PRABHU DAYAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN — 1995 DIGILAW 125 (RAJ)

Judgment B. R. ARORA, J, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31-3-87, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Sections 302 and 380, I. P. C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500. 00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302, I. P. C. ; and five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 380, I. P. C. ( 2 ) APPELLANT Prabhu Dayal, who was the husband of deceased Smt. Bhajno, was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar, for committing the house lurking trespass in night and committing the murder of Smt. Bhajno in her house by inflicting grievous injuries. He was, also tried for committing the theft of the gold ornaments, viz. , ear-rings and bangles belonging to Smt. Bhanjo. The case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night between 9th and 10/04/1986, Smt. Bhajno was found murdered in her house. P. W. 1 Smt. Baga Bai - a neighbour of Smt. Bhaj no - found Smt. Bhajno dead and informed PW. 3 Mani Ram and PW 4 Dr. Sukhdeo Raj about this fact. The neighbours saw the deadbody of Smt. Bhajno and reported the matter to the Police at Police Station, Sri Karanpur. An F. I. R. was registered and the investigation ensued. During the investigation, it was revealed that the accused was the person who committed the murder of Smt. Bhajno his wife. On 14-4-86, the accused was arrested and on his information and at his instance, the recovery of a Gandasa - the weapon of offence - the shirt and trousers of the accused, were made. The gold ornaments, namely, ear-rings and two gold bangles belonging to the deceased, were recovered from the house of the accused on his information and at his instance. The prosecution, in support of its case examined fourteen witnesses. The accused did not examine any witness in his defence. The gold ornaments, namely, ear-rings and two gold bangles belonging to the deceased, were recovered from the house of the accused on his information and at his instance. The prosecution, in support of its case examined fourteen witnesses. The accused did not examine any witness in his defence. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after trial, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as stated above, but, however, he was acquitted of the offence under Section 460, I. P. C. as according to the learned trial Court the prosecution failed to prove this offence against the accused-appellant. It is against this judgment dated 31-3-87, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar, convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant for the offence under Sections 302 and 380, I. P. C. that the appellant has preferred this appeal. ( 3 ) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no eye-witnesses to the occurrence and the case of the prosecution solely rests upon the circumstantial evidence and the circumstances believed by the trial Court are not sufficient to complete the chain and to prove that it was the accused -. appellant and the appellant alone who committed the crimes and these circumstances do not conclusively prove the guilt of the accused-appellant. His further contention is that even the recoveries, which have been relied-upon by the prosecution and believed by the trial Court, do not inspire confidence as they were not made on the information and at the instance of the accused-appellant. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that it has, also, not been proved that the articles alleged to have been recovered from the accused were kept in the Malkhana of Police Station, Sri Karanpur in the same sealed conditions in which they were deposited and remained as such till they reached the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. It has, also, been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that though the blood samples of Kashmiri Lal, Subhash Chand and Dharampal were taken for determination of their blood-groups but no sample of the blood of the appellant was taken and sent for determination of his blood-group to connect him with the crime. It has further been contended that the medical evidence, also, does not support the prosecution case. It has further been contended that the medical evidence, also, does not support the prosecution case. It has, also, been contended that the independent witnesses to the recoveries have not been produced and only the relative and interested witnesses have been produced by the prosecution. The learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has supported the judgment passed by the Court below. ( 4 ) BEFORE considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, we found first like to consider the nature of the evidence produced by the prosecution. The prosecution, in support of its case has examined fourteen witnesses. PW 1 Smt. Baga Bai and PW 2 Ram Pyari are the two neighbourers of the deceased, who have not supported the prosecution case and