JUDGMENT 1. - The sole appellant, Sharvan Singh, was tried before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar in Sessions Case No. 21/93 for committing murder of one Tara Chand son of Jaisa Ram, age 25 years in village Disnaoo. He was convicted under Section 302 and 450 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. Under Section 450 Indian Penal Code he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. As per the prosecution case, at 3.30 a.m. in the night intervening 5th and 6th November, 1992, deceased Tara Chand was assaulted by the appellant with an axe when he was sleeping in a room of his house in village Disnaoo. He succumbed on the spot to the injuries sustained by him. A written report of the incident (Ex.P 12) was promptly made at 5.30 a.m. in the following morning at Police Station. Laxmangarh by PW. 8 Jaisa Ram, who was an eye - witness of the occurrence. On this report, crime IV 211/91 was registered under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and investigation commenced. 3. During investigation Inquest report of the dead body (Ex.P 1) was prepared on 6.11.92 and thereafter: the dead body was made over for post-mortem examination. Site-plan (Ex.P 2) of the scene of occurrence was also prepared on 6.11.92. The Investigating Officer (for short, the I.O.) collected control cement chips and blood stained cement chips from the place of occurrence vide seizure memos Ex.P 4 and Ex.P 5 respectively. Blood stained clothes of the deceased Tara Chand were seized vide memo Ex.P 5 and blood stained `Gudri' was seized vide memo Ex.P 6 on the same day. The autopsy on the dead body was conducted by a Medical Board consisting of PW 6 Dr. PR Joshi and Dr. J.R Bhariya. The following injuries were found on the body of the deceased vide post-mortem report Ex.P 9:- 1. Incised wound 11/2" X 1 X 3/4" left wrist region extensor surface, obliquely placed, clotted blood present. 2. The autopsy on the dead body was conducted by a Medical Board consisting of PW 6 Dr. PR Joshi and Dr. J.R Bhariya. The following injuries were found on the body of the deceased vide post-mortem report Ex.P 9:- 1. Incised wound 11/2" X 1 X 3/4" left wrist region extensor surface, obliquely placed, clotted blood present. 2. Incised wound 2" X 1" X 1/2" left side neck above 1/2" above sternoclayicular joint, clotted blood present. 3. Incised wound 11/2" X 1/2" X 11/2" at middle portion of neck, trachea cut and sternocleidomastoid muscle cut with carotid vessel cut along with fracture of thyroid and cricoid bone, clotted blood present. 4. Incised wound 2-/12" X 1" X bone deep Lt. side of face with fracture of body of mavdible, clotted blood present. 5. Incised wound 23/4" X 1/2" X 11/4" deep obliquely placed, nasal bone cut with fracture of maxillary bone on Rt. side of face, clotted blood present. 6. Incised wound 1" X 1/2" X 1/2" neck posteriorly in vertical direction. 7. Contusion 1" X 1/4" left side forehead, simple, blunt. 8. Incised wound 1" X 1/2" X 1/4" left side transversely placed pre-auricular area. 9. Incised wound 1" X 1/2" X 1/4" left parietal region scalp. In opinion of the Doctors, injuries No. 1, 2. 3, 4, 5 and 6 were caused by sharp edged weapon. PW. 6 Dr. PP Joshi also testified that cause of death was multiple injuries of neck and face causing excessive haemorrhage and shock. The injuries were anti-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 4. The appellant was arrested on 26.11.92 vide arrest memo Ex.P 11. Thereafter, on his information under Section 27 of the evidence Act (Ex.P 16), an axe was recovered vide recovery memo Ex.P 7. The cement chips, `gudri' `Kulhari' and the clothes of the deceased were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (F.S.L.) and vide report Ex.P 17 all the articles, except control cement chips, were found to be stained with human blood. However, their blood group could not be determined for the reason `dis-integrated. After usual investigation, the police submitted a charge- sheet in the Court of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, who committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge for trial, from where it was made over to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar. 5. However, their blood group could not be determined for the reason `dis-integrated. After usual investigation, the police submitted a charge- sheet in the Court of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, who committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge for trial, from where it was made over to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar. 5. In trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses for seeking appellant's conviction. The plea of the appellant, in his statement under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code was that of total denial. No witness was examined in defence. The learned trial court after completion of the trial, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid. 6. Before dealing with the contentions urged by Shri Biri Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, we would like to state the nature of evidence led by prosecution and relied upon by the trial court, which is thus:- (a) Depositions, made by the so-called eyewitnesses namely, PW 5 Smt. Vimla, `Bhabi' of the deceased; PW 8 Jaisa Ram, father of the deceased and PW. 12 Pooran Mai, brother of the deceased. (b) Deposition of PW 4 - Bajrang Lal about motive of the incident. (c) Deposition of PW 9-Surja Ram, as corroborative piece of evidence, who saw the accused-appellant running from the house of the deceased with a `Kulhari' in his hand. (d) Other corroborative evidence in the shape of First Information Report (for short F.I.R.) medical evidence and recovery of the weapon of offence from possession of the appellant. 