PRAFULLA C.PANT,J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18-07-2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 76 of 2000, and Sessions Trial No. 33 of 2000, whereby accused/appellant Chandan Singh has been convicted under Sections 302 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.), and under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, 1959. The convict has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 302 I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 323 I.P.C. The accused/appellant Chandan Singh has been sen­tenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, under Section 4/25 Arms Act, 1959.
(2.) HEARD learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the Lower Court Record. Prosecution story in brief is that P.W.1 Mahesh Kumar Ahuja, complain­ant, R/o Subhash Nagar, Haldwani, had gone to Nainital on 07-10-1999, leaving his wife and children in his home. He re­turned at about 3.45 P.M. and when he reached near his house, he heard shrieks of his wife inside the house and knocked the door, but nobody opened it. Mean­while, hearing the cries from the house of the complainant, his neighbour P.W.2-Surendra Pal Singh alias Lattu also reached there. When the two witnesses failed to get opened the door, they went behind the house and broke it open. They entered in the house, and saw that ac­cused/appellant Chandan Singh, who was servant of the complainant, giving blows with a knife on the person of Smt. Pummi (deceased), wife of the complain­ant. The accused/appellant Chandan Singh opened the door of other side and ran away. P.W.1- Mahesh Kumar Ahuja, complainant, lodged the First Information Report on the very day i.e. 07-10-1999, at about 4.30 P.M., with Police Station Haldwani, District Nainital, relating to of­fence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. against the accused/appellant Chandan Singh. Crime No. 1656 of 1999 was reg­istered against the accused/appellant and investigation was taken up by P.W.7 In-charge Inspector Raja Ram Nagar. The Police went to the spot and took the dead body in their possession and prepared In­quest Report (Ext.A-11) at 5.00 P.M. (on 07-10-1999). The Police also prepared other necessary papers like- Police Form No. 13 (Ext.A-12), Sketch of the Dead Body (Ext.A-13), letter to Chief Medical Officer (Ext.A-14), Sample Seal (Ext.A-15). The dead body of Smt. Pummi was sent for postmortem examination, P.W.5-Dr. P.C. Kapri, conducted postmortem examination on the very day i.e. 07-10-1999, at 8.05 P.M. He recorded as many as fifteen ante mortem injuries. Most of these were incised wounds. The Medical Officer opined that the deceased had died due to shock and haemorrhage as a re­sult of ante mortem injuries. He prepared Autopsy Report (Ext. A-10). On 08-10-1999. the Police could arrest accused/appellant Chandan Singh in Lalkuan. The Investigating Officer, during investigation, on pointing out of the accused/appellant could recover the knife (Ext.3) allegedly used in the crime and prepared recovery memo (Ext.A-2). After completion of in­vestigation, Police submitted Charge Sheet (Ext.A-9) against accused Chandan Singh for his trial in respect of offence pun­ishable under Section 302 I.P.C. Also, as the accused was found in possession of the knife with a blade having prohibited length, a separate Crime No 1657 of 1999 was registered against him in respect of offence punishable under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, 1959. Said crime was inves­tigated by Sub Inspector Kiran Pal Singh, who also submitted Charge Sheet (Ext.A-6) against the accused/appellant Chandan Singh for his trial in respect of said offence.
(3.) ON receiving the two Charge Sheets against the accused/appellant Chandan Singh, the Magistrate committed both the cases to the court of Sessions of trial, after giving necessary copies to the accused, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, on 09-05-2000, after hearing the parties, framed charge of offences punishable under Sec­tions 302 and 323 I.P.C. He framed a separate charge in respect of offence pun­ishable under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, 1959. The accused Chandan Singh pleaded not guilty in both the cases and claimed to be tried. Evidence of both the cases was recorded in Sessions Trial No. 76 of 2000. The prosecution got exam­ined P.W.1-Mahesh Kumar Ahuja, com­plainant and alleged eye-witness; P.W.2-Surendra Pal Singh, another eye witness; P.W.3- Rajendra Kumar, in whose pres­ence the knife and blood stained clothes of the accused are said to have been re­covered; P.W.4- Sub Inspector Kiran Pal Singh, who investigated the crime related to offence punishable under Section 4/25 Arms Act; P.W.5- Dr. P.C. Kapri, who conducted post mortem examination; P.W.6- Sub Inspector Mohd. Hanif, in whose presence Inquest Report was pre­pared and P.W.1- In-charge Inspector Raja Ram Nagar, who investigated the crime relating to murder. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in re­ply to which he alleged the same to be false. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. After hearing the parties, trial court found the accused Chandan Singh guilty of charge of offence punish­able under Section 302 I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 4/25 Arms Act. The accused Chandan Singh was further found guilty of charge of offence punish­able under Section 323 I.P.C. for caus­ing voluntarily hurt of Simran, daughter of complainant, who is said to have been assaulted by accused. Accordingly, the ac­cused was convicted on charges of of­fences punishable under Sections 302, 323 I.P.C. and 4/25 Arms Act, 1959. After hearing on sentence, the accused-Chandan Singh was sentenced to impris­onment for life and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-under Section 302, I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 323 I.P.C., and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, under Section 4/25 Arms Act. Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 18-07-2000, the accused/appellant has pre­ferred this appeal through Senior Super­intendent, Central Jail, Bareilly, where he appears to have been undergoing the sen­tence awarded against him.;