JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 04/02/2008 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Bhanswara in Sessions Trial No. 12/2007, whereby the accused-appellant is convicted under Sections 302, 307, 323 and 324 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 with a fine of Rs. 15,000/- in default to deposit the fine, further to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and under Section 307 of IPC for seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default to deposit fine, further to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and under Section 324 for one years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to deposit fine, further to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment and under Section 323 for six month rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to deposit fine, further to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. 2. The factual aspect relating to lodging of the F.I.R discloses that complainant Manilal lodged Ex. 2,000/- in default to deposit fine, further to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment and under Section 323 for six month rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to deposit fine, further to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. 2. The factual aspect relating to lodging of the F.I.R discloses that complainant Manilal lodged Ex. P.10 F.I.R stating therein :- ^^bRryk tckuh ceqdke PHC [kesjk fnukad 18-01-2007 le; 12-30 PM le; izkFkhZ Jh ef.kyky iq= vej th mez 35 o"kZ tkfr cqudj fuoklh [kesjk Fkkuk [knsjk is’kk gksVy us ceqdke PHC [kesjk lwpuk nh fd esjs nks yM+ds ih;w"k mez 8 o”kZ o vafdr mez 6 o”kZ tks [kesjk esa izkbosV Ldwy esa i<+rs gSaA vkt lqcg Ldwy x;s FksA vkt djhc 12-20 PM ij Jh ‘kkarhyky S/o Mw¡xj th cqudj fuoklh [kesjk us esjs gkWVy ij vkdj crk;k fd rqEgkjs nksuksa cPps ih;w”k o vafdr dks Jh jkts’k S/o ‘kadj yky cqudj fuoklh [kesjk us Ldwy ls ykdj Jh fot;jke S/o nsoh yky cqudj fuoklh [kesjk ds edku ds vkxs jksM+ ij djhc 12%00 PM ij nksuksa cPpksa dks dqYgkM+h ls tku ls ekjus dh uh;r ls flj is okj dj fxjk fn;s gSaA nksuksa cPpksa dks ekSds ls ygqyqgku voLFkk esa [kesjk vLirky yk;s gSaA mDr lwpuk ij eSa rFkk esjh ifRu lqfurk nksuksa gksVy ls jokuk gks [kesjk vLirky igq¡ps tgk¡ ij vLirky esa esjs nksuksa cPpksa ds flj esa pksVs vkus ls ygqyqgku voLFkk esa csgks’k gSA ih;w”k ds flj is dqYgkM+h ds 4&5 ?kko gS rFkk vafdr ds Hkh flj is dqYgkM+h ds 4&5 ?kko gSa o [kwu fudy jgs gSaA jkts’k o esjs iwoZ esa djhc lky Hkj igys >xM+k gqvk FkkA bl ckr dh nq’euh ysdj jkts’k us esjs nksuksa cPpksa dks tku ls ekjus dh fu;r ls Ldwy ls ykdj dqYgkM+h ls flj ij okj dj pksVs igq¡pkbZ gSA jkts’k ekSds ls Hkkx x;k gSA bRryk djrk gw¡A dkuwuh dk;Zokgh djkosaA esjs cPpksa dks dqYgkM+h ls jkts’k }kjk ekjrs gq, ‘kkafryky o Jh fot;jke dh vkSjr us ns[kk gSA Sd/- ef.kyky^^ It was registered on 18/01/2007 under Sections 307, 324 and 323 IPC and charge-sheet relating thereto was submitted under Sections 302, 307, 323 and 324 of IPC. After committal of the case, trial was conducted by the trial Court, which concluded with the afore-discussed verdict. 3. Heard submissions of rival side. After committal of the case, trial was conducted by the trial Court, which concluded with the afore-discussed verdict. 3. Heard submissions of rival side. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has contended that the findings of the trial Court are perverse and proper appreciation of evidence has not been done, there are vital contradictions in the prosecution story and ignoring all the infirmities, learned trial Court has passed impugned verdict erroneously, which is liable to be set aside and the accused-appellant is entitled to be acquitted after allowing the appeal. Learned public prosecutor has vehemently opposed the argument advanced on behalf of defence and has submitted that there is no infirmity in the findings of the trial Court, accused-appellant was a kith and kin of the complainant side, who was nurturing animosity and acted under the same, so after getting leave of both the kids under some false pretext from the school, accused committed heinous crime by fatally injuring both tender kids aging eight and six years and one of the tender child Piyush succumbed to his injuries and another injured Ankit has narrated entire veracity and happenings against the involvement of the accused-appellant, hence, there is no error in the findings of learned trial Court, so the impugned judgment is upright and deserves to be confirmed. 