In cases of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a chain of circumstances that points towards the guilt of the accused and negates their innocence.

JUDGMENT

1. Convict Mohan Singh @ Mahaveer had faced trial in FIR No. 252 dated 24.05.2019 registered under Sections 302, 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') at Police Station Vigyan Nagar, Kota City. Learned trial court vide impugned judgment/order dated 26.02.2020/28.02.2020 has convicted and sentenced the convict as under:

2. The trial court has sent reference for confirmation of death sentence of the convict, whereas, convict has filed appeal challenging his conviction and sentence as ordered by the trial court.

3. Vide this judgment, above mentioned death reference as well as appeal filed by the convict would be disposed of.

4. Prosecution story, in brief, as per the FIR is that on 24.05.2019 at about 8.15 A.M., Baban called the complainant from House No. 2-Ta-11 and informed him that one bag was lying along the wall of his house. In the bag, there appeared to be a dead body tied with wires. Then, complainant reached the spot and the bag was opened by sweeper Raju Valmiki and it was found that dead body of an unknown woman was lying in it. Somebody had murdered the lady and kept her body in the bag after tying it with wires. The dead body appeared to be two days old.

5. After completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against the convict.

6. Trial court framed charges against the convict for offence punishable under Sections 376, 392, 302 and 201 IPC. Convict did not plead guilty to the charges framed against him and claimed trial.

7. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined 54 witnesses during trial and exhibited 229 documents.

8. Convict, when examined under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') after the close of prosecution evidence, prayed that on 21.05.2019, he had taken the deceased for labour work from gobariya bawdi. They had reached Vigyan Nagar Bridge by taking Aerodrome road on an auto. At that time, the deceased was wearing a ghaghra, kurti and loogdi. Then they went to the shop of Salam and they picked up tagari and fawda from there. Shop of Salam was in Vigyan Nagar Car Bazar. In the evening, he left the deceased at Vigyan Nagar Crossing. Thereafter, he did not know where the deceased had gone. He was innocent and had not committed any murder. No recovery of knife or any other article was effected from him. He had been falsely involved in the case by the police. Convict did not examine any witness in his defence.

9. Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 26.02.2020/28.02.2020 convicted and sentenced the convict in the above mentioned manner.

10. Learned State counsel has submitted that the prosecution had been successful in proving its case. All the circumstances brought on record by the prosecution lead towards the guilt of the convict. Convict was earlier convicted in a case of rape and murder. The trial court judgment in this regard was Exhibit P-144. While the convict was lodged in open air camp, he had escaped and committed the offence-in-question. Convict was involved in another case of double murder in an incident which took place in the year 1997. Now, after the arrest of the convict in the present case, challan had been presented against the convict in FIR No. 146 dated 22.05