were declared hostile and, therefore, their evidence is of no help to the prosecution. PW 3 Mani Ram is the witness who lodged the F. I. R. (Ex. P. 3 ). He is, also, a witness to the site-plan (Ex. P. 4), Site Inspection Note (Ex. P. 4-A), Panchnama Lash (Ex. P. 5), recovery of the blood-stained soil and the plain soil vide Ex. P. 6, the recoveries of the blood-stained clothes of the deceased vide Ex. P. 7 and the hair of the deceased vide Ex. P. 8. PW 4 Dr. Sukhdeo Raj is a registered Medical Practioner, whose shop is situated opposite to the house of the deceased. He has stated that the deceased used to wear gold ear-rings in her ears and gold bangles in her hands. On 10-4-86 when he was sitting in his dispensary along with Mani Ram, Baga Bai came there and informed them that Bhajno Devi is lying in her house and though the door is open but she cannot say whether she is alive or dead. Thereafter they went to Bhajnos house and peeped from the window inside the house and found Bhajno dead. Thereafter Mani Ram lodged the report, the police came there, opened the door and prepared the site plan etc. He is, also, a witness to the various recoveries made vide Ex. P. 4, Ex. P. 4-A, Ex. P. 5, Ex. P. 6, Ex. P. 7, Ex. P. 8 and Ex. P. 9. Ex. P. 8 and Ex. Thereafter Mani Ram lodged the report, the police came there, opened the door and prepared the site plan etc. He is, also, a witness to the various recoveries made vide Ex. P. 4, Ex. P. 4-A, Ex. P. 5, Ex. P. 6, Ex. P. 7, Ex. P. 8 and Ex. P. 9. Ex. P. 8 and Ex. P. 9 are the recovery memos of the blood-stained wood from the door and that of the Biri, the paper and the used match-stick vide Ex. D. 1. He has, also, stated that accused Prabhu Dayal who was the husband of deceased Bhajno, had deserted her and contracted second marriage, but no quarrel ever took place between them on account of land or any other matter. PW 5 Dr. Naresh Kumar conducted the autopsy on the deadbody of Smt. Bhajno and found seven injuries on her corpse, which were caused by sharp as well as the blunt weapons and according to him the cause of death of Bhajno was the various injuries inflicted on her person. According to the doctor, the deceased must have taken her meals one or two hours before her death. PW 6 Neki Ram was the Malkhana Incharge on 10-4-86 posted at Police Station, Sri Karanpur, with whom the incriminating articles were deposited by PW 14 Kashi Ram, S. H. O. , on 10-4-86, two incriminating articles were deposited with him by the S. H. O. on 14-4-86 and one more incriminating article was deposited with him by the S. H. O. on 18-4-86 and he sent eight sealed packets through PW 11 Ram Bharose on 22-4-86 for F. S. L. examination to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur and on 16-5-86 he sent four sealed packets for F. S. L. examination to the aforesaid Laboratory through PW 12 Banwari Lal, L. C. He has, also, stated that the seals on these articles remained intact till they remained in his custody. Neither the Malkhana Register nor a copy thereof has been produced by the prosecution and the explanation for this given by the prosecution is that the same have been called by the Special Court, Ajmer, and he has admitted that without seeing the Malkhana Register he cannot disclose the contents of those sealed packets. PW 7 Om Prakash is the Motbir witness to the recoveries of the Gandasa vide Ex. PW 7 Om Prakash is the Motbir witness to the recoveries of the Gandasa vide Ex. P. 11; the shirt and the trousers of the accused vide Ex. P. 12 on the informations and at the instance of the accused-appellant from his house. PW 8 Ranjeet Kumar was the Foot Constable, who, on the relevant day, was posted at Police Station, Sri Karanpur and who is a witness to the arrest of the accused on 14-4-86 vide Ex. P. 5. PW 9 Diwan Chand has stated that his house is situated at a distance of about 80 to 90 feet from the house of the deceased and on the relevant day he was going to buy cigarettes at about 8. 00/8. 30 p. m. and saw accused Prabhu Dayal alongwith his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person knocking at the doors of the deceased and on the next day he heard that Bhajno Devi had been murdered. He has, also, stated that A mar Singh, a Gram Sewak, was, also, passing near the house of the deceased. PW 10 Kashmiri Lal is the brother of the deceased, who has stated that the marriage of Bhajno was solemnized with accused Prabhu Dayal thirty years before and both lived together for about ten years but as his sister Bhajno could not give birth to any child, therefore, the accused contracted second marriage in village 6-F. Smt. Bhajno had filed a suit against the accused, which was later on compromised and it was agreed that the accused would get seven Bighas of land situated in village Dubli Rathan transferred in her name and she would be entitled for the income arising out of this land but would not alienate the property by way of sale, mortgage or transfer etc. The land was got transferred i n the name of Bhajno. After that