N.N.MATHUR,J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12.6.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions (Fast Track), Pratapgarh convicting the appellant Nahar Singh of offence under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment on each count.
(2.) THE appellant Nahar Singh was put to trial on the charge of murder of his uncle Devi Singh, It revealed during trial that deceased Devi Singh, PW5 Mokad Singh and father of the appellant Madhu Singh were three brothers. Mokad Singh and Devi Singh were not having any issue. Thus appellant Nahar Singh is the only issue among the three brothers. On 20.08.98 the appellant Nahar Singh submitted a written report Ex.P20 at Police Station, Nikum, District, Chittorgarh stating inter alia that in the night at about 1 A.M. he was awakened from sleep by a wavering cry of the goat. He got up and went inside the house. It was found that some bricks from the roof were removed. He raised voice, which attracted the villagers namely Mohanlal, Satya Narayan, Sohanlal etc. He alongwith the other villagers went in search of the miscreants. During search when they reached on the field of his uncle Devi Singh, it was found that the gate of the house was open and the other household articles were lying scattered. One of the she-goat was also missing. His uncle Devi Singh was lying injured on the cot. He made arrangement for sending his uncle to the hospital in a tractor. On way he succumbed to the injuries. On this information police registered a case for offence under Section 460 IPC and proceeded with investigation. The police prepared the site plan and the inquest memo. The dead body was sent for post-mortem. PW13 Dr. Gyan Mal Sankhla conducted the post-mortem on the dead body of deceased Devi Singh vide Ex.P18. He noticed the following injuries on his person : 1. A lacerated wound through and through 3 cm x 1-1/2 cm over pinna of right ear. 2. Incised wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x bone deep over right parietal region. On cut section there is fracture of right parietal bone with surrounding haematoma. 3. Incised wound 1 cm x 3/4 cm x 1 cm over right temporal region on cut section there is fracture of right temporal bone with surrounding haematoma. 4. A gross deformity over distal 1/3rd of right forearm. On cut section there is fracture of distal 1/3rd of right radius case and ulna bones. Haematoma present at the site of fracture. The muscle arteries, nerves and other structures are torned due to end of fractured bone. In his opinion the cause of death of deceased Devi Singh was due to excessive haemorrhage present over scalp resulting into shock, syncope and coma. After six months of the incident i.e. on 05.02.99 the statement of the minor daughter of the appellant namely Sugna was recorded. On 06.02.99 the police produced Mst.Sugna before the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhoti Sadri for recording of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. However, she refused to get her statement recorded on the pretext that she was not well. On 11.02.99 another typed application Ex.P27 was submitted bearing the signatures of PW1 Sugna Kunwar that she was prepared to get her statement recorded. The learned Magistrate directed the police to produce police diary on 12.02.99 the statement of PWI Sugna Kunwar was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. vide Ex.P28. She alleged to have stated that on the date of incident she had gone to the field for grazing cattle. On return, she found some guests at the residence. She prepared tea for the guests, which was offered to them by her father appellant Nahar Singh. The guests left the house and again returned at 7 P.M. After taking dinner they went to sleep outside the house. She went to sleep alongwith her sister Leela and her father inside the house. At about 1 A.M. she was awakened on raising voice of his father appellant Nahar Singh. Her father shouted that three persons have killed Devi Singh. She inquired about the missing cattle from her father. Thereafter her father removed the bricks from the roof. His father asked her as well to raise the voice, which attracted Gopilal, Ratanlal etc. Every body in the locality had assembled but Devi Singh had not arrived. Thus, all the persons went to his house. They found that Devi Singh was lying injured. He advised the villagers to take Devi Singh to the hospital in a tractor. However, he died on the spot. She also stated that she did not disclose this fact on earlier occasion because of the pressure of her father. In view of the statements of PW1 Sugna Kunwar the appellant was arrested on 14.02.99 vide Ex.P25. In pursuance of the information given by the appellant the police recovered a bloodstained lathi. After usual investigation police laid charge-sheet against the appellant for offence under Section 302/120-B IPC on 12.05.99.
(3.) THE appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of the case prosecution examined as many as 21 witnesses. In statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the appellant denied the correctness of the prosecution evidence appearing against him. In defence he examined himself as DW1. He also examined Kalu Singh as DW2 and Moolchand as DW3. He deposed that he has lodged the First Information Report Ex.P20 at Police Station, Nikum on 20.08.98. However, the investigation was misdirected at the instance of one Ratan Singh a police constable at the same police station. At the instance of Ratan Singh he alongwith his daughter Sugna Kunwar was taken in custody by the police. They were kept in custody for about 10 days. The police got a false and fabricated statement of his daughter under coercion implicating him. When her daughter was produced before the court, she refused to give the statement. She was again brought to the Police Station. She was being' tortured and threatened. Subsequently, under coercion her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded. He had no quarrel with his deceased uncle. His son was adopted by deceased Devi Singh. The police deliberately at the instance of Ratan Singh did not investigate on the First Information Report lodged by him. In the cross examination he denied the suggestion that he killed Devi Singh with a view to grab his land.;