[2025:RJ-JD:34187-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No. 331/1995 Laxman S/o Nana Meena, R/o Asariwada, P.S. Pahada, District Udaipur.

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through P.P.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Heli Pathak, Amicus Curiae For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Devasi, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Judgment

Reserved on : 30.07.2025 Pronounced on : 12.08.2025 (Per Hon’ble Mehta, J.):

1. The instant jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.06.1995 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’) in Sessions Case No. 16/1994, whereby the accused appellant – Laxman has been convicted of the charge under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under:-

2. The facts leading to appellant’s conviction emanated from the FIR, which came to be lodged by one Bakshi Ram on 19.03.1992 at about 12:30 a.m inter-alia stating that on 18.03.1992 at about 7:00 – 7:15 p.m. he was sitting in the house of his father-in-law (Kachara), his father-in-law had some altercation with his brother Nana Meena (father of the appellant Laxman) in relation to an ox. It was stated in the said FIR that Kura, who was present on the site tried to diffuse the situation and pushed Nana towards his house, but after some time, while the complainant was sitting with his father-in-law (Kachara) in verandah (padsal), the accused approached their house and called his father-in-law (Kachara) and raised grievance about what Kachara had said to his father and stabbed a knife in left side of his chest and resultantly, the deceased died instantly and the accused Laxman ran away from the scene.

3. On the basis of such written information given by the complainant, First Information Report bearing No. 63/1992 was registered in the police station Pahada, District Udaipur for the offences under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and section

4/25 of the Arms Act.

4. The investigating officer prepared the site map (Exhibit-P/1), Panchanama of the corpse (Exhibit-P/2), seized the clothes of the deceased and collected blood stained soil and control soil and got the post-mortem conducted. On 22.03.1992, the appellant was arrested and at his instance, a knife was recovered from his house.

5. The knife, blood stained soil and vest (banyan) of the deceased were sent for forensic examination, which reported that the blood group on the blood stained clothes of the deceased, blood stained soil and the knife contained identical blood group i.e. Group ‘A’. The investigating officer, thus concluded that the appellant was the accused and accordingly filed a charge-sheet.

6. Later on, the case was committed to the Sessions Court and on denial of the charges, it was tried and decided by the trial court vide impugned judgment dated 30.06.1995.

7. On behalf of the prosecution Hukka (P.W.1); Kura (P.W.2); Manilal (P.W.3); Ashok Kumar (P.W.4); Nani (P.W.5); Bakshi Ram (P.W.6); Amrit Lal (P.W.7); Rupa (P.W.8); Man Singh (P.W.9); Santosh Giri (P.W.10); Padam Singh (P.W.11); Halu (P.W.12); Dr. Rameshchandra Ahari (P.W.13) and Dhularam (P.W.14) were examined.

8. Site Map (Exhibit-P/1); Panchnama (Exhibit-P/2); FIR (Exhibit-P/3); Arrest Memo (Exhibit-P/4); Letter by SHO sent while taking sample of the soil (Exhibit-P/5-I); Supurdginama of dead body (Exhibit-P/5-II); Recovery memo of Knife (Exhibit-P/5- III); Receipt of samples (4 packets) sent to FSL (Exhibit-P/6-I); Recovery memo of control soil and blood stained soil (Exhibit-P/6- II); Post-Mortem Report (Exhibit-P/6-III); Recovery memo of vest from the dead body (Exhibit-P/7); Information under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act by accused Laxman (Exhibit-P/8) and Statement of Nani (P.W.5) under section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code (Exhibit-D/1) were exhibited.

9. When the appellant was called upon to explain the evidence and circumstanc