IMPORTANT POINT
There is no question of interference with the order of the High Court on defence s plea of fabrication by prosecution as the circumstances noted by it formed complete chain of events without any snap and pointedly point to the accused-appellant as the guilty person and to no-one else for murdering his wife.

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Murder by husband of his wife by strangulation-Conviction based on circumstantial evidence-Rule in Criminal Jurisprudence as regards the acceptability of the circumstantial evidence and the rule of law counts in regard thereto (see paras 9 r/w 21 to 24).
       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Murder by husband of his wife by strangulation in a room of guest house at Delhi-Conviction based on circumstantial evidence-Plea of fabrication-Whether be accepted? (No)-Plea of no proper identification of the appellant-accused negatived-Plea of fabrication by based on interested evidence, weak hand-Writing experts evidence and misleading telephone information to mother and sister of deceased held not correct-Appeal dismissed.
       Held : The circumstances noticed above, if read with the evidence of PW.6, Shamim Bano as to the date of departure of the accused with his wife Hazra @ Halima from Bombay to Delhi and the telephonic message after two days that Halima had died in a bus accident and that she had been cremated at a cremation ground in Nizamuddin -- this piece of evidence, as noticed above, if read along with the circumstances noticed above, would form a chain without there being any snap. Strenuous submissions have been made as regards the admissibility of the Handwriting Expert s opinion as also a challenge thrown to the non-admissibility of the entire evidence of Shamim Bano, PW.6. This evidence of Shamim Bano has been challenged on two counts: on the first Shamim Bano, being the sister of Halima, was an interested witness and secondly, she did not say so in a statement before the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Interested witness by itself cannot possibly be a ground to reject the evidence on record. The test of creditworthiness or acceptability, in our view, ought to be the guiding factor and if so, question of raising an eye-brow on the reliability of witness being an interested witness would be futile - in the event the evidence is otherwise acceptable, there ought not to be any hindrance in the matter of prosecutor s success. The evidence must inspire confidence and in the event of unshaken credibility, there is no justifiable reason to reject the same. It is on this score the issue of interested witness thus stands negated, as raised by the appellant. The second limb pertains to the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Admittedly, this piece of evidence was not available in the statement of the witness under Section 161 Cr.P.C., but does it take away the nature and character of the evidence in the event there is some omission on the part of the police official. Would that be taken recourse to as amounting to rejection of an otherwise creditworthy and acceptable evidence - the answer, in our view, cannot but be in the negative. In that view of the matter, the evidence of PW.6 thus ought to be treated as creditworthy and acceptable and it is to be seen the effect of such an acceptability. (Para 12)
       Coming back to Mr. Jaspal Singh s submissions as regards prosecution s fabrication of evidence, two redeeming features ought to be noticed, namely : The handwriting expert s opinion simply corroborates the circumstantial evidence and as such we are unable to record our concurrence with the submissions of Mr. Singh on this score. (Paras 13 & 14)
       The learned Sessions Judge as also the High Court did place, upon consideration of all relevant facts and material on record, reliance on the opinion of the handwriting expert and we do not see any reason to record a contra finding. (Para 17)
       Misleading, telephonic information about the death of the deceased to sister and mother of the deceased and the evidence on this score seems to be rather categoric and creditworthy. It is on this score, the High Court also placed reliance and did not think it fit to discard the testimony of PW.6, Shamim Bano on this score. (Para 18)
       Held finally : On the basis of the law and the factual score as above, in particular the circumstances tabulated hereinbefore, the issue thus arises as to whether involvement of the accused can be doubted in any way or the events pointedly point out the guilt of the accused person. The High Court answered it in the second alternative and upon consideration of the entire matter we do feel it expedient to record our concurrence with the reasons and conclusions as put forth in the judgment impugned. In that view of the matter, this appeal fails and is dismissed. (Paras 25 and 26)

JUDGMENT

Banerjee, J.-The matter under consideration presently before this Court stands out to be singularly singular on the plea of fabrication by the defence against the prosecutor. The High Court of Delhi negated the same and dismissed the appeal against the conviction under Section 302 IPC and the sentence of imprisonment for life along with fine.

2. It is at this juncture convenient to advert briefly to the Prosecution case as below:

Alamgir, the appellant herein being a resident of Pakistan was married to Ms. Hazra (known by the name of Halima after marriage). The factual score depicts that on 17th September, 1991, the appellant came to Delhi along with his wife Hazra @ Halima and they checked in a hotel at Darya Ganj (Royal Inn Guest House) on 18th September, 1991 at about 8.50 p.m. Upon registration in the guest registration book, the appellant and his wife, who was in Burqa, were allotted Room No. 107 and the key was handed over to Alamgir. On 19th September, 1991, Alamgir, however, went out and brought some break-fast and at or about 10.15 in the morning, he reported at the counter informing therewith that the wife being left alone in the hotel room ought not to be disturbed and that he would be back soon. Alamgir, however, the factual score depict, did not return till 20th and the Manager of the hotel by reason of not being able to get any response from the room after several attempts, opened the room with the duplicate key in the presence of one Dinesh Chand and found that the deceased was lying on the bed covered with a red dupatta. Immediately thereafter, however, the police was informed and Sub-inspector Rajbir Singh reached at the hotel and recorded the statement of the Manager of the hotel. The Crime Branch was called along with photographer and upon completion of all necessary formalities, the dead body was sent for post-mortem and the FIR being No.357/91 was registered around 12.25 in the afternoon.

3. Incidentally, the police found two slips near the dead body, one of the papers indicated "7 A Jaitkar House Tandel Street Room No. 3, Mal Bazar, Bombay - 3" and something was written in Urdu thereon. The other paper slip was a photo of receipt A.V. 187318, 18.7.90 bearing photo and signatures of Alamgir. On its backside 50690, 235472, and Assistant Director, D.R.O. Karachi (West) was printed and sealed respectively. Some injury marks were noticed on the neck of the deceased.

4. The further factual score depicts that on 21st September, 1991 on receipt of some secret information at about 2.20 p.m. by the CID, Bombay Unit, at 2.45 p.m. Inspector Naresh Talvalkar along with Inspector Dhoble and other Constables reached in front of Cafe Rahim Restaurant and found a person standing opposite Cafe Rahim Restaurant. They arrested that person, namely, the accused Alamgir. On his personal search the accused was found holding a brown colour rexine pouch in his hand containing a key ring with a brass letter R and No. 107 written on it along with passport of the accused, residential permit as well as Pakistani I card of the accused and Pakistani passport of Ms. Halima Noor Jamal, her residential permit and one copy of I. Card form of the Halima and ticket from Delhi to Bombay along with 100 rupee notes in Indian currency and Pakistani currency. Assistant Police Commissioner, Darya Ganj, Delhi was contacted and it was confirmed that accused Alamgir was wanted in the case under Section 302 IPC in FIR No. 357 of 1991.

5. On 21st September, 1991 Delhi Police received the information of arrest of accused Alamgir. SI Rajbir Singh was deputed to leave for Bombay for investigation. The post mortem examination was also conducted on 21st September, 1991. However, the body was directed to be preserved. Necessary formalities were completed by the Bombay Police. Accused was produced on 22nd September, 1991 before the Additional CMM, Bombay. On 24th September, 1991 Delhi Police arrived in Bombay. All the articles which the Bombay Police h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2002 Supreme(SC) 1094

Cases Referred (5)