- (1.) THESE two appeals, one by the accused and another by the State, arising out of the same sessions case, and preferred against the same judgment and order, have been heard together; and are taken up for disposal by this common judgment.
(2.) THE accused-appellant Anil Kumar Chouhan and also the State of Rajasthan have challenged the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987 passed by the Sessions Judge Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.37/1985, whereby the learned Judge has convicted the accused-appellant Anil Chouhan for the offence under Section 304 Part-II IPC and has sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof, to undergo nine months' rigorous imprisonment; has further convicted him for offence under Section 309 IPC and sentenced him to six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.100/-, and in default of payment, to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment; and has yet further convicted him for the offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced him to three months' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.100/-, and in default of payment to undergo fifteen days' rigorous imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 29.01.1985, PW6 Hemant Kumar submitted a written report (Ex.P/7) at Mahatama Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur stating, inter alia, that previously, he alongwith his sister Durgawati (since deceased) and his mother Dharmi Devi were residing at Agra. In the same house, Jagdev Singh Chouhan alongwith his son, the accused Anil Kumar Chouhan, also resided. When he and his mother suspected illicit relations of the accused Anil Chouhan with his sister Durgawati, about three and half years ago, he alongwith his family left Agra and shifted to Jodhpur. Hemant Kumar further stated in his report that at about 8:30-9:00 p.m. that day, the accused Anil Kumar came to his house and demanded that he wanted to talk to Durgawati and wanted to take Durgawati alongwith him in a taxi. Durgawati refused to go with the accused whereafter, the accused Anil Kumar took out a knife and started stabbing Durgawati. His cousin Rajendra Kumar (PW-9) intervened but the accused Anil stabbed him also with the knife. After hue and cry, the accused closed the door from inside. Upon receiving this information, he came to the house and broke the windows with stones and saw that the accused had caused a wound on his own neck and was trying to hang himself by the ceiling fan in the room. They broke open the door and by that time, the police also reached the spot. The condition of Durgawati was serious and they took her to hospital where she died. The complainant further alleged that the accused Anil forcibly wanted to take Durgawati with him for solemnizing marriage with her and when Durgawati refused to go with him, the accused murdered her by inflicting injuries on her body with knife blows. On the basis of this report, FIR No.12/1985 (Ex.P/19) was chalked out for offences under Section 302, 307, 324 and 309 IPC. After due investigation, the police filed the charge- sheet against the accused; and after committal, the accused was charged for the offences under Sections 302, 309 and 324 IPC. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial.
(3.) IN order to support its case, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses and submitted 23 documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, by the judgment and order dated 22.07.1987, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant Anil Kumar Chouhan as aforementioned. The accused Anil Kumar Chouhan has filed the appeal for setting aside his conviction and sentence while the State of Rajasthan has filed the appeal for enhancement of the sentence awarded to the accused Anil Chouhan.;