4. Examined entire record and evidence. PW.9 Ankit, a nine year old tender aged boy, who also felt victim to brutal assault, has narrated entire unfortunate happening and has said that on the day of occurrence, he and his brother Piyush were in their school, Rajesh came there to call them with a say that their mother was indisposed and was taken away to Banswara and he said that kids were summoned there, so both the brothers left the school with Rajesh and were coming on foot with Rajesh, when they arrived near the house of Kanta, Rajesh gave axe blows upon the body of his brother Piyush and also hit him with Kulhari, his head, back, shoulder, thighs and posterior part of the body sustained injuries. 5. 5. It is pertinent that during the course of examination, these injuries have been noticed and further been observed in the testimony by the trial court, he has further said that accused Rajesh was his uncle and he is unaware as to which part of the body of Piyush was inflicted upon, he has also said that when "Rajesh uncle" came to school, a dagger was with him, when they were being brought back from the school, Rajesh ousted a concealed axe from near of the temple. 6. An innocent interrogatory is also replied by this small kid by saying, Rajesh was asked by him regarding the said Kulhari, then Rajesh replied that the same was being carried over to the home premises. He has again said that he had also seen Rajesh bringing out the said axe, why this witness and his brother were assaulted upon with Kulhari, is not known to him, he has further said that he often experienced headache because of the injury and knows Rajesh-uncle, who is present in the Court, in cross-examination, this child witness has again reiterated that Rajesh had been to their school to take them and had said that his mother developed some unpleasant, he has also said that Rajesh had kept "Kulhari" concealed in front of temple under the pile of bricks. A vital has also been said by this child witness that Kanta had witnessed some of inflictions of Kulhari from her house, nothing abnormal or causing infirmity has emerged or erupted in the cross of this witness and this injured child witness has uttered everything in a crystal and candid way. 7. PW.10 Smt. Kanta an eye-witness has also corroborated this aspect of the incident in her evidence and she has said that she knows Rajesh, around seven months back, she was washing cloths in the posterior part of her house, she heard a scream from outside and went out to see and found that Rajesh was blowing Kulhari upon Ankit and Piyush. On her cry, Indra and Shantilal came, observing them Rajesh fled away, both the kids were taken to Banswara Hospital by we people and further Ankit and Piyush were shifted to Udaipur Hospital, where Piyush died because of injuries, he was aging six to seven years. On her cry, Indra and Shantilal came, observing them Rajesh fled away, both the kids were taken to Banswara Hospital by we people and further Ankit and Piyush were shifted to Udaipur Hospital, where Piyush died because of injuries, he was aging six to seven years. This witness has also said that both the kids were brought from the school and were injured with Kulhari blows, in his cross-examination, she has also said that the incident had taken place in front of her house and has again said that Rajesh was beating and injuring them. She has also said that both the complainant and accused side were her relatives. While replying an interrogatory, she has also said that she had implored Rajesh with folded hands asking not to injure and thrash the kids. She has also said that she had heard cry of kids Piyush and had seen Rajesh inflicting injuries upon Ankit and Piyush. 8. PW.3 Smt. Indira is also an eye witness of the incident and she has said that the incident belongs to about three months back of about 11 to 12 noon, she has further said that she was engaged in serving at the house of Shankar Panchal and was washing cloths, neighbour Kanta Behan cried, so she rushed outside and observed Rajesh, inflicting injuries with kulhari upon Ankit and Piyush, they cried and on their cry, Rajesh fled away, kids were taken to hospital by a jeep, in cross-examination, she has again reiterated this aspect that she had witnessed accused fleeing away after inflicting injuries and had seen accused injuring Piyush with Kulhari, she had rushed there and had cried. 9. PW.8 Shantilal has said that on 18/01/2007 at about 12 noon, he was on his shop, he heard sound of Kanta and rushed to the spot and found two kids lying there with injuries of kulhari. Kanta informed him that Rajesh had inflicted injuries upon both the kids with kulhari, he has also said that he found Rajesh fleeing away before him with kulhari. He has also said that he had been to police station for informing the same. He has further ratified Ex. P.7, 8 and 9 and has said that vide Ex. P.10 kulhari was recovered and vide Ex. He has also said that he had been to police station for informing the same. He has further ratified Ex. P.7, 8 and 9 and has said that vide Ex. P.10 kulhari was recovered and vide Ex. P.11 Rajesh was