Smt. Bhajno lived with them for sometime at Sri Ganganagar and later-on she purchased a house at Sri Karanpur and started living there. He used to go casually to Sri Karanpur and whenever he went there he saw Bhajno wearing two gold bangles and the earrings. She also, used to wear a ring in her finger and a gold chain on her neck. He used to go casually to Sri Karanpur and whenever he went there he saw Bhajno wearing two gold bangles and the earrings. She also, used to wear a ring in her finger and a gold chain on her neck. When he heard about the news of murder of his sister on 10-4-86, he went Sri Karanpur and found the gold chain, ring and the papers relating to the transfer of land as well as the gold bangles and ear-rings missing from the house and the deadbody. He had identified these articles before the Magistrate during the identification parade conducted by PW 13 Mr. Radhey Mohan Srivastava, the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur. PW 11 Ram Bharose was the Foot Constable posted at the relevant time at Police Station, Sri Karanpur, who took the eight sealed packets from the Malkhana for F. S. L. examination on 27-4-87 and deposited the same at the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. According to him, the packets remained in the same sealed condition from the time they were taken by him from the Malkhana of the Police Station till they were handed over at the aforesaid Laboratory. PW 12 Banwari Lal was the Literate Constable posted at Police Station. Sri Karanpur and in his presence the accused got the two ear-rings and two gold bangles recovered from his house vide Ex. P. 17, which bears his signature. Site Plan Ex. P. 8 was, also, prepared in his presence which, also, bears his signatures. PW 13 Mr. Radhey Mohan Srivastava was the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur, who conducted the identification parade of the gold ear-rings and the gold bangles and stated that PW 10 Kashmiri Lal correctly identified these articles. PW 14 Kashi Ram was the Station House Officer, Police Station, Sri Karanpur, who conducted the investigation and presented the challan. ( 5 ) THERE is no eye-witness to the occurrence and the prosecution case mainly rests on the circumstantial evidence. PW 14 Kashi Ram was the Station House Officer, Police Station, Sri Karanpur, who conducted the investigation and presented the challan. ( 5 ) THERE is no eye-witness to the occurrence and the prosecution case mainly rests on the circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence, which have been relied-upon by the prosecution and believed by the learned trial Court are : the motive with the accused to commit the murder of his wife Smt. Bhajno; the recoveries of the blood-stained Gandasa and the clothes of the accused on the information and at the instance of the accused and which were found stained with human blood of Group b and the recoveries of the gold ear-rings and the bangles. The prosecution, also, produced PW 9 Diwan Chand to prove that the accused, alongwith his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person was seen at the house of Smt. Bhajno and was knocking the doors. Now, it has to be seen : whether these circumstances, which have been relied-upon by the prosecution and believed by the learned. trial Court, were sufficient to connect the accused with the crime and whether the chain of circumstantial evidence established conclusively that it was the accused-appellant and none else who was the perpetrator of the crime and no hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused can be inferred from these circumstances ? ( 6 ) THE first circumstance, relied upon by the prosecution and believed by the learned trial Court, is the evidence of seeing the accused-appellant in the company of his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person at the house of the deceased in the night of the occurrence. PW 9 Diwan Chand has stated that he is residing at a distance of 80 to 90 feet from the house of deceased Bhajno and knows Kashmiri Lal (the brother of the accused) very well. On the fateful night, at about 8. 00/8. 30 p. m. he had gone to buy cigarettes and saw the accused-appellant, his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person knocking at the doors of the house of Bhajno Devi and on the next day he heard that Bhajno has been murdered. On the fateful night, at about 8. 00/8. 