Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) The appellant was the accused in Sessions Case No. 80 of 1994 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu. He was found guilty u/s 459, 397 and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced as under: JUDGEMENT_97_LAWS(RAJ)7_19961.html All the sentences had to run concurrently.
(2.) Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present action for filing the appeal has been resorted to.
(3.) The prosecution case is woven like this: (i) In the intervening night of 21.4.94 and 22.4.94 at 2.15 A.M. informant Bharat Mal (P.W. 1) lodged a written report (Ex.P 1) with the police station, Bagar (Disstt. Jhunjhunu) stating therein that on 21.4.94, at about 11 PM. he heard a loud shouting of Chor-Chor from the side of the house of his Bhabhi. He immediately reached there and found Ram Swaroop (PW. 6), Tulsaram (PW. 5), Mohan, Mahendra, Raju (PW. 7) and Mahendra Jat (PW. 10) standing behind the Bhabhis house and were persuading to catch the thief, whom they had seen running away from there. After they proceeded to chase the thief, the informant found his Bhabhi lying on cot. He tried to wake her but she was dead already. The ornaments from her nose, neck and legs were missing. The informant also proceeded to follow the thief after raising his voice and shouting that the thief had killed his Bhabhi and committed theft of ornaments. The thief hidden in a trench of the field of Sunda Ram, was caught and the informant identified him as Naval Singh already known to the informant being regular visitor of the village. He was taken to Bhabhi house by the informant and other persons and they made him to sit In the house. (ii) The Police Station, Bagar registered a case U/s. 394 and 302 I.P.C. and Investigation commenced. After completion of investigation the I.O. submitted charge sheet against the appellant in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu from where the case was committed to the trial court. (iii) The trial court framed charges U/s. 458, 397 and 302 I.P.C. The appellant denied charges and claimed trial. (iv) The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and produced 18 documents. Thereafter statement of the accused appellant under section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The appellant produced one defence witness and exhibited five documents. The trial court recorded the order of conviction and passed the sentence mentioned herein above.;