7. Shri Biri Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, assailing conviction of the appellant, strenuously contended that the entire prosecution case was sought to be proved by the partisan evidence, which ought not to have been accepted in the case. Counsel contended that evidence of PWs. Vimla Devi, Jaisa Ram and Pooran Mai, the so called eye-witnesses of the incident, should not be relied and acted upon as they were highly interested witnesses to depose in favour of the prosecution. Shri Biri Singh further contended that the deceased might have been assaulted by an un-identified assailant or assailants at early hours of the night and at that time there was no eye-witness of the incident, but subsequently, close relatives of the deceased have been falsely made as eye- witnesses of the occurrence. Shri Biri Singh further contended that the deceased might have been assaulted by an un-identified assailant or assailants at early hours of the night and at that time there was no eye-witness of the incident, but subsequently, close relatives of the deceased have been falsely made as eye- witnesses of the occurrence. In support of this, he contended that in stomach of the deceased semi-digested food material was found present at the time of his death and the villagers ordinarily take their food at or about sun set, as such, the deceased ought to have met his death around 10 p.m. For this reliance was placed on the decisions in Ram Narain Singh v. State of Punjab, (1975) SCC (Cri.)] 571 and Shambhoo Missir and another v. State of Bihar, (1990) 4 SCC p. 17 . Learned counsel then contended that the appellant was having no motive to kill the deceased Tara Chand and the evidence of eye-witness was totally inconsistent with the medical evidence and this is a most fundamental defect in the prosecution case to discredit the entire case. According to the learned counsel, the nature of injuries, sustained by the deceased, show that he sustained three types of injuries and that the weapon of offence i.e. `Kulhari' was not shown to the Doctor to obtain his opinion whether all the injuries on the deceased could be with the said weapon. 8. We have given our careful and deep consideration to the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. We also minutely examined the entire record and judgment under challenge in the appeal in light of the submissions. In our opinion none of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant has any substance and the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code is proved against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 9. To start with the eye-witnesses, we may observe that evidence of close relatives cannot be suspected or discarded simply on the ground of their relationship. The evidence of a relative witnesses has to be examined in the facts and circumstances of a particular case. For example, if the murder takes place in a house in dead hour of the night, the relatives residing in that house can be the only witnesses to see the occurrence. The evidence of a relative witnesses has to be examined in the facts and circumstances of a particular case. For example, if the murder takes place in a house in dead hour of the night, the relatives residing in that house can be the only witnesses to see the occurrence. So, there cannot be a hard and fast rule to suspect the evidence of a close relative and to discard his evidence merely on the ground of relationship. In the instant case, undisputedly the occurrence took place in the house where the deceased and the eye-witnesses were residing. The occurrence took place at 3.30 a.m. in the night intervening 5th and 6th November, 1992. In such a situation, close relatives of the deceased who resided with him are the natural witnesses and the only witnesses to see the occurrence. If their evidence is found to be reliable and trust-worthy, the same cannot be discarded on the ground of their being close relative of the deceased. There is nothing on record to show that the alleged eye-witnesses had any animus or malice with the accused so as to falsely implicate him. Ordinarily, a close relative is the last person to screen real culprit and falsely implicate an innocent person. A similar argument to suspect the evidence of a close relative was rejected by the Apex Court of the country in Mst. Dalbir Kaur v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 472 and it was observed as under:- "More-over, a close relative who is a very natural witness cannot be regarded as an interested witness. The term "interested" postulates that the person concerned must have some direct interest in seeing that the accused person is some how or the other convicted either because he had some animus with the accused or for some other reasons. Such is not the case here." The same principle is reiterated in Kartik Malhar v. State of Bihar, 1995 Cr.L.R (SC) 765 and Pooran Singh v. State of Punjab, 1996 Cr.L.R. (SC) p. 12 . Still, as an abundant precaution, we have scrutinised the evidence of the aforesaid eye-witnesses carefully keeping in view their close relation with the deceased. Such is not the case here." The same principle is reiterated in Kartik Malhar v. State of Bihar, 1995 Cr.L.R (SC) 765 and Pooran Singh v. State of Punjab, 1996 Cr.L.R. (SC) p. 12 . Still, as an abundant precaution, we have scrutinised the evidence of the aforesaid eye-witnesses carefully keeping in view their close relation with the deceased. PW 8 Jaisa Ram, father of the deceased, had deposed that in the night of occurrence, he was sleeping in the `Baithak' of the house and deceased Tara Chand was sleeping in a room which is infront of 'Baithak'. The said room and `Baithak' are show by the