- (1.) THE appellant Maniya was convicted of the offence Under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life by the learned Sessions Judge by his judgment dated April 13, 1977.
(2.) THE charge against the appellant was that on 3.2.1976 at about, noon, he entered into the house of Honiya and fired a shot with a gun at Mst. Mugali wife of Rai Chanda on her face as a result thereof she died The appellant was also charged for the offence Under Section 25 of the Arms Act. In nut shell, the prosecution case is that on 3.2.1976 at about moon, the accused entered into house of Honiya, Mugali was alone in the dhalisa' outside the 'kotha'. Dwarkadas (PW.2 and Babu (PW3) were present, Dwarka Das Singhi is a contractor residing at Udaipur and Babu was his servant. In connection with the cutting of the trees from the forest Dwarkadas had come to the house of Honiya and was staying there in the'dhaliya'. Dwarkadas was preparing his meals at the time when the accused entered into the 'kotha'. Both these witnesses heard the gun shot report and saw the accused coming out of the 'kotha' and the accued was crying ej xbZ ej xbZ According to Dwarkadas he saw from a distance that Mst. Mugali was lying dead near the oven having an injury on her face right side which was bleeding. Both of them went to inform Soma, the uncle -in -law of the deceased, is the father -in -law of the deceased was away from the village and her husband was also away in the jungle, the father -in -law of the deceased Honiya bad gone to village Sandmariya. Soma on being informed visited the house of Honiya and found Mugali dead having a gun shot wound on her face. Mst. Sedna (PW7) had also come to the home of Honiya who informed Soma that she had seen accused Maniya and that he confessed that he had fired a shot at Mugali. Soma waited for bis brother, who came in the night and on the next morning Soma went to police station Kotara which is at a distance of ten miles from the place of occurrence. Soma lodged a report on 4.2.76 at about 8.30 a.m. on which a case under Section 302 IPC was registered by Himmat Singh, SHO (PW 16). After registering the case, the S.H.O. visited the spot and prepared the site plan and site memos (Ex P 9 and P.10) and panchanama (Ex.P1) and conducted the other spot investigation. He arrested accused Maniya on 9.2.1976 vide memo (Ex P.3). Autopsy of the dead body was conducted and thereafter the dead body was handed over to Raichanda. Investigation was conducted in the matter and after completion of the investigation a charge sheet was presented to the count of Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur, who committed the accused for trial to the court of Sessions.
(3.) THE accused was charged of the offence Under Section 302 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. At the trial the prosecution in all examined sixteen witnesses. The statement of the accused was recorded in which he denied the prosecution case and he stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. No evidence was Jed in defence. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the arguments convicted the appellant to the offence Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. He was however acquitted of the offence Under Section 25 Arms Act, The learned Sessions Judge recorded the finding of guilt on the basis of the evidence of Dwarkadas and Babu whose statements further get corroboration from the statements of Soma (PW4) and Kesha (PW14), the evidence relating to extra judicial confession consisting of Sedna (PW 7), Jeeva (PW6), Kalia (PW 9) and Mangla (PW 13). Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred this appeal.;