RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ram Kumar has preferred this appeal from Jail against the judgment and order dated 16-1-1990 of Sri S. N. Singh, Sessions Judge, Uttar Kashi, by which he has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) A written F.I.R. was lodged at 1 p.m. on 13-5-1989 at P. S. Dharasu by Abdul Hameed alleging that his brother Sadik Ahmed was working as tailor. At about 12.15 p.m. the appellant Ram Kumar, who was working as chaukidar in the Electricity Department, came to the room of Sadik Ahmed and assaulted him by a garasa. The incident was seen by Imam Bano and Johra Khatoon and when they raised an alarm Ram Kumar ran away from the place of occurrence and entered into quarter No. D.T. 57. Some police personnel and public men arrived at the scene and caught hold of Ram Kumar along with the Garasa. The condition of Sadik Ahmed was precarious and he had been carried to Uttar Kashi Hospital. On the basis of the F.I.R. a case was registered as crime No. 18 of 1989 under Section 302, I.P.C. at P. S. Dharasu. Sadik Ahmed succumbed to his injuries and an autopsy was held on his body at 9.15 a.m. on 14-5-1989. The post-mortem report shows that a large number of incised wounds were found on the body of the deceased. The case was investigated and a charge-sheet dated 12-7-1989 was submitted against the appellant. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on 22-7-1989 and committed the case to the Court of Sessions by his order dated 4-8-1989. Learned Sessions Judge recorded a confession of the accused on 16-1-1990 and on the same day pronounced verdict convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

(3.) Sri Vinod Prasad who has appeared as amicus curiae has submitted that the conviction of the appellant is wholly illegal and contrary to law as it is based solely upon his confession which could not have been recorded on the date which was fixed for recording of prosecution evidence. Learned counsel has further urged that in a murder case a finding of guilt can only be recorded on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and not on the confession of the accused and in these circumstances the conviction of the appellant is liable to be set aside.