R.S.CHAUHAN, J. - (1.) THE appellant, Inder is aggrieved by judgment dated 29.9.2004 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jhalawar, whereby the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC, but has acquitted him of offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. By an order of even date, the learned Judge has sentenced the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC to life imprisonment, imposed a fine of Rs.1000/ - and directed to further undergo three months of simple imprisonment in default thereof.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 30.12.2003, around 7:30 AM, Manju Bai (PW.7) orally lodged a FIR at Police Station Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar. The FIR as registered, when translated into English, reads as under: - To, The S.H.O. Jhalrapatan. Sir, At this time Manju Bai, wife of Ashok, by caste Rao, aged 30 years, resident of Village Gindore, orally informed the police that behind the Ranchhor Temple, Gindore, that yesterday, on 29.12.2003, on Monday, her husband, Ashok had come back home after completing the day's labour. After her husband came back, their neighbour, Inder came to our house, who used to frequently come to our house and used to have drinks with my husband. In the evening at around 8 o'clock, Inder Lohar, son of Bhagwan Singh took my husband with him after proposing that they should go to the theka for having some liquor. But my husband has not come back till morning. I went to Inder Lohar's house. His family members told me that Inder Lohar had come back home at 11 o'clock at night. He had changed his clothes, and has left his house at 7 o'clock in the morning for driving a tractor. I came back home. This morning at 7:00 AM there was a hue and cry in the neighbourhood that a dead body of a man is lying in the jungle behind the Ranchhor Temple. Ramnarayan Rao, I and Radheyshyam Rao along with other neighbours went behind the temple. When we reached there, we discovered that the dead body of my husband was lying amongst the stones: his head had been crushed with a stone, and lot of blood was lying there. My husband has been killed by Inder Lohar. Inder Lohar, who used to come and visit my house, my husband had seen his visiting my house. Therefore, there was an animosity between my husband and Inder Lohar.
(3.) ON the basis of this oral report, the police chalked out a formal FIR (Ex.P.23), namely FIR No.381/2003 for offence under Section 302 IPC. After completing the investigation, on 17.2.2004, the police filed a charge -sheet against the appellant before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhalawar. Since the charge -sheet was submitted also for offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the case was eventually transferred to the learned Judge. By order dated 6.4.2004, the learned Judge framed the charges against the appellant for offences under Section 302 IPC, and under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. In order to support its case, the prosecution examined twenty witnesses, and submitted twenty -five documents. However, the defence neither produced any witness, nor submitted any document. After completing the trial, the learned Judge convicted and acquitted the appellant as aforementioned. Hence this appeal before this court. Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant, has raised the following contentions before this court: firstly, the case is entirely based on circumstantial evidence. However, the prosecution has failed to forge such a chain of circumstances which would unerringly point towards the guilt of the appellant. Secondly , through the testimony of Manju Bai (P.W.7), the prosecution has tried to establish the evidence of last seen. However, the evidence of last seen is rather weak. For, the time when Ashok was seen on the last occasion with Inder Lohar, and the time when his dead body was discovered, the live link has been snapped.;