arrested, which bears his signatures, he has also said that he had seen school bags of the kids, lying on the road there. PW.1 Smt. Saroj Principal of Nutan Bharat Vidhya Mandir has said that she knows Piyush and Ankit, on 18/01/2007 both kids attended school and about 11.50 A.M. accused Rajesh, who is present in the Court, came and informed that Ankit and Piyush were summoned by their mother. She has again said that she inquired the reason of calling the kids, Rajesh apprised that their Mummy was going out, so they were summoned. She has also said that she inquired both the kids, relationship with Rajesh and she was told by the kids that he (Rajesh) was their uncle, so she permitted both the kids to go alongwith Rajesh and after lapse of half an hour, she heard that both Ankit and Piyush were subjected to kulhari blows by Rajesh and kids were taken to the hospital. 10. She has also said that she had brought attendance record of both the kids relating to 18/01/2007, and has said, actual register is Ex. P.1 and at serial No. 6, attendance of Piyush is entered, its copy is Ex. P1A and the original record of attendance of Ankit is Ex. P.2, which bears his attendance at column No. 3, its copy is Ex. P.2A and the attendance register of teachers is Ex. P.3 and its copy is Ex. P.3A and registration of the school is Ex. P4 and its copy is Ex. P.4A. She has also said that all the documents were in her handwriting. She has also said that when accused Rajesh came to call and fetch the kids, third period was in progress, Ankit was in Class II and Piyush was studying in Class III. She has also said that at that time Naina madam was teaching to Piyush and Ankit was being taught by her, accused primarily went to madam Naina and subsequently came to her. She has also said that being the head of the institution, she had permitted both the kids and accorded leave, both the kids had taken their school bags alongwith. 11. She has also said that being the head of the institution, she had permitted both the kids and accorded leave, both the kids had taken their school bags alongwith. 11. PW.2 Smt. Naina is also a teacher of the said school and has reiterated similar kind of episode and has said that on 18/01/2007 at about 11.50 A.M, accused Rajesh, who is present in the Court, came to their school and bade Namaste to her and said that he wanted leave of Piyush and Ankit and he was asked to submit this to Barri madam Saroj Soni. She has also said that she did not know the conversation between Barri madam and Rajesh, but Barri madam permitted leave to both the kids and both kids were taken away from the school by accused Rajesh, present in the Court, she too has said that after half an hour, she heard that Rajesh inflicted and had blown kulhari blows upon Ankit and Piyush and injured them. 12. PW.4 Smt. Sunita has said that incident belongs to 18/01/2007, her kids Ankit and Piyush aging eight and six had gone to school, she and her husband were at hotel, Shantilal came to call them and informed that both the kids were lying injured in a pool of blood in front of the house of Vijiyaram, she said Shantilal that, kids were in the school and it was to off at 4 P.M, she went alongwith Shantilal at the spot of incident and found both the kids in a pool of blood, kids were having cutting injuries and blood was oozing, she was not in a position to see their predicament, her husband Shantilal, Nathulal a police cop came and kids were taken to Banswara Hospital, during treatment elder kid succumbed to his injuries in Udaipur Hospital, she has also said that everybody was vocally crying at the place of occurrence that the kids were injured by Rajesh and he had since fled away. She has also said that a compromise had taken place with respect of a dispute, in the Court with Rajesh about two years ago. 13. She has also said that a compromise had taken place with respect of a dispute, in the Court with Rajesh about two years ago. 13. PW.11 Manilal has also said that the incident belongs to 18/01/2007, kids were injured with kulhari, which was inflicted upon by Rajesh, at that time he was at his hotel, Shantilal came to call him, both the kids Piyush and Ankit were injured on their shoulders, back, leg and head, Piyush died two to three days later and another kid Ankit remained hospitalized at Udaipur for about three months. He has accepted Ex. P.10, FIR and has said that it was lodged by him, which bears his signatures, Ex. P.5 Panchnama, Ex. P.6 consignment of dead body have also been accepted by him, with context to animosity, he has said that about three years back, a dispute had occurred between his wife and wife of Rajesh and in that case, compromise was arrived at and that could be the reason enmity, he too has said that both his kids had gone to school for study and Rajesh had brought them by saying that their mummy was calling them and subsequently this incident occurred, he too has said that both his kids were inflicted upon injuries by Rajesh in front of house of Vija Ram, nothing abnormal has emerged from the cross-examination of this witness as well. 14. PW.5 Kanhaiyalal and PW.6 Manohar are witnesses of Ex. P.5 Panchnama and Ex. P.6 consignment of body to the family. PW.7 Baldev Panchal is a witness of Ex. P.7, spot map, Ex. P.8 and Ex. P.9. He has also said that the spot of occurrence was about 150 feet away from the shop of Shantilal and it could be seen from there, which is an important aspect. 