IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that a clear intention to kill, evidenced by the nature and number of injuries inflicted, overrides claims of provocation in determining the classification of an act as murder under Section 300 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred claiming the following relief :

“It is therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed and impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.03.2018 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Churu may kindly be quashed and set aside and the appellant may kindly be ordered to be acquitted.”

2. The accused-appellant laid a challenge to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.03.2018 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court (SC/ST Act Cases) (Sessions Judge), Churu, in Special Sessions Case No.23/2014 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Sher Mohammed @ Bangali), whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as below :

3. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the accused-appellant, are that on 09.04.2014, Pawan Kumar (complainant) submitted, in Government Hospital, Ratangarh, a Parcha Bayan before the Police Station, Ratangarh, to the effect that during the day at around 2:00 pm, he (complainant) and one Jitendra @ Kalu, who was stated to be his brother (uncle's son), both came from their houses to market town Padihara Gandhi Chowk and were standing near one Durga Sansi's shop, and Farooq Teli's son (whose name was not known) was also standing near Jitendra @ Kalu, and joking with him, while abusing Jitendra @ Kalu jokingly. Sher Mohammed @ Bangali (accused-appellant), who was also standing nearby, asked Jitendra @ Kalu, as to how did he abuse the accused-appellant, whereupon, Jitendra @ Kalu said that he did not abuse the accused-appellant; Jitendra also said that he was indulged in joking conversations with Farukh Teli’s son. In the meantime, the accused-appellant picked up a scissor from Durga Sansi's shop and started hitting Jitendra @ Kalu hard with the said scissor, due to which Jitendra @ Kalu fell down. At that time, Durga Sansi and 2-3 other persons were also standing there. Upon seeing Jitendra falling, the complainant rushed towards home and informed his family about the said incident, whereupon Jitendra @ Kalu was brought to Ratangarh Government Hospital, but he died on way to the hospital. It was also stated that the accused-appellant had caused murder of Jitendra @ Kalu by stabbing him with scissor, and thereafter, fled away from the scene.

4. On the basis of the aforementioned information, an FIR bearing No.139/2014 was registered for the offences under Sections 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST Act, and the investigation accordingly commenced. After investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet.

5. The learned Trial Court framed the charges against the accused-appellant under the aforementioned provisions of law, and the trial accordingly commenced thereafter.

6. During the course of trial, the evidence of 18 prosecution witnesses were recorded and 19 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution; whereafter, the accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which the accused-appellant pleaded innocence and his false implication in the criminal case in question.

7. Thereafter, upon hearing the contentions of both the parties as well as considering the material and evidence placed on record, the learned Trial Court, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant, as above, vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.03.2018, against which the present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the accused-appellant.

8. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submitted that entire incident took place due to sudden altercation between the deceased and the accused-appellant, during course whereof the accused-appellant took scissor (weapon of murder) and attacked the deceased, and the sai