Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) JEALOUSY , the green -eyed -monster, started controlling the life of Bahadur Singh, appellant herein, when his beloved Asha left him alone and married to Jitendra. On the allegation of murder of Jitendra, Bahadur Singh, along with three co -accused, was put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2 Jhalawar, who vide judgment dated October 20, 2003, while acquitting co -accused persons, convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/ -, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.
(2.) ON September 29, 2002 around 7 AM while Pratap (Pw.1) was going towards Bandha Talai with his cows, he found a dead body lying in a ditch. Pratap handed over a written report (Ex.P -1) at Police Station Mandawar. On that report case was registered and investigation commenced. Dead body was subsequently identified as of Jitendra Bhatnagar. Autopsy was performed. As many as four stab wounds were found on the dead body. Cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. Statements of witnesses were recorded. The deceased was last seen alive in the company of appellant and three others. All of them were nabbed and at the instance of appellant a wallet belonging to deceased got recovered. 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 (Fast Track) No.2 Jhalawar. Charges under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 307/34, 302/34, 120B, and 115 IPC were framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 29 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec.313 Cr.P.C., the appellant claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above. Since the case of prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence, we have to examine whether: (i) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, have been cogently and firmly established; (ii) those circumstances are of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the appellants; (iii) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the appellants and none else.
(3.) HAVING gone through the impugned judgment we notice that learned trial court founded conviction of the appellant on the following circumstances: (i) Death of Jitendra was homicidal in nature. (ii) Jitendra was last seen alive in the company of appellant. (iii) Appellant had a motive to kill Jitendra. (iv) Pursuant to disclosure statement of appellant wallet belonging to the deceased got recovered.;