Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) The appellants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below vide the judgment dated 10.10.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur, in Sessions Case No.116/2011: JUDGEMENT_85_LAWS(RAJ)2_2020_1.html Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) Being aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the appellants have preferred the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C.
(3.) Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant appeal is enumerated below: Devi Lal (PW.14) lodged a written report (Ex.P/32) to the SHO PS Ogana, District Udaipur on 25.03.2011 at 07:45 am alleging inter alia that on the previous night, his father Partha S/o Nola Katara R/o Upreta had come to his house on the occasion of Rangpanchami. While his father was returning home after having had dinner, the informant heard the cries of Mare-Mare coming towards from the house of Mangi Lal. The informant recognized the voice to be of his father, upon which, he and Badami Lal rushed towards the source of the noise and saw that his father was being assaulted by Mangi Lal S/o Hamera, his wife Sakudi and his son Dhuli Ram, resident of Upreta and they were pulling him towards their house. Shri Partha was dragged into the shed inside Dhuli Ram's house. The informant and his companion requested them to refrain from the assault but these persons threatened them with dire consequences and started pelting stones towards them on which, the informant and his companion became frightened and went back their house. The incident took place at about 11 O' clock in the night. His father did not return till the next morning upon which, the informant went and found out that his father had been murdered by the accused and the dead body was lying in their Dhaliya (Shed). He further alleged that his father had been done to death because of a land dispute. On the basis of the report aforesaid, an FIR No.34/2011 (Ex.P/33) was lodged at the Police Station Ogana for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC. Investigation was commenced. Shri Sumer Singh, SHO PS Ogana (PW.13) alongwith police team reached the place of incident and conducted spot inspection. The dead body of Shri Partha, which was lying in the courtyard of the house of the accused Dhuli Ram was got subjected to postmortem whereafter the same was handed over to the family members for cremation. The clothes of the deceased were seized. Panchnama of the dead body was prepared.The accused Mangi Lal, Dhuli Ram and Sakudi were arrested vide arrest memos Ex.P/26, Ex.P/27 and Ex.P/28. Requisite procedure of investigation viz. recoveries etc. was completed. The Investigating Officer Sumer Singh (PW.13) collected verification certificate (Ex.P/29) from the Sarpanch regarding the ownership and possession of the house in question and thereafter a charge-sheet came to be filed against the three accused named in the FIR for the offences under Sections 302, 341/34 IPC. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the case was committed and transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge No.1, (Fast Track), Udaipur for trial where charges for offences under Sections 341 and 302/34 IPC were framed against the accused persons who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 37 documents in support of its case whereafter the case was transferred to the court of Sessions Judge, Udaipur for continuing the proceedings. The learned Sessions Judge recorded the statements of the accused appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and confronted them with the circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence. The accused-appellants denied the same and claimed to be innocent. However, no evidence was led in defence. After hearing the arguments advanced by learned Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel and appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned Sessions Judge proceeded to convict and sentence the appellants as above, whereas the accused Sakudi was acquitted by giving her the benefit of doubt. Hence this appeal.;