SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. - (1.) RAMJILAL @ Sukya, the appellant herein, was indicted in Sessions Case No. 33/2001 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Gangapur City for having committed murder of Ashok. Learned Judge vide judgment dated May 22, 2001 convicted and sentenced him under section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) AS per the prosecution case on July 11, 2000 at 6. 05 AM the informant Rameshwari (PW. 4) submitted a written report (Ex. P. 9) at Police Station Gangapur City stating therein that in the preceding night about 9 PM while she was cooking food her husband had gone out. AShok (deceased) and Ramjilal (appellant), who were under the influence of liquor, came quarreling to her house. Finding them quarreling she scolded them and they in turn promised not to quarrel again. AShok then lay down on the cot, which was lying outside her house. Pretending to attend call of nature Ramjilal went near the Chhappar from where he brought spade and gave blows on the neck and face of AShok, as a result of which AShok died instantly. At the time of incident Parsadi and other villagers were present. After her husband arrived in the night, motbirs of village gathered and decision was taken to lodge report. On that report a case under Section 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Dead body was subjected to post mortem, statements of witnesses were recorded, the appellant was arrested, necessary memos were drawn and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Gangapur City. Charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant, who denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 9 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence and stated that he was under intoxication and he did not give any beating to AShok. It was on the pursuation of Ramesh and Rameshwari that the villagers had given beating to him, tied him in the hut and handed him over to the police. He had no enmity with AShok, but relations of Ramesh were inimical with him because some two years back he took out money from the pocket of Ramesh. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing the final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced before us and scanned the material on record. Death of deceased Ashok was indisputably homicidal in nature. As per postmortem report (Ex. P. 8) he received following injuries:- 1. Stab & incised wound 1" x 1/2" x bone deep left face near ear 2. Stab & incised wound 3" x 1 1/2" x bone deep left side of face 3. Stab wound 3" x 1/2" x bone deep on the left side and upper part of frunt of chest with clevical and 3nd, 4th & V ribs. In the opinion of Dr. Nand Kishore Meena (PW. 6) the cause of death was hypovolumic shock due to huge bleeding on account of rupture of pulmonary vessels. The prosecution case is based on the evidence of Rameshwari (PW. 4) and Parsadi (PW. 3 ). Supporting the facts narrated in the FIR Rameshwari in her deposition stated that at 9 PM while she was cooking food and her husband was away, Ashok and Ramjilal came quarreling to her house. They were under the influence of liquor. Finding them quarreling she scolded them and they in turn promised not to quarrel again. Ashok then lay down on the cot which was lying outside her house. Pretending to attend call of nature Ramjilal went near the Chhapper and brought spade with which he gave three blows on the neck, jaw and chest of Ashok, who died instantly. Rameshwari was subjected to searching cross examination but her testimony could not be shattered. Testimony of Rameshwari gets corroboration from the evidence of Parsadi (PW. 3), who was neighbour of Rameshwari. It appears from the evidence that appellant was nabbed by the villagers after the incident and when police came to the place of incident, appellant was handed over to police. The fact that the appellant was nabbed by the villagers after the incident and handed over to police is a relevant fact under Section 6 of the Evidence Act in view of ratio indicated in Shankar vs. State of U. P. (2000 Cr. L. R. (SC) 760 ). It is contended by learned amicus curaie that the spade was sent for medical examination to FSL and as per FSL report (Ex. P. 15) no blood was found on the spade therefore the prosecution story has become doubtful. For this reason alone that blood was not found on the spade, we cannot discard the case of prosecution. We find the eye witnesses to be straight forward and reliable. Being rustic villagers there is no effort on their part to improve the case of the prosecution on the basis of imaginary facts. They have deposed in a straight forward manner and there is a ring of truth in their testimony. We find them to be implicitly reliable.
(3.) AS a result of above discussion, we find no merit in the instant appeal and the same stands accordingly dismissed. The conviction and sentence awarded to appellant under Section 302 IPC are confirmed. .;