figures 1 ' and `9' in site-plan of the place of incident and they are at a close distance from each other abetting on the chowk of the house. The room, where the deceased was sleeping, was not having doors on its gate and window. The witness, Jaisa Ram has stated that at about 3.30 in the night, he got-up hearing the noise and when he came near the window of the room, he saw accused appellant, assaulting his son Tara Chand with an axe and on his `Lalkara' as to who was he, the appellant ran away with the axe According to him, he and his son tried to catch hold of him. But he weilded the axe towards them and ran away after jumping over the 'dole' of the house which was 4' high. In the meantime, Surja Godara came there. The witness also stated that Tara Chand died on the spot due to the injuries sustained by him, which were on his neck, face, nose, etc. Blood was spread on the floor and its sprinkles fell on the wall of the room. That, the accused was wearing a `Baniyan' and `Chaddi' which got smeared with blood. He, then, went to the Police Station and gave a written report Ex.P 12 which was written by Mahendra Singh. He also narrated about the investigation of the case which was made in his presence by the I.O. In cross, the witness admitted, the accused to be his brother in community. That he went to the police Station in a Jeep alongwith three persons. Similar is the statement of PW 12-Pooran Mai, brother of the deceased and his wife Smt. Vimla-PW. 5. That he went to the police Station in a Jeep alongwith three persons. Similar is the statement of PW 12-Pooran Mai, brother of the deceased and his wife Smt. Vimla-PW. 5. These witnesses were cross-examined at length, but the learned counsel for the appellant could not point out any serious infirmity or abnormality in their statement so as to discredit or suspect their evidence. No animosity or malice or other reason has been suggested to them in their cross-examination for falsely implicating the appellant and to screen the real culprit. From their evidence, it is borne out that electric bulbs were burning out-side the room where the deceased was sleeping. In the site-plan (Ex.P 2), the fact of burning electric bulbs is also mentioned. After deeply scanning the evidence of these witnesses, we are satisfied that their evidence is trust-worthy being straight foreword, firm and consistent. We are of the opinion that the learned trial Court committed no error in placing reliance on their testimony. 10. Another important aspect of the case is that report of the incident was made with promptitude at 5.30 a.m. i.e. within two hours of the incident at the police station, which was at a distance of 12 kms. from the place of incident. The fact that report of the incident was made without any loss of time and the complainant was having no enmity to falsely implicate the appellant, we are convinced that the disclosure made in the report are true and un-adulterated account of the incident. 11. A good deal of arguments were made by the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to presence of semi-digested food material in stomach of the deceased, as disclosed in post-mortem report and on the basis of this, learned counsel wanted us to disbelieve the testimony of eye-witnesses; According to counsel, the deceased must have died in early hours of night and the incident did not take place at 3.30 a.m. as narrated by the witnesses. To substantiate this argument, learned counsel contended that villagers take their food at about Sun set and it could be presumed that the deceased must have taken his food near about 7 p.m. on the day of occurrence and presence of semi- digested food showed that the occurrence ought to have taken place before 12 in the night. To substantiate this argument, learned counsel contended that villagers take their food at about Sun set and it could be presumed that the deceased must have taken his food near about 7 p.m. on the day of occurrence and presence of semi- digested food showed that the occurrence ought to have taken place before 12 in the night. This argument may appear to be attractive at the first instance but, if judged on the basis of material on record it is found without any substance. Firstly, there is no evidence on record to show that food was taken by the deceased at 7 p.m. or so and in absence of this evidence, it is difficult to presume that he must have taken his food at 7 p.m. Then, there is no evidence to show the type of food consumed by him. Dr. PR Joshi, who conducted post-mortem of the dead body, states in cross-examination that post-mortem of the dead body was performed at 12.30 in the day and death had occurred 3 to 24 hours prior to the post-mortem examination. No cross-examination was directed to the Doctor to bring any material on record to establish that occurrence did not take place at 3.30 a.m. We are of the opinion, that in absence of necessary material on record about the time the deceased had taken his food, no such inference can be drawn that he must have taken his food at or about 7 p.m. By mere presence of some semi-digesteo food in stomach of the deceased no inference can be drawn that the incident did not occur at 3.30 a.m. in night, in Pooran Singh v. State of Punjab (supra), a similar argument was rejected by the Supreme Court in the following terms:- "Mr. R.C. Kohli, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that prosecution version that the occurrence took place at about 4.00 p.m. has been belied by the medical evidence. Learned counsel submitted that from the evidence of Dr. V.K. Khurana it transpires that stomach of the deceased contained partially digested food and since the doctor had admitted in his cross-examination that food leaves the stomach after about six hours, the