other villagers then apprehended Raju and brought him to the railway station leaving some persons to keep watch over the dead body, the informant thereafter proceeded to lodge the report scribed by Bharat Singh Tomar at P. S. Mahobkanth at 1. 15 p. m. on 26. 11. 2004. The report was registered at case crime No. 480 of 2004 under sections 376, 302 and 363 IPC. The prosecution has examined Ram Pal, the informant as P. W. 1, who has reiterated the version mentioned in his FIR, in his examination in chief about the disappearance, search for Dropadi, the apprehension of the appellant, and the lodging of the report etc.;