A. K. SHRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) FEELING aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3rd March, 1990 passed by learned sessions Judge, Morena in Sessions Trial No. 72/89, convicting the appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment of life, the appellant has knocked the door of this Court by preferring an appeal under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

( 2 ) THE facts shorn of unnecessary details lie in a narrow compass. It is the case of prosecution that Roshanbai (hereinafter referred to as the "deceased") was a concubine of accused/appellant. The deceased was residing with her mother Almadi Bai in subhash Nagar of the township of Morena. On the fateful day i. e. , 17-12-1988, at 12 in the noon, accused armed with single barrel gun arrived at the house of the deceased and was talking with her inside the room. At 1. 30 p. m. accused asked the deceased not to go to Ambah. It is said that at that juncture Afhis Khan arrived there to carry the deceased with him. The deceased was pacifying the accused that she will return after two days, on which the accused again told her not to go, as a result of which she stood up from the cot and said that she is going at the house of his brother Lalla. At that juncture it is said that accused stood up from the cot and came towards at the door and thereafter fired gun. The bullet struck left elbow and abdomen region as a result of which the deceased fell down and breathed her last.

( 3 ) AFTER firing, the accused fled from the spot. The son of the complainant as well as certain other persons of the locality chased to catch the accused and the complainant (PW-2) Almadi Bai, who is the mother of the deceased, went to lodge the report.

( 4 ) ON lodging of F. I. R. , the criminal law was set in motion. The investigating officer immediately arrived at the place of occurrence, prepared the panchyatnama of dead body; prepared the spot map; sent the dead body for post-mortem; seized the blood stained earth from the spot; seized broken pieces of bangles; bullet and plastic cover of bullet from the spot. The persons went to catch the accused, brought him at the place of occurrence along with his gun and its licence. The gun and licence along with live catridges were seized by the police. The postmortem of the deceased was conducted on 18-12-1988.

( 5 ) IN furtherance to his investigation, the investigating officer sent the fire arm, the gun, bullet and blood stained clothes etc. to the chemical examiner and after completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted in competent Court, who on its turn committed the case to the Court of Session, where the accused was tried.

( 6 ) THE learned trial Judge after going through the charge-sheet framed charges punishable under Section 302, IPC against the accused. Needless to emphasis the accused abjured his guilt and pleaded complete innocence. His defence is of maladroit implication.

( 7 ) IN order to prove the charge the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and placed Ex. P-1 to P-19 the documents on record.

( 8 ) THE learned trial Judge after appreciating and marshalling the evidence came to hold that appellant did commit the offence for which he was charged and eventually convicted him and passed sentence which we have mentioned herein above. Hence, this appeal.

( 9 ) IN this appeal Shri J. P. Gupta, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Atul Gupta has submitted that though several witnesses were cited by the prosecution as eyes witnesses, but, except PW-2 Almadi Bai all the witnesses turned hostile and thus the entire story rests upon the testimony of PW-2 who Is also an author of F. I. R. Ex. P-3. The submission of learned senior counsel is that if the evidence of this witness is tested on the avail of facts and circumstances of the case it would reveal that her evidence is planted and therefore, she is not a reliable witness. In support of his contention, learn

Click Here to Read the rest of this document