The testimony of a child witness can be credible and reliable, and can be used to convict a defendant, provided that it is corroborated by other evidence.

JUDGMENT

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - The present appeal was listed on 20/02/2019 before this Court and Mr. Sunil Joshi, Advocate was appointed as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court on behalf of the accused-appellant as the counsel Mr. Amitabh Acharya who filed the represented appeal had pleaded no instructions.

2. The present criminal appeal under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 has been preferred by the accused-appellant against the judgment and order of conviction dated 30.03.2009 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.49/2008 whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

3. The facts in narrow compass are that a written report (Ex.P/1) was filed on 20.09.2008 to the Station House Officer, Police Station Amet District Rajsamand by PW1 Ashok Joshi stating therein that his younger sister Smt. Laxmi was married to the appellant Sohan Lal for last 20 years. The appellant Sohan Lal was suspicious about character of his sister Laxmi, therefore he used to assault her. On two-three previous occasions, his sister was assaulted and was turned out of the house by the appellant. Therefore, she used to come and stay at the parental house and used to share her misery. The appellant Sohan Lal was involved in the business of catering and used to frequently visit Mumbai. He returned from Mumbai about a month back and was staying in Tikar, Amet. The complainant was informed by his sister that her husband was threatening to kill her. On 20.09.2008, when he was in the village Kuwanthal, his uncle Dhanraj (PW4) informed him at around 06:00 pm that Laxmi had been murdered by her husband and her dead body was lying in the courtyard (Bada). On this information, he rushed to village Tikar and saw the dead body of his sister lying in the courtyard near the bushes. The appellant was holding a stone in his hand. When the appellant saw him and his uncle Dhanraj (PW4), he fled away from the place of incident. When he and his uncle reached near the dead body of his sister, he saw multiple injuries on the temporal region and above the left eye which were profusely bleeding. The police was informed and the report was lodged.

4. On this report, a formal F.I.R. No.164/2008 (Ex.P/2) was registered at Police Station-Amet, District Rajsamand for the offences under Sections 498A & 302 IPC against the accused appellant.

5. After conclusion of the investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the accused-appellant for the offences under sections 302 & 498A IPC.

6. Learned trial court framed, read over and explained the charges for the offences under Sections 302 & 498A of IPC to the accused-appellant who pleaded not guilty and sought trial.

7. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses and documents Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/46 were exhibited in support of its case.

8. The accused-appellant was examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and he was confronted with the evidence adduced against him during the course of trial which he denied and stated that on the date of the incident, he had gone to Devgarh and when he went to his courtyard at Tikar, he saw that his wife was lying dead. He was falsely implicated on the basis of suspicion.

9. Learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments from both the sides, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant for the offence under section 302 & 498A vide judgment dated 30.03.2009. Hence this appeal.

10. We have heard learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned