KESHOTE, J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed by Anwar Ali son of Ramjani, residence of Gardana, Tesil, Sangod, Police Station, Kanwas, District Kota, at present in Central Jail, Kota against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 05th of November, 1998 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramganj Mandi, in Session Case No. 143/1998. The Additional Session Judge, Ramganj Mandi under the judgment of conviction and sentence convicted the accused appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. , in default of payment of fine the accused appellant has to undergo further six months simple imprisonment. The accused appellant has also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo one years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, he has to undergo further one month simple imprisonment.
(2.) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ramganj mandi has ordered to run the sentences concurrently. The facts of the prosecution case in nut shell, is that on 22. 6. 1995 Mst. Firoz Bano, (PW. 4) lodged a written report at Police Station, Kanwas stating therein that her husband Talib Hussain and Anwar Hussain are real brothers. Both the brothers are having ten bighas of land in Village, Gardana. The land of the Village, Gardana is with Anwar and mother in-law of the complainant namely, Smt. Jenab. Her husband is having there bighas of the land in the Village, Islam Nagar and 1 & 1/2 bighas in the Village Kandafal, which are on mortgaged. Her husband is working in `ravtha Khan'. The complainant and her husband are leaving separately form them. Her mother in-law and Anwar (thewar) are residing together separately from them though in the same house having separate rooms in their possession. About 4-5 days, before the date of incidence, her mother in- law told to Anwar that he is not doing any work and she will not give him meals. On this point, Anwar has told to her that she has been poisoned against him by the elder brother i. e. the husband of the complaint. The mother in-law told to him that his elder brother, the husband of complaint has not poisoned her against him. She (complainant) was sleeping on the cot. Anwar has abused her and inflicted injury on her hand by `purania'. She has come out from the house. Anwar has inflicted injury on the thigh of the left leg by `purania'. Asraf Ali, Pegmber Sahib had intervened in the matter and save her from attack of Anwar. Her husband has come to house at 2. 00 p. m. on 21. 6. 1995. She had narrated the story of her beating by Talib Hussain to husband. Talib Hussain told that is the matter of relations of her with brother-in-law. The husband of complaint told to Anwar he has not done good to beat his wife. He asked him to come at home, but he (accused) has not come to home. Anwar has gone to Anuddin, who is real uncle of complainant to complaint against her husband. Anuddin talk to her husband and told that he will not fight with him. He may come and live peacefully in house. Anwar has not returned to home in night. In the morning on 22. 6. 1995, he had come at about 6. 00 AM, when she was preparing `khir'. Part of the original of this document is torn. From readable part of this document, we find that there was talking between the brothers for some money. Anwar has gone out telling to his brother that he may remain in the house. Thereafter at about 7. 00 am, he came with Gun and fired on her husband, who was sitting on the cot i. e. fire hit to her husband at his abdomen, chest and head. After some time her husband is died. Anwar has ran away with the Gun from the scene of incidence. At the time of this incidence at her house nobody was present except herself and her mother-in-law. Having gone through the file of the court below we find that top of the document Ex. P. 8 and left part of the top thereof is torn. That document is not readable to that extent. Not only this, two other documents filed in the trial court are also torn. The documents are not properly placed and tagged. The maintenance of the file of the trial court is wholly unsatisfactory and that has resulted in torn of many pages. It is unfortunate that because of heavy pendency in the courts, matters take long time in disposal. Keeping in view this aspect, we have to find out solution of this problem and ensure proper maintenance, safety and preservation of the record of the case. In a criminal case were the original documents are torn and as a result of which they are not readable, the possibility of acquittal of the accused increase as benefits of doubt is to be extended to the accused. That way, though the accused would have committed offence because of non-maintenance of filed properly, he may get the benefit of doubt in the given case.
(3.) ON this written report submitted at Police Station Kunwas, District-Kota, first information report No. 111/95 (Ex. P-25) was registered under Section 302 IPC against the accused appellant. Investigation of the case had been commenced by Shri Mohan Lal Yogi, S. H. O. Police Station Kunwas (PW-17 ). During the course of investigation permission of District Collector, Kota was sought for to file challan against the accused appellant for offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Sangod. Cognizance was taken in the matter and as it was triable by the Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Kota and, ultimately, it was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge. No. 3, Kota. On 28. 10. 1995, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the accused appellant, the learned trial court framed charges against the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. The accused appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 19 witnesses and Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-31 were produced as documentary evidence. In addition to this, F. S. L. report has also been produced. Along with the charge-sheet, though, the letter of sanction of filing of challan against the accused appellant for the offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act and arrest memo of the accused appellant were filed, but during the trial the same were not got exhibited by the Public Prosecutor. The accused appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr. P. C. and in defence he produced Mst. Firoz Bano (PE-4) as (DW-1) and in documentary evidence, documents Ex. D-1 to Ex. D-4 have been produced. ;