Conviction for murder under 302 IPC requires clear evidence of motive and intent; significant delays and contradictions among witnesses can warrant reasonable doubt, necessitating acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

RAVI CHIRANIA, J.

1. As the present criminal appeal preferred by the appellant- Gurdev Singh @ Gendu through jail and therefore, the Coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 16.05.2016 appointed Mr. Bhawani Singh Tanwar as Amicus Curiae. The appeal is against the judgment dated 26.06.2015 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Raisingh Nagar, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No. 09/2014 for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, whereby learned court below punished the appellant with imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/-. In the event of non-payment of fine, he will undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. The facts as noted from the record of the case are that a written report was lodged by one Ranjeet Singh on 16.07.2014, Exhibit P-1, by which he informed police that the accused killed his father-Roop Singh by beating with fists and strangulation. The report Exhibit P-1 dated 16.07.2014 is reproduced as under:-

^^fuosnu gS fd izkFkhZ j.kthr flag iq= :iflag tkfr fNEik fuoklh 18 th ch dk gSA vkSj izkFkhZ yqf/k;kuk esa [kjkn dk dke djrk gSA ogh ij jgrk gSA izkFkhZ ds firk :iflag Hkh izkFkhZ ds lkFk gh yqf/k;kuk jgrs FksA tks vDlj xkao 18 th ch esa vkrs tkrs jgrs FksA izkFkhZ ds firk djhc 1 ekg igys ;g dg dj yqf/k;kuk ls xkao 18 th ch vk;s Fks fd isUlu feyuh gSA rc ls 18 th ch esa gh jg jgs FksA dy fnukad 15@07@14 dks izkFkhZ dk ppsjk HkkbZ m/ke flag us Qksu djds dgk dh rsjss ikik dh ekSr gks xbZ gSA vki xkao tYnh vk tkvks rc eS yqf/k;kuk ls jokuk gksdj 18 th ch gekjs ?kj vk;k esjs ls igys esjh cgu tlfoUnz dkSj o esjk thtk tlohj flag gekjs ?kj vk;s gq, FksA eSus vkdj irk fd;k rks esjh pkph y{eh nsoh eq>s crk;k fd vki ds ikik vkSj xqjnso flag dy lqcg ds lkFk esa cSBs ?kj ij [kk ih jgs FksA blds ckn nksigj dks xqjnso flag us izkFkhZ ds firk :iflag dks FkIiM+ eqDdksa rFkk dksguh dh pksVs ekjdj o xyk nckdj tku ls ekj fn;kA fjiksVZ nsrk gwW dk;Zokgh dh tkosA**

On the said report, the police registered an FIR bearing No. 193/2014 dated 16.07.2014 for offence under Section 302 IPC against the accused-appellant. After conducting the investigation the police filed the charge-sheet. The learned trial court framed the charges which the accused-appellant denied and to prove its case, prosecution produced 11 witnesses in evidence and in documentary evidence 11 documents were exhibited. The statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. by the trial court in defence and statement of DW-1 Attar Singh were recorded in defence by the trial court. The learned trial court after considering the entire evidence and the documentary evidence as exhibited, passed the judgment of conviction dated 25.06.2015, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC with punishment for imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/-. As the present appeal filed by the appellant through jail, therefore, there are no specific grounds on record to challenge the judgment.

The learned Amicus Curiae prays to make oral submission in the case on the basis of record of the learned trial court. The learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Bhawani Singh Tanwar, submitted that a perusal of a hand written report, Exhibit P-1 dated 16.07.2014 as lodged by Ranjeet Singh, PW-1, shows that he is not an eye- witness of the incident and, he was informed about the incident by his cousin brother namely Udham Singh telephonically. According to leanred Amicus Curiae, the incident occurred at 09:30 a.m. however, the FIR was lodged with the delay