occurrence, could not have taken place at 4.00 a.m. but much earlier. We cannot agree. Learned counsel submitted that from the evidence of Dr. V.K. Khurana it transpires that stomach of the deceased contained partially digested food and since the doctor had admitted in his cross-examination that food leaves the stomach after about six hours, the occurrence, could not have taken place at 4.00 a.m. but much earlier. We cannot agree. Apart from the fact that there is no evidence on the record to show as to what was the type of food which was consumed by the deceased, which necessarily is a factor relevant to determine the time within which it would be digested besides the digestive system of an individual. Dr. Khurana himself opined "that the stomach contained small quantity of partially digested food" and in the cross-examination stated that "the food would leave the stomach after about six hours". The presence of "small quantity of partially digested food" cannot lead to any inference that the occurrence could not have been taken place at about 4.00 a.m. Balvinder Singh -PW. 4, stated during his cross-examination that normally they take dinner at about 8.00 or 9.00 p.m. Thus, even if it be assumed that the deceased took his food at about 9 p.m., the presence of a small quantity of partially digested food therefore, does not militate against the occurrence having taken place at about 4.00 a.m." The decisions in Ram Narain's case aad Shambhu Nisar's case (supra) are based on facts of their case which are not similar to that of the presence case Consequently, this argument also does not help the appellant. 12. Then, there is evidence of PW. 9 Surja Ram to have seen the accused with an axe running from the house of the complainant immediately after the incident. The statement of this witness has not been shattered in any manner in cross-examination. 13. The statement of PW 4-Bajrang Lal proves the motive of the incident. Ai the relevant time the appellant was an employee of this witness as a driver on his Tractor and he has testified that he was in the village on the day of incident and in the night there was some oral altercation between the deceased Tara Chand and the appellant and the deceased had given slaps to the appellant. Ai the relevant time the appellant was an employee of this witness as a driver on his Tractor and he has testified that he was in the village on the day of incident and in the night there was some oral altercation between the deceased Tara Chand and the appellant and the deceased had given slaps to the appellant. He also stated that in the night he slept in the house of the appellant in village Disnao and the appellant did not come to his house to sleep in the night. 14. Apart from the evidence of PW 5, PW 8 and PW 12, the eye-witnesses and the corroborative evidence of PW 9 and PW 4, we find from the record that on the basis of the disclosure made by the appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the weapon of offence, namely `Kulhari' (axe) was taken in possession vide recovery memo Ex.P 7. According to the report of the Serologist, the blood stains on the `Kulhari' were of human origin. The recovery of blood stained axe on the disclosure of the appellant also provides enough corroboration to the prosecution evidence against the appellant. 15. The next contention of Mr. Biri Singh was that prosecution case should be discarded in absence of specific expert evidence that the injuries sustained by the deceased could be caused by the weapon of offence, i.e. the axe recovered in the case during investigation. According to him, the axe was not shown to the Doctor to obtain his opinion whether ali or any of the injuries could be caused by the weapon. Mr. Biri Singh contended that the nature of the injuries sustained by the deceased incident that three different weapons were used for causing the injuries. Learned counsel placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Kertarey and other v. The State of U.P., (1975) SCC (Criminal) 803 . On a close examination of this aspect of the matter we find that the contention raised by Mr. Biri Singh does not rest on sound premises and must be rejected. The factum of recovery of axe on disclosure statement of the appellant stands proved beyond doubt from the evidence of the I.O. PW 13 -Jhinko Ram and Motbir witnesses, PW 2-Ramesh Kumar and PW 3-Ram Singh. Biri Singh does not rest on sound premises and must be rejected. The factum of recovery of axe on disclosure statement of the appellant stands proved beyond doubt from the evidence of the I.O. PW 13 -Jhinko Ram and Motbir witnesses, PW 2-Ramesh Kumar and PW 3-Ram Singh. From the F.S.L. report (Ex.R17) it also stands proved that the axe was stained with human blood. The axe could not be shown to the Doctor as it was sent to F.S.L. for examination. Still, Dr. PR Joshi, who conducted post-mortem of the deceased, has categorically stated that the incised wounds sustained by the deceased could be caused by an axe and two contusions could be also caused from reverse side of the axe. Thus/ the present case is not of that type where medical evidence is in direct conflict with the prosecution evidence so as to make the prosecution case doubtful. 16. The resultant effect of the above discussion is that the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 450 Indian Penal Code is well founded. However, we are of the opinion that no separate sentence required to be passed for the offence under Section 450 Indian Penal Code after sentencing the appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. With the above modification. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentence imposed for the same by the trial Court are maintained. The appeal is decided accordingly. *******