SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.L. KAPUR, K.C. DAS GUPTA AND RAGHUBAR DAYAL, JJ.
Rajinder Kumar and another, Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 1961, dated 4-5-1962.
Advocates appeared
Mr. A. S. R. Chari, Senior Advocate, (Mr. Om Prakash Passey, Advocate, Punjab High Court and Mr. K. R. Chaudhari, Advocates with him), for Appellants; M/s. Gopal Singh and P. D. Menon, Advocates, for Respondents.
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - SUFFICIENCY - MOTIVE - RELEVANCE - CONCEALMENT OF OFFENCE - EVIDENCE - SUFFICIENCY.
Fact of the Case:
Tonny, a three and a half year old boy, was found dead in the compound of the house of his next-door neighbors, Jagdish Chander and Rajinder Kumar. Rajinder Kumar was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and Jagdish Chander was convicted of concealing the dead body under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rajinder Kumar had murdered Tonny and that Jagdish Chander had concealed the dead body.
Issues: 1. Whether the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rajinder Kumar had murdered Tonny? 2. Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jagdish Chander had concealed the dead body?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, including the fact that Tonny was last seen alive with Rajinder Kumar, that Rajinder Kumar made contradictory statements about where Tonny had gone, and that the dead body was found buried in Rajinder Kumar's compound, was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rajinder Kumar had murdered Tonny. 2. The court held that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the testimony of Bhagat Ram, a servant in the house, was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jagdish Chander had concealed the dead body.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of Rajinder Kumar and Jagdish Chander.
Judgement
DAS GUPTA, J. : Three and a half year old Tonny, son of Ravindernath Goyal was last seen alive on January 5, 1961. A month later on February 5, 1961, his dead body was discovered, buried in the compound of the house of the Goyal s next door neighbour Jagdish Chander and Rajinder Kumar. These two, Jagdish Chander and Rajinder Kumar are father and son. Tonny s body was found in a gunny, bag with a blood-stained piece of cloth stuffed in the mouth; a blood-stained towel was also found in the bag. When the cloth stuffing the mouth was removed the tongue was found pushed to the left side backward locking the throat. The Civil Surgeon, Bhatinda, who held the post-mortem examination has given his opinion that the death of the child was due to asphyxia resulting from suffocation caused by packing the mouth with the cloth.
2. Rajinder Kumar has been convicted under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Tonny and sentenced to death. The father Jagdish Chander has been convicted under S. 201 of the Indian Penal for having concealed the dead body of Tonny.
3. The prosecution case is that on January 5, 1961, between 3-30 p.m. and 4 p.m. when Tonny was at the house of Jagdish and Rajinder and the other inmates of the house were away Rajinder killed Tonny by stiffing his mouth with a cloth and kept the dead body in the Garage in their house; and that that very night he and his father putting it in a gunny bag. For the entire month after the child was found missing and before his body was discovered frantic efforts had been made by the distracted parents and grand-father of Tonny to trace him but in vain. Indeed, according to the prosecution, the two accused made a show of taking part in the search for the body.
4. The details of the prosecution story are best told by enumerating the circumstances on which the prosecution relied to prove its case that Rajinder killed Tonny.
(1) A few days before January 5, 1961 relations between Rajinder Kumar on the one hand and Tonny s father Ravinder Kumar on the other had become stained because Rajinder had talked to Tonny s mother in a way which her husband did not like and Ravinder asked Rajinder to stop his visits to their house. After this Tonny who used to be a frequent visitor to Rajinder, whom, he called "uncle", also stopped his visits for some days; but then three or four days before January 5, he resumed his visits to Rajinder as Rajinder had been giving him sugar drops. (2) Tonny was last seen alive at about 3-30 p.m. in Rajinder is house playing with Rajinder. (3) At the time Rajinder s wife, his father, his sister and his servant Bhagat Ram were away from the house, Bhagat Ram having been actually sent our by Rajinder at about 2-30 p.m. (4) At about 4 p.m Tonny s mother Sudha called out to Tonny after preparing the tea but not getting any response asked Rajinder Kumar, whom she saw coming from the direction of the Garage as to where Tonny was. (5) Rajinder Kumar said that Tonny had gone with his wife to the house of Jagdish Goyal. Rajinder s wife came back to the house just at that time and in reply to Sudha said that Tonny had not gone with her but had been playing about with her husband. Sudha then enquired again from Rajinder about Tonny and he said Tonny might have gone to the shop of Baba to fetch a toast. (6) At the same time Bhagat Ram returned with his cycle and wanted to keep it into the Garage but finding that Rajinder had locked the Garage he asked him to open the lock but Rajinder asked him to put the cycle in the house saying that he had put some important articles in the Garage and so would not open the lock. (7) That night Bhagat Ram slept in the kitchen and Rajinder Kumar who had gone out of the house after 4 O clock pretending to take part in the search for Tonny returned home at 12 midnight and put on the light in the kitchen where Bhagat Ram had laid himself down and asked him why he had not gone to sleep. (8) At about 2 O clock when Bhagat Ram came out to
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.