JUDGMENT :

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.

1. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. by the accused–appellant Ravi Kumar son of Shri Satnaam, assailing the legality and validity of the judgment dated 23.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, in Sessions Case No. 26/2017 (State vs. Ravi Kumar) whereby the accused–appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six month’s simple imprisonment.

2. Succinctly stated, the facts of the case are that on 18.06.2017, the complainant Deepak Singh submitted a written report (Exhibit P-9) at Police Station Suratgarh, stating therein that his uncle’s son, Sunny, son of Charan Singh, had come to Suratgarh from Sirsa approximately 9–10 days prior for the purpose of employment, along with Raju, Jayram, and Ravi. All four were residing together in a rented room situated in Ward No. 8, RIICO Area, Suratgarh. It was alleged that on 14.06.2017 at about 10:00 p.m., Ravi Kumar had a quarrel with Sunny Singh and, in the course of the altercation, inflicted two knife blows upon him, causing grievous injuries. The injured was immediately taken to the hospital at Suratgarh, from where he was referred to Bikaner for further treatment. However, on 17.06.2017 at about 8:00 p.m., Sunny Singh succumbed to his injuries during treatment at the hospital in Bikaner. It was specifically alleged that Ravi Kumar assaulted Sunny Singh with the intention to cause fatal injuries, which ultimately resulted in his death.

3. On the basis of the of the written report (Ex.P-9), a formal First Information Report bearing No. 304/2017 (Ex.P-10) came to be registered at Police Station Suratgarh, Sri Ganganagar, against the accused–appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. After completion of investigation, Police filed a charge-sheet against the accused-appellant for the offences under Section 302 IPC.

5. Learned Trial Court framed, read over and explained the charges under Section 302 of IPC to the accused-appellant, who denied the charges and sought trial.

6. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. In support of its case, the prosecution also produced documentary evidence, Exhibits P-01 to P-35.

7. 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 and he is innocent. The accused–appellant produced documentary evidence as Exhibits D-2 and Exhibits D-3.

8. Learned Trial Court, after hearing the arguments advanced on behalf of both sides, upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence brought on record, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as aforesaid vide its judgment dated 23.01.2023.

9. Hence the present appeal.

10. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge are contrary to the settled principles of law as well as the facts and evidence available on record, and therefore, the same are liable to be quashed and set aside.

11. He further submitted that the Learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the oral and documentary evidence in its true and proper perspective and has erroneously convicted the appellant on the basis of surmises and conjectures. The findings recorded by the court below are perverse, arbitrary, and not supported by cogent evidence.

12. Learned counsel submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction is primarily based upon the statements of alleged eye-witnesses PW-5 Jayram and PW-7 Rajaram, who projected themselves as eye-witnesses to the incident. However, a bare reading of their testimonies reve