30 p. m. he had gone to buy cigarettes and saw the accused-appellant, his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person knocking at the doors of the house of Bhajno Devi and on the next day he heard that Bhajno has been murdered. This witness did not disclose to any other person regarding the presence of the accused and aforesaid two persons at the house of Smt. Bhajno and knocking the door for a considerably long time and informed the father of the deceased about this fact after five to seven days of the date of the occurrence. He did not disclose this fact to the police immediately and for the first time he was examined by the police after about one month, i. e. . , on 7-5-86. He is a relative of the complainant party. He, at the relevant time, was posted in Government Primary School, Burjwala and not at Sri Karanpur. His evidence, being a relative of the complainant party, not disclosing the fact of seeing the accused, his brother Kashmiri Lal and one more person knocking at the door of the house of the deceased, to any other person, his not being posted at Sri Karanpur and the school-hours being the Morning-hours, raise a suspicion about his presence at Karanpur at that time and his evidence does not appear to be a trustworthy. The evidence of this witness, therefore, does not inspire confidence and this circumstance does not stand proved against the accused-appellant. ( 7 ) THE next circumstance, relied-upon by the prosecution and believed by the learned trial Court is the motive. The motive, as per the prosecution case, with the accused was that he transferred seven Bighas of agricultural land to Smt. Bhajno and wanted to take it back. The learned trial Court, also, observed that the accused might be facing some financial hardship and, therefore, by committing the murder he could have got the land transferred back to him as well as acquired the gold ornaments which the deceased was wearing, The evidence, produced by the prosecution, to prove the motive is insufficient. The accused and Smt. Bhajno were living separately for last nearly twenty years and the land was transferred by the appellant in favour of his deserted wife Smt. Bhajno. The accused and Smt. Bhajno were living separately for last nearly twenty years and the land was transferred by the appellant in favour of his deserted wife Smt. Bhajno. For the last twenty years they were leaving separately and the accused was living with his family and it has, also, come in the evidence that the accused did not use to go to the deceased and it was Kashmiri Lal (the brother of the accused) who used to come to her house. PW 4 Dr. Sukhdeo Raj has, also admitted that he never saw any quarrel between the accused and the deceased. PW 10 Kashmiri Lal (the brother of the deceased), in his earlier statement, has stated that the accused never used to come to Smt. Bhajno, though during the trial he has changed his version and when confronted With his earlier statement, he stated that he never stated so before the police. But from the evidence, produced by the prosecution, it has been established that the deceased and the accused separated themselves from each other about twenty years before the date of the incident and the accused transferred seven Bighas of the land in favour of the deceased to make the two ends meet. Therefore, this cannot be said to be a motive with the accused to commit the murder of his wife or to commit the theft of her ornaments. There was no motive with the accused-appellant to commit the murder of Smt. Bhajno and,. therefore, the learned trial Court was not justified in believing the alleged motive with the accused-appellant to commit the murder of his wife Smt. Bhajno. This circumstance, relied-upon by the prosecution and believed by the trial Court, does not stand proved from the evidence produced by the prosecution. ( 8 ) THE next circumstance, relied-upon by the. prosecution and believed by the learned trial Court, is the recoveries of the blood-stained Gandasa, the shirt and the trousers of the accused on the informations and at the instance of the accused-appellant. The accused gave information Ex. P. 20 regarding the Gandasa by which the murder was committed and the shirt and the trousers of the accused which he was wearing at the time of the incident. The accused gave information Ex. P. 20 regarding the Gandasa by which the murder was committed and the shirt and the trousers of the accused which he was wearing at the time of the incident. In pursuance to this information given by the accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the appellant got the Gandasa recovered from the court-yard concealed under the firewood (Banchhatti) and his own clothes, i. e. , the shirt and the trousers, in the strings of the foot-side of the cot. Both the Gandasa as well as the clothes of the accused-appellant, i. e. , the shirt and the trousers, were found stained with blood. After the chemical examination in the Laboratory, the clothes (shirt and trousers) as well as the Gandasa were found stained with human blood of Group b, which was the blood group of the deceased. The recoveries were made from the house of the accused and on his information and at his instance. They were made in the presence of two witnesses, viz. , PW 7 Om Prakash and Karnail Singh. Though Karnail Singh has not been produced in evidence but the evidence of PW 7 Om Prakash cannot be disbelieved merely on the ground that he is a witness related to the complainant party, when his evidence otherwise inspires confidence. A lengthy cross-examination has been conducted with this witness but nothing could be elicited to