K. C. SHARMA, J. - (1.) THESE two appeals, one by appellant Ashok Kumar in representative capacity and another by accused Raju through Jail arises out of the judgment and order dated 7. 5. 2001 passed by the Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur, thereby convicting the appellants under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default thereof, to further undergo 3 months simple imprisonment on the first count, and two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 300/- each, in default thereof to undergo one months' simple imprisonment on the second count. Since both the appeal arise out one judgment in Sessions Case No. 31/2001, therefore, they are being decided by a common judgment.
(2.) THE facts leading to these appeals are that on 8. 4. 98, PW 6 Bharat Lal Verma lodged a written report, Ex. P7 at Police Station Nadwai that his son Bhagwan Swaroop aged 30 years was missing since last evening. He alleged that after completing his night duty when he returned home in the morning, his wife informed that Bhagwan Swaroop did not return home in the night. On search, he found blood at some places near a primary school. He also found a chappal of one feet of Bhagwan Swaroop. He also noticed signs of dragging from the place i. e. just ahead the school, where he found the blood, ending up to the well. He alleged that one Dalip S/o Hira Lal Jatav informed him that in the night at about 8. 00 PM Dalip had seen his son in the company of Raju S/o Laharia and Ashok S/o Sukhchandi sitting near "samadi" (religious vow) around the boundary wall of the well. He suspected that Raju and Ashok have murdered his son and has thrown his body into the well. On the basis of above report, police registered a case for offence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC vide FIR, Ex. P. 8 and proceeded with the investigation. In the course of investigation, the police recovered the dead body and prepared Ex. P. 1 and the site plan Ex. P. 2. The blood stained and controlled soil vide memo Ex. P. 4 and a stone used in the commission of offence and a Chappal of the feet of deceased vide memo Ex. P. 5 were also seized. The cloths of the deceased were also seized and the seized items were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination. The FSL report is Ex. P. 26. The police got conducted autopsy on the dead body and collected the post mortem report, Ex. P. 9. In the opinion of doctor, the cause of death was combined effect of comma and asphyxia (due to drawing ). The police arrested accused Raju on 3. 5. 98 vide memo Ex. P. 24. Accused Raju furnished information, Ex. P. 25 under Sec. 27 of the Evidence Act as regards recovery of stone. Pursuant to the information, police recovered a piece of stone vide memo Ex. P. 9 and prepared site plan, Ex. P. 21 of the place of recovery. On completion of investigation, the police submitted a charge sheet in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Bharatpur, who in turn committed the case to the court of Sessions. The case came to be tried by the Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur. The trial court after hearing counsel for the parties and considering the evidence and material collected during investigation and placed before it, framed charges against the accused appellants under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial. In the course of trial, the prosecution, in support of its case examined as many as 14 witnesses and got exhibited some documents. Thereafter the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr. P. C. In their explanation, the accused stated they have been falsely implicated. Accused Ashok specifically raised the plea of alibi and stated that he was residing with his sister at Bharatpur for last three years and was doing of job of rickshaw pulling. The accused did not examine any witness in defence.
(3.) AT the conclusion of trial and after hearing counsel for the parties, the learned trial court found the charges duly established against the appellants and accordingly convicted and sentenced both the appellants in the manner stated above. Hence these two appeals against conviction and sentence. It may be stated that Shri B. L. Sharma, Advocate was appointed Amicus Curiae in Jail Appeal No. 816/2001 to represent accused Raju. Shri B. L. Sharma did not appear to argue the case on behalf of appellant Raju, on the day when both the appeals were fixed for final arguments. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that interest of both the appellants was common and the evidence was same, we directed Mr. Mahendra Goyal to represent appellant Raju and argue the case on his behalf as well. Accordingly, Mr. Mahendra Goyal represented appellant Raju and argued the jail appeal on his behalf. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned judgment and the evidence and material on record. ;