VINIT KUMAR MATHUR,J. - (1.) The instant appeal under Section 374(2) has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment dated 25.05.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali District Pali in Sessions Case No.46/2010 whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted for the offence under sections 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo two years additional simple imprisonment.
(2.) Facts in brief are that a written complaint was filed by PW1 Prakash Kumar at Police Station Rani District Pali on 01.05.2010 stating therein that Raju S/o Varda Ram was visiting his house for last 4-5 days requesting him and his grandfather for giving their agricultural field to him for cultivation but they refused for the reason that on earlier occasion, when they gave their agricultural field for cultivation to Raju, his conduct was not upto the mark, therefore, for last two years, they refused to give their field to him for cultivation. On 30.04.2010, at around 03:00 pm, the accused Raju again visited their house and requested for giving their field for cultivation but his request was turned down, therefore, while going back, Raju threatened his family of dire consequences. On 01.05.2010, at around 08.00 - 08:30 in the morning while he was preparing himself for going to Rani, he heard some noise. He ran outside their gate (Pole) and saw that Raju was assaulting his grandfather Shiv Lal Ji on his neck and head with a 'Kunth'. When he went to rescue his grandfather who was sitting on the platform in front of their plot, the accused Raju fled away from the spot towards the pond. Kailash Ji and Sajjan Singh Ji tried to catch hold of Raju in front of the house of Kailash Ji but they could not nab him. They informed about the incident to the police station, Rani, on telephone and his grandfather was taken to the hospital where the doctors declared him dead.
(3.) On the above information, a formal FIR No.65/2010 was registered at Police Station, Rani against the accused appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. After completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the accused appellant for the offence under section 302 IPC. Learned Trial Court framed charge against the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The same was read over and explained to him but he pleaded not guilty and sought trial. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses and got exhibited 31 documents in support of its case. The accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and was confronted with the evidence adduced during the course of trial. He stated that he was innocent and falsely implicated in this case. Learned trial Court after hearing the arguments of the defence and prosecution, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant vide judgment dated 25.05.2013 for the offence under section 302 IPC. Hence, this appeal. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There exist material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses creating serious doubt in the prosecution story. The prosecution miserably failed to prove the offence alleged against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt. He further submits that in the arrest memo (Ex.P/8), the place of arrest was not mentioned and the place of arrest was only shown as 'Sarhad Varkana'. Even as per the statement of PW15 Ratan Singh, the investigating Officer, it was not clear that from which place exactly, the appellant was arrested. He further submits that the recovery memo of the weapon of offence i.e. 'Kunth' was prepared after a gap of one hour clearly showing that the documents were fabricated by the investigation agency to falsely implicate the appellant in the present case. ;