15. P.W. 13 Lalji, a police cop, who has deposited the seized samples in malkhana and further to FSL and P.W. 13 Lal ji has reiterated entire process of requisite exhibits with deposit in FSL. P.W. 17 Nanu Ram is malkhana incharge who too has admitted deposit of the said seizures vide Ex. P. 23. 16. P.W. 12 Mohan Lal is a witness of Ex. P.W. 17 Nanu Ram is malkhana incharge who too has admitted deposit of the said seizures vide Ex. P. 23. 16. P.W. 12 Mohan Lal is a witness of Ex. P. 7, 8 and 9 and had said that about 6 to 7 months ago sons of Manilal were inflicted with injuries in front of the house of Vijayram master, in his cross-examination he has said that he had been to the spot of incident, where his signatures were taken by police. 17. P.W. 14 Dr. Akhilesh Sharma, who conducted postmortem upon the body of deceased child Piyush, has said that on 22/01/2007 he was medical jurist in Udaipur and had conducted the postmortem on the body of the deceased child piyush aging nine years, he had said that ante-mortem, kid was admitted with Neuro Surgery Department and cause of his death was head injury, he has narrated nature of injuries and has further said that duration of injuries was 3 to 5 days retro and injury No. 1 and 2 were fatal, describing the intensity of the injuries, he has said that the cause of death of the child was head injury resulted coma and Ex. P.12 is postmortem report, which bears his signatures. PW. 16 Dr. Tarun Gupta a Neuro Surgeon of R.N.T. Medical Collage Udaipur, has said that on 18.01. 2007 child Ankit son of Mani Lal was admitted with head injury, he has further said that on C.T. Scan, skull bone was found inflicted and inserted into the brain material at two places and was having injuries. He was operated upon on 19/01/2007, he got recovered and discharged on 08/02/2007, the bed ticket is Ex. P.19 and it's copy is Ex. P. 19A, operation note is Ex. P.20 and its copy is Ex. P.20A, which bears his signatures, in his cross-examination, he has said that the left side of the child was slightly palsy, he has again said that both the kids were operated properly but how Piyush died, he cannot say. PW.18 Dr. S.K. Bhatnagar a Medical Officer of M.G.H. He has said that on 18/01/2007, he was posted at M.G.H in Forensic Department and had examined injuries of Ankit son of Manilal and has further narrated seven descriptive injuries and has said that injury No. 1 and 2 were fatal, which relates to bone injury of head, Ex. PW.18 Dr. S.K. Bhatnagar a Medical Officer of M.G.H. He has said that on 18/01/2007, he was posted at M.G.H in Forensic Department and had examined injuries of Ankit son of Manilal and has further narrated seven descriptive injuries and has said that injury No. 1 and 2 were fatal, which relates to bone injury of head, Ex. P. 24 is injury report, which bears his signatures, he has further said that the injuries were caused by sharp edged weapon and injury No. 1 and 2 were fatal in nature, Ex. P. 25 I.R contains his signatures. 18. PW.15 Nathu Lal Patel is S.I who has said that on getting information he had rushed on the spot by jeep where two kids were lying injured and then were brought to Khamera hospital and it was entered in General Diary, which is Ex. P. 13, Ex. P. 10 is FIR, chalk FIR is Ex. P. 14, which bears his signatures, investigation was given to him and he has further ratified Ex. P.7 and 9 and has said that on 19/01/2007 at about 7.30 P.M accused Rajesh came to thana and admitted that Ankit and Piyush were beaten and injured by him with kulhari, which was brought alongwith and accused was arrested vide Ex. P.11, which bears his signatures. The said Kulhari was seized vide Ex. P. 10 and has further ratified Ex. P. 5, 6, 15, 16, 17 and 18 and during the course of evidence he has said that Article 1 is that kulhari, which was got recovered from accused and articles 2 and 3 are the wearings of Piyush and Ankit, F.S.L. Report is Ex. P. 19, entire process and sequence of investigation has further been narrated by this witness, nothing abnormal has emerged in his cross-examination. P.W. 19 Narendra Pal Singh is also an investigator, who has said that he investigated the matter subsequent to I.O. Nathulal and has said that Ex. P. 10 was presented before him and Ex. P. 14 FIR also contains his signatures and he had taken supplementary statements of every witness and has sent articles to FSL vide Ex. P. 26 and had submitted charge-sheet against accused Rajesh. 