This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 31-07-2004, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/lst F. T. C. , Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 135 of 2003, State Vs. Harbans Kumar @ Guddu whereby the appellant has been convicted & sen tenced to undergo rigorous imprison ment of ten years u/s 307 Indian Panel Code, 1860 (for brevity as I. P. C. ). The appellant was further directed to pay a fine of Rs. 3,0001- and in default thereto, the appellant should further undergo imprisonment of two months.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the appellant Harbans Kumar has taken a sum of Rs. 500/- as loan from the injured Seaspal. On 01-07-2003 at about 1:00 p. m. injured Seaspal was going towards river Kosi and the appellant was coming from opposite direction. When the injured met the appellant, he demanded a sum of Rs. 500/-which was taken as loan from the appellant. Due to which some scuf fle took place in between them and the appellant stabbed him by knife. Injured Seaspal sustained injury on his person and fell down on the ground. Thereaf ter, the appellant fled away from the spot. The said incident was seen by the father of the injured, Prakash PW1, Jagdish PW3 and Mahendra Prakash. Thereafter, the injured was taken to Ramnagar Civil Hospital by his father Prakash PW1 and other witnesses namely, Jagdish PW3 and Mahendra Prakash where he was medically exam ined by the doctor. After seeing the pre carious condition of the injured, he was referred to Moradabad where his treat ment was conducted at Sai Hospital, Moradabad. A report Ex. Ka. 1 was lodged by the father of the injured Prakash PW1 at the police station on the same day at about 3:10 p. m. The police started the investigation of the case and arrested accused/appellant on 02-07-2003. The police also recovered knife from the possession of the accused/ appellant. After completing the investi gation, the police submitted the chargesheet Ex. Ka. 13 before the court concerned.

3. After submission of chargesheet, the accused/appellant was committed to the court of Sessions for trial and the trial court framed charge u/s 307 I. P. C. against the accused/ appellant. The ac cused/appellant denied the charge lev elled against him and claimed his trial.

4. The prosecution in support of its case examined Prakash PW1, father of the injured Seaspal who claimed himself to be the eyewitness of the incident. He has also lodged the F. I. R. before the po lice station. Seaspal PW2 is the injured witness. He was produced by the pros ecution to prove the entire incident. Jagdish PW3 is also eyewitness of the incident. Dr. Harish Lal PW4 is the Medical Officer posted at Ramnagar Civil Hospital. He examined the injured at about 2:05 p. m. on 01-07-2003, i. e. date of the incident. S. i. Roop Singh Bisht PW5 has investigated the matter at the initial stage. Thereafter, the mat ter was investigated by S. I. Khanjan Lal PW6. Both the witnesses have stated that they conducted the investigation and prepared the papers which have been adduced in the evidence before the trial court. S. I. Khanjan Lal submitted the chargesheet before the Court.

5. The accused-appellant was ex amined u/s 313 Cr. P. C. and he has pleaded not guilty to the offence. He has further stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has stated in his statement recorded u/s 313 Cr. PC. that he got seized horns of deer from the house of the father of injured Seaspal by the Forest Department and to that effect a case is pending before the C. J. M. , Nainital against the father of the injured due to which, the appel lant has been falsely implicated in this case. The defence has also adduced the evidence of Dayawati DW1, wife of the appellant before the court.

6. The learned Sessions Judge, after appreciation of the evidence and hearing the parties convicted the appel lant and sentenced him as indicated above.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. A

Click Here to Read the rest of this document