JUDGMENT :

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant Mahendra singh S/o Shri Kartar singh, from jail against the judgment dated 07.11.2017 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 02, Hanumangarh, in Sessions Case No. 31/2015 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of FIR No.214/2015, whereby the accused-appellant stands convicted for the offence under Section 302, of the IPC.

2. By the said judgment, the learned trial Court has sentenced the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life till the remainder of his natural life along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

3. Brief facts for deciding the present appeal are that the complainant, Rajendra Kumar (PW-13) S/o Mangtu Ram, submitted a written Complaint (Ex. P-22) to the Station House Officer, Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, on 22.04.2015 at about 9:15 PM. In the written Complaint, he stated that he ordinarily resides at 2 K.N.G. Colony, Makkasar, and is married to Maina Devi, daughter of Deceased - Chetram, S/o Bhagirath, resident of village Rodawali. On 22.04.2015, at around 5:00 PM, he had gone to his in-laws’ house at Rodawali. His father-in-law, Chetram, was not present at the house, and upon inquiry, his mother-in-law informed him that Chetram had gone for work and had not returned. At about 8:00 PM, one person came running to the house and informed his mother-in-law, Parmeshwari Devi, that a man wearing saffron clothes, resembling a sadhu, who had been residing in the village for the past one and a half years, had assaulted Chetram on head near the boundary wall of the cremation ground. On receiving this information, he, along with his mother-in-law Parmeshwari Devi and sister-in-law Pooja, rushed to the cremation ground, where a crowd had already gathered. They saw the saffron-clad man striking Chetram on the head with a cement-gravel pillar and thereafter covering his face with mud. On noticing the presence of villagers, the assailant fled from the spot. The complainant and the persons present witnessed the condition of Chetram, who had succumbed to the head injury. The assailant, dressed in saffron attire, had been residing in village Rodawali for about one and a half years and was known to all villagers. The complainant asserted that he could identify the accused if produced before him.

4. On the basis of the above written complaint, a formal FIR No.214/2015 (Exhibit P.25) was registered at Police Station, Hanumangarh against the accused for the offences under Sections 302, IPC.

5. After completion of investigation, police filed a charge-sheet against the accused-appellant for the offences under section 302, IPC.

6. Learned Trial Court framed, read over and explained the charges under Sections 302 IPC to the accused-appellant, who denied the charge and sought trial.

7. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 21 witnesses. In support of its case, the prosecution also produced documentary evidence, Exhibits P-01 to P-57.

8. The statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied all incriminating circumstances put to him, stating that the prosecution witnesses had deposed falsely due to enmity, that the evidence was fabricated, and that he was innocent. The accused-appellant produced documentary evidence, Exhibits D-01 to D-03.

9. Learned Trial Court, after hearing the arguments advanced on behalf of both sides and upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence brought on record, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as aforesaid vide judgment dated 07.11.2017.

10. Hence the present appeal.

11. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution case suffers from fundamental infirmities, which strike at the very root of its credibility. It was argued that the First Information Report (Ex. P.25), lodged by the complainant Rajendra Kumar, does not disclose the name of th