Defects in the investigation cannot be the sole basis for acquittal, and the admissibility of evidence should not be discredited based on technicalities.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT GUPTA, CJ.

1. Challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Satna (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 75/2003 on 14-11-2005 convicting the appellant for an offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and vide separate order convicting him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-; in default of payment of fine, the appellant was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another six months. The appellant was also convicted for an offence under section 25(1)(b) and (a) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine, he was to undergo another rigorous imprisonment of six months.

2. The prosecution case was set in motion on the statement (Ex.P-2) of Satish Kumar Chourasiya alias Rajni Chourasiya s/o Daulat Ram Chourasiya made to Shri A.P. Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station, Uchehara, District Satna on 3-10-2002 at about 11 p.m. On the basis of such statement, FIR (Ex.P-1) was lodged. He stated that he stays in village Ichaul in Atta Chakki (flour mill). On 3-10-2002 at about 4 p.m., he was standing near Kranti crossing eating Chat when somebody informed him that his brother Ajay Chourasiya is being beaten by accused Sukhendra, Sapan, Chingu, Kalyan and Dablu Ghosh. There was a rumor in the area that Ajay and Sukhendra had a dispute on account of a money transaction. When he reached the place of occurrence then he saw that the appellant has caught hold of Ajay from his collar and took out a country-made pistol kept in his pant and fired on the right side of the chest of Ajay. Ajay fell on the spot near Mandir (temple). At that time, Chingu, Sapan, Kalyan and Dablu have caught hold of Ajay and after firing of bullet, all five accused persons ran away. He took Ajay on a motorcycle to Uchehara Dispensary where, after giving the first-aid, his brother was referred to Satna. He narrated the entire incident to his brother, father and neighbours. The injured has been taken to hospital for treatment but when he reached hospital, doctor informed him that his brother has been brought dead.

3. On the basis of the statement made by Satish Kumar Chourasiya alias Rajni Chourasiya, PW-11 – A.P. Singh took over the investigation. After death of Ajay Chourasiya, he took in possession the dead body on 4-10-2002 vide memo Ex.P-12 and sent the dead body for postmortem examination vide memo Ex.P-6. He also took in possession of the clothes of deceased, his chappals and also the pellets vide memo Ex.P-16. He prepared a site plan by visiting the site on 4-10-2002. Earlier, he has recorded the statements of Rajni Chourasiya, Shiv Prasad and Daulat Ram on 3-10-2002 and statements of Lalla alias Lala Chourasiya, Billa alias Dilip Avadhiya, Jugga alias Jogendra Tamrakar were recorded on 4-10-2002. Accused Sukhendra was arrested on 6-10-2002 at about 4.30 p.m. at Nagaud Bus Stand vide memo Ex.P-10. Accused made a disclosure statement of keeping the country-made pistol lying concealed. The statement was recorded vide memo Ex.P-8 and at about 4.45 p.m., the country-made 0.12 bore pistol was recovered, which was taken in possession vide Ex.P-9. From the other pocket, he produced an empty shell and a live cartridge, which was also taken in possession vide memo Ex.P-9.

4. The other accused persons were declared absconding on 17-11-2002 vide memo Ex.P-17 and were arrested on 28-1-2003 when they surrendered in Court vide arrest memos Ex.P-23 to Ex.P-26. The country-made pistol was examined by the Armourer, request of which was made vide memo Ex.P-5A. The country-made pistol and live cartridge was sent for forensic science examination to Laboratory at Sagar vide memo Ex.P-20.

5. On completion of the investigations, a charge-sheet was filed in Court. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. During trial, on the basis of oral and documentary evidence the