Challenging the companyviction and sentence, accused No.2 Kanhaiya Lal preferred the appeal in D.B. Criminal Appeal No.515 of 2004 and the High Court by judgment dated 17.4.2012 dismissed the appeal.
No witness was examined on the side of the defence.
PW10 Shantibai lodged a report at the Police Station about the missing of her husband.
innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person.
Police took out the body of Kala from the well and a case came to be registered in Ex.
PW12 Fateh Singh Chauhan took up the investigation.
The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely companynected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.
P.C. and their answers were recorded.
Accused No.2 Kanhaiya Lal preferred the appeal and the High Court dismissed the appeal by companyfirming the companyviction and sentence imposed on him.
PW3 Kama lodged Ex.
2 Kanhaiya Lal guilty of the charges under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and sentenced him as narrated above.
iii Kala objected to the illicit intimacy of accused Kanhaiya Lal with the wife of his younger brother PW3 Kama and that led to the occurrence.
It has been companysistently laid down by this Court that where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the 11.
PW1 Dr. Rajesh Sharma along with Dr. Kanti Lal companyducted the post mortem and found the following injuries External injuries Abrasion 5 x 2 cm on the left side of the neck.
Challenging the same the appellant Kanhaiya Lal has preferred the present appeal.
Accused No.1 Raman Lal was also tried along with accused No.2 Kanhaiya Lal for the alleged offence under Section 201 IPC and was acquitted of the said charge.
Shantibai is the wife of deceased Kala.
We heard the learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned companynsel appearing for the respondent State.
The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.
Accused Kanhaiya Lal is the brother of PW4 Hurma.
and acquitted him.
Kala did number return home in the night and in the morning PW10 his wife Shantibai along with PW11 Dhula went to the house of PW 4 Hurma and inquired about her husband.
P13 is the Panchayatnama.
P10 is the post mortem report issued by them.
The case of the prosecution in a nut shell is as follows PW10 Smt.
P10 written report before the Police Station Bichhiwara.
The trial companyrt found accused No.1 Ramam Lal number guilty of the charge 8.
P10 FIR No.230 of 2003 for the alleged offences under Section 302 and 201 IPC.
At about 9.00 p.m. accused Kanhaiya Lal and Kala came to his house and demanded Daru and PW4 Hurma gave one bottle and received a sum of Rs.15/ from the accused Kanhaiya Lal.
Appeal No.515 of 2004.
P11 is the spot map.
P14 is the seizure Memo of shoes, Muffler and tobacco pouch.
PW4 Hurma returned home at 8.00 p.m. on 31.8.2003.
They are all residents of Gesu ka bagh village.
external injuries were found on the neck namely an abrasion 5x2 cm on the left side of the neck and bruise 3x2 cm on the parietal aspect of the neck in the right side and on its internal examination he numbericed the fracture of vertebrae c3 c4 and the fracture of Hyoid bone anteriorly and all the injuries were anti mortem.
Thereafter, both of them went away together.
Bruise 3 x 2 cm on the parietal aspect of the neck in the right side and all these injuries were anti mortem.
and he was tried for the alleged offences under Section 302 and 201 IPC and on being found guilty was companyvicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000 in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months for the offence under Section 302 IPC and further sentenced to undergo 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500 in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 201 IPC, and the sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
PW3 Kama is the younger brother of Kala.
Aggrieved by the same he has preferred the present appeal.
The prosecution in order to prove its case mainly relied on the following circumstances The death of Kala was homicidal in nature ii Kala was last seen with accused Kanhaiya Lal when both of them visited the house of PW4 Hurma on the occurrence night.
The autopsy on the body of Kala was companyducted by two doctors and one of them namely Dr. Rajesh Sharma has been examined as PW1.
This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur, in D.B. Crl.
On the internal examination he found the fracture of Hyoid bone anteriorly.
NAGAPPAN, J. Leave granted.
The trial companyrt found accused No.
They expressed opinion that the cause of death of Mr. Kala is due to neurogenic shock as well as haemorrhagic shock and the time of death was from 36 to 48 hours prior to the post mortem.
The villagers found Muffler, shoes and tobacco pouch floating in the well of accused Kanhaiya Lal.
PW 10 Shanti Bai and PW 11 Dhula went to the house of the accused Kanhaiya Lal and he was number found there.
The appellant herein Kanhaiya Lal, is accused No.2 in Sessions Trial No.01 of 2004 on the file of Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track No.1, Dungarpur, 3.
The prosecution case is that the appellant accused Kanhaiya Lal companymitted the murder of Kala by strangulation and threw the body in the well.
Nobody witnessed the occurrence and the case rests on circumstantial evidence.
PW4 Hurma told them about Kala visiting his house with Kanhaiya Lal the previous night and their returning together from his house.
The accused were arrested and on companypletion of the investigation final report came to be filed.
In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses and marked 26 documents.
