Honble YADAV, J.–The present Jail Appeal has been preferred by accused-appellant Thavra through Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur against the impugned judgment dated 16.4.96 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur whereby he convicted accused-appellant Thavra for the offence under Sec.302 IPC and sentenced him for life imprisonment. Accused Bakshi and Dheera were convicted under Sec.323 IPC and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment whereas Kantilal arrayed as accused No.4 in the aforesaid Sessions Case No. 17/1994 was acquitted.

(2). It is noticed that Bakshi and Dheera who were arrayed as accused Nos. 1 and 3 in the aforesaid Sessions Case and were convicted for the offence under Section 323 IPC to one years rigorous imprisonment have not filed any appeal before this Court.

(3). The prosecution story as disclosed in the FIR Ex. P/8 registered under Sections 341, 323, 324 read with Sec.34 IPC on the oral statement of Shanti Lal (PW 5) at police station Pahara Dist. Udaipur on 12.3.92 at 12.30 PM was that first infor- mant above named along with deceased Babulal and Kauwa (PW 6) on 11.3.92 after sun-set proceeded from village Bavalwada on foot to their village Harshawada. When all of them reached at about 8.30 PM at the place known as Bada Darra they saw four accused persons named above coming with two camels loaded with bundles of woods. Complainant party questioned four accused persons as to where they were taking boundles of woods? When the aforesaid question was asked by complainant party to accused-appellant Thavra and Dheera they retorted their authority to ask such question from them.

(4). Upon the aforesaid altercation, it is alleged that accused- appellant Thavra assaulted deceased Babulal with an axe which he was carrying. Accused Bakshi assaulted deceased Babulal by throwing stones at him and accused Dheera assaulted the deceased with `lathi whereas accused Kantilal blocked the way of complainant party by not allowing them to proceed to their village Harshawada.

(5). After lodging of the FIR (Ex.P/8), Investigation commenced. During the investigation Babulal died in hospital at Ahmedabad on 15.3.92 and as such the case was converted under Sec.302 IPC.

(6). After conclusion of investigation, the Investigation Agency filed challan against accused-appellant and other three accused persons named above before the committal Court from where the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Udaipur. The learned Sessions Judge transferred the case for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur.

(7). The learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur after receipt of record from the learned Sessions Judge framed charges against accused appellant and other three accused persons named above.

(8). Accused-appellant and three other accused persons named above denied the charges framed against them and claimed trial.

(9). In order to substantiate the prosecution case, the Prosecution Agency examined as many as 20 witnesses and produced documentary evidence Ex.P1 to Ex.P16.

(10). It is borne out from perusal of record requisitioned from learned trial Court that when Prosecution Agency closed its evidence, the accused-appellant and other three accused persons named above were called upon by learned Additional Sessions Judge to give their statement under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. The accu- sed-appellant and other three accused persons gave identical statements under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. to the effect that Shanti Lal (PW 5) and Kauwa (Pw 6), in order to save themselves from the punishment for committing murder of deceased Babulal, have falsely implicated them. Accused-appellant and other three accused persons examined Heera Lal in their defence as DW 1.

(11). After hearing the learned public prosecutor and learned defence counsel on behalf of accused-appellant and other accused persons named above, the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the strength of evidence adduced by the Prosecution convicted and sentence

Click Here to Read the rest of this document