R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment dated 16.10.2004 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, the appellant, Tikaram, has approached this court. By the said judgment the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and has sentenced him to life imprisonment, and imposed a fine of Rs. 1000/ -, and directed the appellant to further undergo six months of rigorous imprisonment in default thereof.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts of the case are that on 3.1.2004 at 3:00 PM, Balvindar Singh (P.W. 8) submitted a written report before the SHO, Police Station Harmada, Jaipur City (North). The said report when translated into English , reads as under: - To, The SHO,Police Station Harmada,Jaipur City, North Sub.: For registration of a report. Sir, It is to submit that I and Raju had come from Hapud for getting a truck repaired. On 1.1.2004 in the evening, we met Hari Singh, a driver. Hari Singh invited me to go to the house of Tikaram as Tikaram is known to him. Both of us went to the house of Tikaram. There all three of us consumed liquor. During the drinking bouts, a dispute erupted between Tikaram and us. Therefore, we came back to a STD shop situated on the road going to Anokha village. Raju also came and joined us. After ten to fifteen minutes, around 9:30 -10:00 PM, Tikaram came back to us. We asked whether he had come back to again fight with us. Again there was a verbal abuse and fighting which took place. Raju slapped Tikaram. Threatening that he would kill us, Tikaram left the place. I and Hari Singh went and slept in the truck belonging to Hari Singh. Meanwhile, Raju went and slept in the truck that had broken down. Yesterday morning around 11:00 -12:00 O'clock, when I went to Raju's truck and opened the window, I found Raju's dead body lying in the cabin. Due to the injuries inflicted on his head and face, blood was oozing out. I immediately called my employer, the owner of the truck, and informed him about Raju's murder. My employer told me that he would be coming by the evening. We kept on for waiting for him. But he never came. This morning again I spoke to my employer. He told me that due to an accident of his relative, he could not come. He instructed me to go ahead and file a report before the police. Therefore, I have come to report at the police station. I suspect that Raju has been killed by Tikaram. I am submitting the report so that appropriate action can be taken. Sd/ - On the basis of this written report (Ex. P. 13), a formal FIR (Ex. P. 14), namely FIR No. 10/2004, was chalked out for offence under Section 302 IPC. The police initiated the investigation. On 3.1.2004, the police arrested the appellant. After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge -sheet before the Judicial Magistrate, Chomu for offence under Section 302 IPC. The case was committed to Sessions Court. By order dated 9.6.2004, the learned Judge framed charge under Section 302 IPC against the appellant. In order to support its case, the prosecution examined eleven witnesses, and submitted thirty -seven documents. The defence did not examine any witness, but did submit two documents. After completion of the trial, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal before this court.
(3.) BEFORE we deal with and discuss the contentions raised by the learned counsel, it would be fruitful to first consider the evidence produced by the prosecution.;