S.S.BYAS, J. - (1.) BY his judgment dated January 31, 1977, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (1) Jodhpur convicted the accused Tola Ram under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. The accused has come -up in appeal and challenges his conviction.
(2.) THE prosecution case is short and simple and may be summarised as under: Haridas Saad, aged about 40 -45 years, was a Police Constable and was living with his wife Smt. Mohini Devi (PW 5) in his house situate in Sharmikpura, Masooriya, Jodhpur. The accused also resides in the same locality. He indulged in rowdysim and used to pick -up quarrel with the residents off and on. Haridas used to reprimand the accused for his nefarious activities. This irked and annoyed the accused. At about 9 30 p.m. on 18th November, 1975. Haridas was going to his house on a bicycle. When he reached out -side the house of PW 2 Sultan Singh, situate a few wards away from his house, the accused came from the opposite side and asked Haridas to stop. Haridas got down from the bicycle. The accused went to him and told him that he was unnecessarily harrasing him and that he would not be spared. Saying so, the accused took -out a dagger and plunged it into the chest of Haridas. Haridas passed away instantaneously on the spot. The incident was seen by PW 2 Sultansingh and PW 11 Narpat Singh. Sultan Singh immediately rushed to the Police Station, Sardarpura and lodged the verbal report Ex P 2 of the occurrence at about 11. 15 p.m The police registered a case and took -up the investigation. The Station House Officer Manohar Lal (PW 14) arrived on the spot, inspected the site and prepared the site plan. He also prepared the inquest report of the victim's dead body. He also seized and sealed the sheath of the dagger lying near the dead body. Blood -stained soil and the blood -stained clothes of the victim were also seized and sealed. The post -mortem examination of the victim's dead body was conducted at 11.00 a.m. on the next day by PW 16 Dr. P. Dayal, the then Medical Jurist, M.G. Hospital, Jodhpur. The doctor noticed the following injuries on the dead body: (1) Incised wound 2.5 c.m. X 0 5 c.m. on the chest on right side 5 c.m. from the mid line at the 4th intercostal space. The upper border of the 5th rib has been cut (about 0.5 c.m.) near the costochandral junction. The intercostal muscle has been cut. The right pleura is cut at the site and there is a cut in the right pubuonary artery. The pericardium has been cut (about 1 c.m. long) and there is about 250 cc clotted blood in the pericardial and about 700 cc partially clotted blood in the thoracic cavity and the right lung is collapsed. The left lung is healthy. (2) Abrasion 0 5 c.m. x 2 c.m. on the right knee anterior aspect; (3) Abrasion 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. on the forehead on right side 1.5 c.m. above the eye -brow. (4) Old partially healed and dressed injury in the leftt endoacholis region. In the opinion of Dr. Dayal, the cause of death was shock as a result of haemorrhage and injury to the right pulmonary artery and pericardium. The post -mortem examination report prepared by him is Ex. P5. The accused was arrested on November 20, 1975. In consequence of the disclosure statement Ex. P 13 and Ex.P 14 made by the accused on November 21, 1975. dagger (Article 8) and bushirt (Article 14) were recovered. The dagger, the bushirt and the clothes of the deceased were sent for examination to the forensic Science Laboratory. Blood was detected on all of them. On the completion of the investigation, the police submitted a challan against the accused in the Court of the Additional Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, who, in his turn, committed the case for trial. The trial was conducted by the Additional Sessions Judge. He framed a charge under Section 302 IPC against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused adduced no evidence. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge held the charge duly proved against the accused. He was consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very out -set.
(3.) WE have beard Mr. K.C. Gaur and Mr. Niranjan Gaur learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor Dr. S.S. Bhandwat.;