MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sikar in Sessions Case No.37/2009, whereby the accused-appellant Narendra Kumar Rao @ Parsiya has been convicted for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000, in default whereof, he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months and was also convicted for offence under Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs.5000 and in default whereof, he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) As per the case of the prosecution, a written report Ex.P. 9 was submitted by one Sanwar Mal (PW8) to the S.H.O. Police Station Sadar, Sikar in connection with the dead body of unknown person found in the truck No. RJ-18-G-2259 in Bajor near Kaharon Ki Dhani. It was mentioned therein that today at 5-6 A.M. one Truck No. RJ-18-G-2259, which is full of bags, was standing and its front side was towards Jaipur at Kaharon Ki Dhani (Bajor) Bus Stand. Doors of cabin were locked. Nobody came near the truck. At about 1.25-1.30 PM, when he came and saw blood lying on the ground, which came from the cabin, he called 2-3 boys of the village and tried to open the door, which was locked. From window glass, they saw that one person was tied from his neck with pole of the cabin and there was injury on his head, from which the blood was oozing out. That person has been murdered by someone after tying him in the vehicle, who left that place keeping the vehicle at stand. The police on the basis of this report registered the FIR (Ex.P28) at Police Station Sadar, Sikar on 08.05.2009 at 3.00 PM bearing No. 114/2009. The police arrested the accused appellant and on conclusion of the evidence, filed charge sheet against him for offence under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. The charge sheet was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, wherefrom it was committed to the Court of Sessions, Sikar and thereafter it was made over the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sikar for trial. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 33 documents. The defence produced 6 witnesses and exhibited one document. The accused in examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. alleged false implication and pleaded alibi. On conclusion of the trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced in the manner as indicated above. Hence this appeal.
(3.) Shri A.K. Gupta, learned senior counsel submitted that the conviction of the accused appellant has been recorded against the material and evidence available on record as well as the law. Admittedly, there is no eye witness of the occurrence and the case hinges entirely on the circumstantial evidence. The learned trial court has failed to consider the basic principle of circumstantial evidence and has illegally convicted and sentenced the accused appellant. The learned trial court in paragraph 38 at page 31 of the impugned judgement has mentioned five major circumstances against the appellant viz. Last seen, recovery of documents of the truck, recovery of mobile phone, recovery of weapon with blood stained and blood on the clothes of the accused and deceased. It is important to note that most of the circumstance as mentioned above, have not been individually proved by the prosecution, let alone making as chain of circumstances against the accused appellant. Yet, however, the learned trial court has convicted and sentenced the accused appellant.;