- (1.)J. C. S. Rawat, J. This appeal, preferred under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity as Cr. P. C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 14-12-1984, passed by learned Addi tional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Ses sions Trial No. 64 of 1983, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sen tenced to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302 Indian Panel Code, 1860 (for brevity as I. P. C. ).
(2.)THE prosecution story, in brief, is that Mani Ram lodged a report Ex. Ka. 2 on 02-04-1983 at about 9:05 a. m. at police station Cantt, Distt. Dehradun, al leging therein that his son Surat Singh was a contractor. On the day of Holi, in the year 1983, his son Surat Singh went to celebrate Holi at the resident of accused/appellant Dhirendra Kumar Sharma alias Dhiroo in the evening. In the night, the accused/appellant came to his house and wanted to drag Surat Singh out from the house. THE accused/ appellant told that Surat Singh while cel ebrating holi had knocked the doors of his aunt Km. Sunita in the night with evil intention when she was alone in her house. THEreafter, Smt. Raj Kumari, wife of Surat Singh and Mani Ram, father of the Surat Singh prevented the accused/ appellant from dragging Surat Singh. THE accused/appellant left the house of Surat Singh after giving him threats of dire consequences. It was further alleged that on 01-04-1983, Surat Singh went Dehradun but did not return home till night. THEreafter, the informant started to search out his son Surat Singh in the morning. Jagdish Singh told him that his son was lying dead near the bank of river adjoining to the field of Ratan Singh. His bicycle was also lying there. Hear ing this, the informant went to the place of occurrence and saw his son Surat Singh lying dead. When he inquired about this, he was informed by Lal Singh PW2 of village Jantanwala that in the last night at about 7:45 RM, his son the deceased Surat Singh and accused/ appellant came from Dehradun; the deceased took his bicycle from his bicy cle stand and they proceeded towards their village. THEreafter, the complainant Mani Ram was informed by Lakhi Ram PW4 and Bahadur Singh PW3 that they saw accused/appellant beating his son Surat Singh by stone at about 8:30 p. m. in the last night. He has further stated in the F. I. R. that his son was murdered by the accused/appellant. On the basis of F. I. R. Ex. Ka. 2, chick F. I. R. Ex. Ka. 14 was prepared and necessary entry was made in the G. D. THE investigation of the case was entrusted to S. O. Rajpal Singh PW11. S. I. Satendra Singh Sirohi PW9 arrested the accused/appellant on 02-04-1983 and prepared the inquest report. As there were marks of injuries on the person of the accused, the ac cused/appellant was sent to Doon Hos pital for medical examination. THE I. O. recorded the statement of the witnesses and prepared the site plan Ex. Ka. 17. After completing the investigation, the police submitted the chargesheet Ex. Ka. 24 against the accused/appellant before the court.
After submission of chargesheet, the accused/appellant was committed to the court of Sessions for trial and the trial court framed charge u/s 302 I. P. C. against the accused/ appellant. The ac cused/appellant denied the charge lev elled against him and claimed his trial.

The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as twelve wit nesses. Dr. D. M. Kala PW1 is the medi cal officer who has medically examined the accused/appellant. Lal Singh PW2 is the witness who has stated that the ac cused/appellant and the deceased Surat Singh came to his shop in the evening on 01-04-1983 at about 7:30 p. m. and thereafter proceeded for their village. Bahadur Singh PW3 and Lakhi Ram PW4 are the eyewitnesses' who had seen accused/appellant and the deceased quarrelling with each other. The accused/ appellant threw a stone on the deceased and he sustained the injury on his head and he fell down at the spot. Bahadur Singh PW3 has a field near the place of occurrence. Both the eyewitness are known to the accused/appellant and de ceased. Khajan Singh PW5 is the scribe of F. I. R. He has scribed the report on the dictation of the informant Mani Ram. Dr. I. F. Nath PW6 is the medical officer who conducted the post-mortem of dead body of the deceased. Smt. Raj Kumari PW7 is the wife of deceased. Mitthan Singh PW8 is the witness in whose pres ence the accused/appellant was arrested. Satendra Singh Sirohi PW9 was posted as S. I. in PS. Cantt, Dehradun. He was deputed for the arrest of the accused/ appellant. He has also prepared the in quest report Ex. Ka. 5. S. O. Rajpal PW11 is the investigating Officer of the case who investigated the case. Later on the investigation was transferred to Sub-In spector Sukhdev Singh due to transfer of S. O. Rajpal PW11. Constables Ansuiya Prasad PW10 and Isam Singh PW12 are the formal prosecution wit nesses.

(3.)THE accused-appellant was ex amined u/s 313 Cr. P. C. and he has pleaded not guilty to the offence. He has stated that he has falsely been im plicated in this case. He has further stated in his statement that there was Yuvak Gram Kalyan Samiti in his village in which he was a member and his brother Vijendra Kumar Sharma DW1 was President. THEre was illicit distilla tion of liquor in that area, therefore, he made complaints with the police but the police did not take any action. THEre after, he reported the matter to District Magistrate. As such, the police person nel had enmity with him. He has further stated that a canal was being con structed in his village in which the con tractors were selling cement illegally. He made complaint in this regard and the cement was apprehended but the police did not take any action against the con tractors. THE contractors were annoyed with him, as such, he has falsely been implicated in this case with the collusion of police. He has further stated that he was not present at the place of occur rence on the date of incident.
The accused/appellant in his de fence examined Bijendra Kumar Sharma as DW1. He is the elder brother of ac cused/appellant. He has stated that his brother accused/appellant has falsely implicated in the case by the police.