1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.11.1990 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.90/1988, titled as the Azizudeen @ Bakia v. The State of Rajasthan , whereby appellant-accused was convicted for the offence under Sections 307, 326 and 324 IPC and was sentenced as under:-

U/s. 307 IPC: 21/2 years' rigorous imprisonment together with fine of Rs. 50/-, in default whereof to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.

U/s.326 IPC: Two years' rigorous imprisonment.

U/s.324 IPC: One year's rigorous imprisonment.

2. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It was also ordered that the period for which appellant remained in custody during investigation and trial, shall be set off from the principal sentence.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.05.1988, at about 12.20 p.m., Ratan Singh (PW-10), ASI, Police Station Sadar Bazar, went to Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur on some information and recorded the statement (Ex.P/6) of complainant-injured Mahendra Singh (PW-5) in which it was alleged that he was working as LDC in the Municipality, Jodhpur in Revenue Section and was a member of encroachment removal team. It was further stated that appellant-accused Azizudeen was also working as labour on daily wages in the said team. On 04.05.1988, at about 6.00 p.m., when he was going to his house, Azizudeen was standing on the way and on being asking to go away, he abused him, also slapped and threatened him. It was further alleged that on 05.05.1988, at about 10.30 a.m., when he was working in his office, appellant-accused came there with knife and inflicted knife blows, which hit him on the spinal-chord and on the neck. On being injured, he fell down and some other colleagues intervened due to which he (Azizudeen) ran away and he (injured) was taken to the hospital.

4. On the basis of this statement (parcha bayan), FIR No.45/1988 (Ex.P/14) was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 332, 307 and 324 IPC at Police Station, Sadar Bazar, Jodhpur and investigation was commenced. After investigation, challan was filed against the appellant-accused on 04.06.1988 in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.4, Jodhpur. Since the offence under Section 307 IPC was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, after complying the provisions envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C., committed the case to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned trial court') as per the provisions of Section 209 Cr.P.C. The learned trial court after hearing framed charges under Sections 307, 333 in alternative 326 and 332 in alternative 324 IPC for which he denied and claimed for trial.

5. To substantiate the charges against the accused, prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and proved certain documents. Thereafter appellant-accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he claimed prosecution evidence as false and stated that due to enmity he has been falsely implicated and didnt choose to lead defence evidence. After hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for accused, learned trial court convicted the appellant-accused and sentenced as aforesaid.

6. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence appellant preferred this appeal before this court which was admitted for consideration vide order dated 28.11.1990 and notice was issued to respondent State and record of trial court was called for.

7. Heard Mr. JS Choudhary, learned senior counsel for appellant- accused and Mr. Pankaj Awasthi learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and record of the learned trial court.

8. To decide the issues raised by the learned counsel for the parties, a brief synopsis of evidence on record, as led by the prosecution is apposite.