The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on eyewitness testimonies, forensic analysis, and the confession of the accused under Section 164 CrPC to establish guilt under Section 302 IPC.

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.;—

By way of this appeal, the appellant Tufail Ahmad has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.5.2009/25.5.2009, passed by the Sessions Judge, Champawat in Sessions Trial No. 17/2005, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs. 25,000/-. However, the appellant has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Surendra Pal (PW1) lodged an FIR on 23.7.2005 at 9.25 PM with the averments that he was the Coordinator of the Rickshaw Tanga Union. He used to allot the number to the horse carts which were being plied daily. As usual, in the evening of 23.7.2005, near the Poornagiri Temple situated in front of the mosque, he was noting the numbers given to the horse-carts, which were to be plied on the next day, in his diary. At about 9.15 O’clock in the night, he heard noise of shouting coming from the road, near the bus stand, which goes to the mosque. On hearing the noise, the complainant immediately went there, where he saw that the accused appellant Tufail Ahmad, who is known to him since before, assaulted Sonu by knife with intention to kill him and made him severely injured, and fled away thereafter along with the knife. He has further averred that Mobin Khan, shopkeepers of the locality and other people had instantly seen the incident in the electric light, and these people identify and know the assailant. With these averments, this report Ex. Ka-1 was lodged with PS Banbasa, on the basis of which chick report Ex. Ka-7 was prepared.

3. After the registration of the aforesaid crime, the criminal justice machinery came into motion. Meanwhile, the injured Sonu succumbed to his injuries in the night of the incident itself. Investigation of this case was taken up by PW10 Inspector V.C. Pant. Inquest report Ex. Ka-2 was prepared on 24.7.2005. Relevant papers were prepared by the police and the dead body was sent for the post-mortem examination. Autopsy was conducted on 24.7.2005 at 2.45 PM by PW6 Dr. KC Thakur. The Investigation Officer collected the bloodstained and plain soil mixed with pebbles from the spot and prepared the recovery memo Ex. Ka-3. He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan Ex. Ka-11 on the pointing out of the complainant Surendra Pal. Accused was arrested at 2.15 PM on 24.7.2005. The bloodstained clothes, which the accused was wearing, were taken into possession and recovery memo thereof Ex. Ka-4 was prepared. Knife, used in the commission of crime, was recovered on the pointing out of the accused. Its recovery memo is Ex. Ka-5. Site plan Ex. Ka-12 of the place of recovery was also prepared. Statement of the accused appellant, under Section 164 CrPC, was recorded by the concerned Magistrate, in which he confessed to his guilt. The clothes of the accused, the knife and the bloodstained and plain soil mixed with the pebbles were sent for the forensic examination, reports thereof are Ex. Ka-17 and Ka-18. After the investigation, the police submitted the chargesheet Ex. Ka-15 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 IPC against the accused appellant.

4. Learned Sessions Judge, Champawat framed the charges against the accused appellant for the offences under Section 302 and 201 IPC. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The trial ended into the conviction of the accused appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC, and he was sentenced appropriately by the learned Sessions Judge, Champawat vide his judgment and order dated 20/25.5.2009. Hence, this appeal.

5. Prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as 11 witnesses. PW1 Surendra Pal is the complainant; PW2 Mobin Khan, PW4 Laxman Singh and PW5 Sunil Sagar are the eyewitnesses of the incident; PW3 Mahesh Chand Dube and PW7 Dhruvpal are the witnesses of recovery of knife and the bloodstained clothes, which the accused was wearing

Click Here to Read the rest of this document