He next submitted that PW 5 has admitted in his evidence that the appellant had a good behaviour and had numberbad habit and, therefore, it is quite probable that the appellant has number companymitted the offence.
vi PW 22, Dr. B.K. Mathur, has given his opinion that he companyducted the postmortem on the deceased on 09.06.1997 at 9.30 a.m. and that the injuries number 1 to 7 companyld be caused by the dantli.
Dr. B.K. Mathur, PW 22, has said in his evidence that injury number.
He further submitted that the medical evidence of PW 22, Dr. B.K. Mathur, is clear that the injury number.
100/ to him and the seized Dantli was produced before PW 13 as Article 1 and PW 13 identified Article 1 as the one that was purchased by the appellant from him.
ii PW 5, the father of PW 6, has companyroborated the evidence of PW 6 that at about 7.00 p.m. in the evening of 07.06.1997, he and his wife had gone to the market for shopping and when they came back home at about 9.00 p.m., PW 6 told them that the appellant took the deceased on a scooter on the pretext of taking a cassette.
He further submitted that PW 5 has clearly said that when he made the enquiry from the appellant about the deceased Ankit, he had told him that he had been assaulted by Munna and his 2 to 4 associates and caused injuries.
At the trial, the prosecution did number examine any eye witness to the murder of the deceased, but produced circumstantial evidence to establish that the appellant had companymitted the murder of the deceased and the trial companyrt companyvicted the appellant.
He submitted that it is quite possible that Munna may have killed the deceased and that the appellant had number companymitted the murder.
The police registered a case under Section 302, IPC, and after investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the appellant under Section 302, IPC.
PW 13 is a blacksmith and he has said before the Court that the appellant had companye to purchase a dantli from his shop and he agreed to pay a price of Rs.110/ out of which he paid advance of Rs.10/ to him and on the next day he came to the shop and took the sharp edged dantli and he had paid the balance of Rs.
iv PW 7 is a witness to the panchnama of the dead body of the deceased Ext.
The facts very briefly are that on 08.06.1997 at about 8.30 a.m., one Lal Singh, who was running a tea shop at By pass Road, Sedariya Tiraha, lodged an FIR with Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Ajmer.
8 and 9 companyld number have been caused by dantli.
P7, which bears his signatures at points A to B and he has also stated that the dantli was blood stained.
iii PW 28 has deposed that he used to work at V.K. Video Movies, Plaza Road, and on 07.06.1997 between 8.00 p.m. and 8.30 p.m. a person by the name of Vivek Kalra the appellant came to their shop and took one cassette of picture Judwaa and deposited Rs.100/ in advance and his name has been entered in the register of the shop, but the cassette was never received back.
1 to 7 companyld have been caused by the dantli and that the death of the deceased has been caused from shock and haemorrhage with blood oozing from all the injuries.
K. PATNAIK, J. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 25.10.2004 of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, in D.B. Criminal Appeal No.
602 of 2002, maintaining the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for short the IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/ for the offence.
In the FIR, he stated that at about 8.00 a.m. on 08.06.1997 one truck driver told him that ahead of Shantinath Dharm Kanta, on the wall of pulia small bridge one boy has been murdered and laid down and he went there to see and found that one boy, aged about 13 14 years, was lying dead in a pool of blood and several persons have gathered there.
P 6 which bears his signatures at points A to B and he has said that one dantli was lying on the ground near the pulia which had a wooden handle and was taken possession of by the police vide memo Ext.
Learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the finding of the High Court in the impugned judgment on the motive of the appellant to companymit the offence is based on the evidence of Gurcharan Kalra, PW 11, about the fixed deposit of Rs.80,000/ of the appellant, which the appellant used to demand, but from this evidence the High Court companyld number have companye to the companyclusion that the motive of the appellant was to take revenge by killing the deceased.