make his testimony unreliable. The recoveries of the Gandasa and the clothes (shirt and trousers) of the accused on the information and at the instance of the accused appellant, therefore, stand proved from the evidence produced by the prosecution. ( 9 ) THE other circumstance, which has been relied upon by the prosecution and believed by the learned trial Court is the recovery of the ornaments of the deceased, namely, a pair of gold ear-rings and two gold bangles. These ornaments were recovered from the house of the accused-appellant in an iron box. The recovery was made vide Ex. P. 17 in the presence of PW 12 Banwari Lal L. C. and Karnail Singh - an independent witness. The information regarding the recovery of these ornaments was given by the appellant under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act vide Ex. P. 21. The recovery was made vide Ex. P. 17 in the presence of PW 12 Banwari Lal L. C. and Karnail Singh - an independent witness. The information regarding the recovery of these ornaments was given by the appellant under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act vide Ex. P. 21. PW 12 Banwari Lal has specifically stated that the recoveries of these ornaments were made in his presence and the accused himself pointed out the iron box and later on took-out the ornaments from it which were concealed beneath the clothes. It has, also, come in the evidence that deceased Smt. Bhajno used to wear these ornaments prior to her death and the witnesses have seen these ornaments worn by her on the previous night. The recoveries of these ornaments from the accused, therefore, stand established. ( 10 ) THE recoveries have been challenged by the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that the independent witness has been produced, though they were present, and only the interested and relative witnesses have been produced. So far as the recovery of the Gandasa and the clothes of the accused are concerned, though they were recovered from the house of the accused but Om Prakash - a relative of the complainant party - was called while the other persons, whose houses are situated near the house of the accused, were not called and in the case of recoveries of the ornaments, P. W. 12 Banwari Lal L. C. has been produced and Karnail Singh, who was the other. independent witness of the recoveries of the ornaments, has not been produced by the prosecution. The site-plan shows that the houses of other persons are situated near the house of the appellant but whether at the relevant time when the police party reached the house of the accused for effecting the recoveries the other persons were available or not, is not shown. PW 7 Om Prakash was taken by the police party and the other witness Karnail Singh was available and so far as the recoveries of the ornaments are concerned, they were, also, made in the presence of Karnail Singh and PW 12 Banwari Lal and PW 12 Banwari Lal bas been produced to prove the recoveries. Merely being the police personnel or a relative to the complainant party, the evidence of such witnesses cannot be discarded provided they inspire confidence. Merely being the police personnel or a relative to the complainant party, the evidence of such witnesses cannot be discarded provided they inspire confidence. After going through the statements of PW 7 Om Prakash and PW 12 Banwari Lal, we are of the opinion that their evidence inspire confidence and they are not telling lie so far as the recoveries are concerned. The recoveries of the gold ornaments from the accused-appellant, therefore, also, stands proved. ( 11 ) THE next contention, raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the link evidence is missing in the present case. The person, who got the forwarding letter issued from the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar, has not been produced and as per the letter Ex. P. 22 the articles were sent from the Office of the Superintendent of Police on 21-4-86 while as per PW 6 Neki Ram - the Malkhana In charge - and PW 11 Ram Bharose, the articles were taken from the Malkhana for F. S. L. examination to Jaipur on 22-4-86. Of course, the forwarding letter issued by the S. P. Office bears the date 21-4-86 and the articles reached at the aforesaid Laboratory on 23-4-86. The Malkhana Register or the copy thereof was not available at the Police Station as the same was sent to Ajmer in connection with some criminal case and, therefore this discrepancy occurred, but merely because different dates have been given, will not make the prosecution case unreliable on this point alone when there is no tampering with the seals and the articles reached the Laboratory in the same sealed condition. The non-production of the Official of the S. P. Office who got the forwarding letter prepared and signed, also, does not affect the prosecution case. The link evidence is, therefore, complete, PW 14 Kashi Ram, the investigating officer, has specifically stated that he recovered the articles, got them sealed and deposited the same