JUDGMENT :

1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by accused-appellant Joga Ram under Section 374 of CrPC being aggrieved of the judgment dated 15.09.2009 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Camp Balotra Camp, Balotra in Sessions Case No.61/2008 whereby he has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to the following punishments:

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:

3. On 28.05.2008 one Maga Ram filed a written report with the Siwana Police Station stating that on 27.05.2008, at about 06:00 PM in the evening his nephew Teja Ram had gone to the accused Joga Ram’s place to purchase the firewood. Both Joga Ram and Teja Ram moved out of the house talking to each other and just after a distance of 50 steps from the house of Joga Ram, Joga Ram attacked Teja Ram with a sharp weapon and inflicted serious injuries on head, nose, mouth and neck of Teja Ram. After receiving the injuries Teja Ram cried in pain and hearing him, Akha Ram and Gapa Ram came running to the place of incident. Seeing Akha Ram and Gapa Ram coming, Joga Ram fled away from the site. Akha Ram informed his brother Tulsa Ram about the incident and when they reached the site, Teja Ram had already expired. It was further stated in the FIR that because of some family dispute, Joga Ram inflicted serious injuries on head and face of Teja Ram which proved fatal. The said incident has been reported to be of around 8 o’clock in the night.

4. Upon this report, an FIR No.68/2008 (Exh.29) came to be registered at Police Station Siwana for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and investigation was commenced on the same. After investigation, challan was filed under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act. Thereafter, the case was committed for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Balotra (hereinafter referred to as “learned Trial Court”). Learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act which were denied and trial was claimed. The prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and got exhibited 46 documents. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 CrPC wherein he denied the prosecution allegations and stated that he had falsely been implicated in the case because of personal vengeance. He further stated that no weapon was recovered from him and he was not in the village on the date of incident.

5. After conclusion of the trial, learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 15.09.2009 held the accused-appellant guilty for the offences under Section 302 and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and consequently convicted him as mentioned above. Hence, the present criminal appeal.

6. The first ground raised by counsel for the accused-appellant is that the alleged incident has been stated to be of 6 o’clock in the evening of 27.05.2008 whereas the FIR has been got registered on 28.05.2008 at about 8 o’clock in the morning. No justification for such delay in registration of the FIR has been given either in the FIR or in the statements of the complainant recorded under Section 161 CrPC. It has been submitted that no justification for the delay has given before the trial Court either.

7. The second ground raised on behalf of the accused-appellant is that there was no motive for the accused to murder the deceased. Although, it has been stated in the FIR that there was some family dispute between the accused and the deceased, any d