- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated September ,6 1995 passed by Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 79/92 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: JUDGEMENT_27_LAWS(RAJ)12_19951.html All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) The incident is said to have taken place on 24.12.90 and it is alleged that Smt. Kani wife of Ram Kishan (now deceased) had gone to her field for bringing fodder for the cattle in the morning after 8.00 a.m. and when she did not return her mother-in-law Smt. Birdhi started her search. Her dead-body was recovered from her field and it was found that her legs and hands were cut-down and she was also having injuries with pellets on her abdomen. According to prosecution, some one had committed murder of Smt. Kani for her ornaments she was wearing before her death. The report of incident was made at 6.30 p.m. on the same day and Crime N. 184/90 was registered under Sections 302 and 379, IPC at Police Station Jamua-Ramgarh. It appears that investigation changed hands from one Investigating Officer to another and ultimately the appellant was arrested on 3.9.92. The prosecution case further is that on the information of the appellant silver 'Kadas' were recovered vide recovery memo (Ex.P. 5) on 7.9.92. A gun and a 'Chhuri' is also stated to have been recovered at the instance of the appellant. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the appellant in the Court of concerned Magistrate and ultimately he was put on trial in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur for offences punishable under Section 302, 379 and 414 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. During trial 27 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The accused denied his involvement in the crime and the prosecution evidence in his statement under Section 313 Cr.PC and examined 4 witnesses in defence.
(3.) At the outset it may be stated that there was no direct evidence to connect the appellant with the crime. The learned Trial Judge has recorded conviction of the appellant relying on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has mainly relied upon the following circumstances to seek conviction of the appellant (i) that the appellant was seen roaming near the place of incident with a gun; (ii) recovery of silver 'kadas' at the instance of the appellant; (iii) recovery of a 'chhuri' as a crime weapon' (iv) recovery of a gun; So far as the last two circumstances are concerned, suffice it to say that the gun so recovered is a licenced gun and by mere recovery of a gun it cannot be said that it was in any way connected with the crime. The report of Deputy Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Rajasthan (Ex.P29), in our opinion, does not connect the gun that it was the same gun which was used in causing pellet injuries to the decease. Similarly, no blood has been detected on the 'chhuri', as such, it is also not connected with the crime. We, therefore, safely reject these two circumstances relied upon by the learned trial Court.;