in the same sealed condition in the Malkhana of the Police Station and PW 6 Neki Ram - the Malkhana In charge - has stated that the articles were deposited with him by PW I4 Kashi Ram on 10-4-86, 14-4-86 and 18-4-86 and they remained in the same sealed conditions till he gave the articles to PW 11 Ram Bharose for taking them to the Laboratory for F. S. L. examination. ( 12 ) THE next contention, raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the investigating officer took the blood samples of Kashmiri Lal, Subhash Chand and Dharampal but did not take the blood sample of the appellant and it is just possible that the blood-group of the appellant is, also of B-Group and, therefore, unless it is proved that the appellants blood group is not of B-Group, the blood on the clothes will not be of any assistance to the prosecution. It is true that the blood samples of Kashmiri Lal, Subhash Chand and Dharampal were taken and sent for determination of the Blood Group and the report to this effect is Ex. P. 23. It would have been proper for the investigating officer to have taken the blood sample of the accused-appellant, also, to negative any other hypothesis, but merely because the blood-sample of the accused-appellant was not taken, will not affect the prosecution case, particularly in the circumstances when the group of blood on various articles recovered was of B-Group and that was the blood group of the deceased and the same blood-group was found on the Gandasa as well as the clothes of the accused which were recovered on his information and at his instance from his house. ( 13 ) NOW, it has to be seen : whether these recoveries are sufficient to connect the accused with the crime and whether only one hypothesis can be drawn from these recoveries that it was the accused and the accused alone who was the perpetrator of the crime. The Gandasa, which has been recovered on the information and at the instance of the accused-appellant from his house was found smeared with human blood of B-Group. The blood group of deceased Bhajno was, also, of B-Group. The clothes of the accused were, also stained with the same group of blood, i. e. , Group-B, which was the blood group of the deceased. The accused was arrested after four days of the occurrence and it was not possible after these four days that the blood of the deceased could have been found on the clothes of the accused unless the stains of blood were got by him at the time of death of the deceased. The accused was arrested after four days of the occurrence and it was not possible after these four days that the blood of the deceased could have been found on the clothes of the accused unless the stains of blood were got by him at the time of death of the deceased. The recoveries of the ornaments, which the deceased were wearing on the previous night of the incident, from the possession of the accused were made on his information and at his instance. All these circumstances point towards the guilt of the accused-appellant. ( 14 ) THE next contention, raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the accused was arrested on 11-4-86 while his arrest has been shown on 14-4-86. It is true that some of the witnesses have seen the accused present in the Police Station along with his brother Kashmiri Lal on 11-4-86, 12-4-86 and 13-4-86 but merely because the accused was present in the police station as he was suspected by the investigating officer, he cannot be said to have been arrested. The investigating officer, in his statement, has specifically stated that he called the accused in the. police station on 11-4-86 and after enquiry and interrogation allowed him to go. Thereafter he received some information from some motbir that the accused is the perpetrator of the crime and was, also, informed by Kashmiri Lal - the brother of the accused- that the accused made extra-judicial confession before him and he arrested the accused on 14-4-86 when he became sure that the accused was the perpetrator of the crime. Merely because the accused was called at the police station for interrogation during the investigation, it cannot be said that he was arrested on 11-4-86. The contention, raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, is, therefore, devoid of any force. ( 15 ) ALL the aforesaid circumstances conclusively prove that it was the accused-appellant who was the perpetrator of the crimes and prove beyond reasonable manner of doubt that the murder of Smt. Bhajno was committed by the accused-appellant. the learned trial Court was, therefore, justified in convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 380, I. P. C. The judgment, passed by the learned trial Court does not require any interference. the learned trial Court was, therefore, justified in convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 380, I. P. C. The judgment, passed by the learned trial Court does not require any interference. ( 16 ) IN the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is here by dismissed. Appeal dismissed.