19. After examination under Section 313, Shankarlal, father of accused, has been produced as D.W.1. P. 10 was presented before him and Ex. P. 14 FIR also contains his signatures and he had taken supplementary statements of every witness and has sent articles to FSL vide Ex. P. 26 and had submitted charge-sheet against accused Rajesh. 19. After examination under Section 313, Shankarlal, father of accused, has been produced as D.W.1. He has admitted that a criminal case had taken place between them, which was compromised and their relations were good and context of beatings with Ankit and Piyush was wrongly been connected with because of jealously by the complainant side. DW.2 Firoz Khan has also said that the accused has wrongly been involved because of enmity, in his cross-examination, he has said that he too had heard people saying that Piyush and Ankit were inflicted kulhari injuries by Rajesh. He has further said that it is correct that he was not present when Rajesh inflicted kulhari upon Ankit and Piyush. DW.3 Surajmal has also said that because of enmity, Rajesh was wrongly been framed, in his cross-examination, he has said that it is correct that he is having good friendship with father of the Rajesh and has studied under father of Rajesh but the defence evidence is quite feeble and untrustworthy with general says only. 20. The documentary evidence, which has been pointed-out and narrated in vocal testimony, is well corroborated with the evidence. Ex. P.12 postmortem of deceased child Piyush aging nine years, showing cause of death due to coma resulted due to head and brain injury. Ex. P.19 FSL report says that Ex. P.1 blood smeared soil, Ex. P.3 Chaddi (Nekar), Ex. P.4 another Chaddi (Nekar) and Ex. P.5 Kulhari have been found with human blood stains. Ex. P.24 injury report of child Ankit son of Manilal is also showing fracture injuries of skull, naturing dangerous to life, likewise Ex. P.25 injury report of child Piyush is also showing that some of his injuries were grievous and dangerous to life. 21. Cumulative assessment of aforesaid elucidated evidence establishes the case of prosecution by clinching ocular evidence. Ex. P.24 injury report of child Ankit son of Manilal is also showing fracture injuries of skull, naturing dangerous to life, likewise Ex. P.25 injury report of child Piyush is also showing that some of his injuries were grievous and dangerous to life. 21. Cumulative assessment of aforesaid elucidated evidence establishes the case of prosecution by clinching ocular evidence. Injured Child Ankit has made categorical narration of entire happenings that how he and his brother were taken away from the school under pretext of a false say that their mother was not well and they were asked to be fetched from school and while both the kids were treading on foot alongwith assailant Rajesh, who was none else but their uncle in relation, brought out an axe from a road side temple, which was kept concealed, and gave brutal multiple blows upon both the tender and innocent kids, both sustained miserable head injuries and were operated upon in the hospital. 22. This star child witness has thoroughly been cross-examined by the defence but without any swerving substantive utterances and positive evidence has been adduced by this child witness, which has been rightly corroborated by several eye-witnesses, even the school principal and school teachers have remained very much vocal in establishing the identity of accused Rajesh by saying that he came to them and under the pretext of a false statement sought their leave and believing his say, both the kids were permitted to go alongwith Rajesh. Medical Evidences is also there, while both the kids were admitted in the hospital and were operated upon but Piyush succumbed to his injuries and Ankit could survive, who too has said that he often experience headache after the assault. The injuries of both the kids are well corroborated by ocular as well as by Medical evidence and result of the FSL report defines that all the belongings, Nekars of the kids and kulhari were found stained with human blood. Nature of the injury has also been said to be suffice to cause death being dangerous. As such prosecution has thoroughly succeeded in establishing its case with substantive and material ocular evidence and the prosecution evidence invariably connects the accused with the charge-sheeted crime. Hence, there appears no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned trial Court, which deserves to be confirmed. Resultantly, the appeal lacks substance and is hereby dismissed.