Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
Rajvinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1098 OF 2012
Decided on : 16.10.2015
(b) Criminal trial – Appellant charged with fabricating power of attorney and selling the properties of deceased – Also charged with kidnapping and murdering her and destroying evidence – Body of deceased not found – Appellant found guilty of fabricating the power of attorney – Deceased having two sisters and two advocate nephews living in the same place had no reason to give power of attorney to a total stranger – Voter card of deceased found in the bushes near Gang Canal – Her ring having letters PV recovered from house of appellant – Statement of appellant that he passed on the monies got from transactions of properties of the deceased found to be and false – Appellant not adducing any proof – Appellant unsuccessfully trying to prove that body of a woman found in fields in UP was that of deceased – Courts below rightly convicting and sentencing appellant. (Para 13)
(c) Service law – Misconduct – Sub-Registrar taking contradictory stands in a criminal proceeding and a civil proceeding – Now stating that he had read over contents of power of attorney to deceased and after understanding the same she had signed in his presence – Suitable action recommended against the Sub-Registrar. (Para 14)
Facts of the case:
One Ms. Pushpa Verma, an unmarried lady, after retiring from her job as Head Mistress in the year 1993, was residing at Karnal. She had set up a marriage bureau and also used to work as a property dealer. Her two married sisters were also residing at Karnal. Two sons of one of the sisters were practicing advocates. Brother of Pushpa Verma named Chander Prakash had retired as Executive Engineer and was residing at Hissar. Pushpa Verma owned properties at Panipat and Gurgaon allotted through Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA for short).
The appellant was convicted for the offences of kidnapping Pushpa Verma and thereafter murdering her and for destroying the evidence by throwing her body in a canal. He has been sentenced to life imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs.10,000/-for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/-in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 364 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 201 I.P.C.
The conviction and sentence as recorded by the trial court has been affirmed by the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
No interference is warranted.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
1. This appeal by special leave challenges the judgment and order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing Criminal Appeal No.800-DB of 2007 and thereby confirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences under Sections 364, 302 and 201 of the I.P.C.
2. One Ms. Pushpa Verma, an unmarried lady, after retiring from her job as Head Mistress in the year 1993, was residing at Karnal. She had set up a marriage bureau and also used to work as a property dealer. Her two married sisters were also residing at Karnal. Two sons of one of the sisters were practicing advocates. Brother of Pushpa Verma named Chander Prakash had retired as Executive Engineer and was residing at Hissar. Pushpa Verma owned properties at Panipat and Gurgaon allotted through Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA for short).
3. The appellant stands convicted for the offences of kidnapping Pushpa Verma and thereafter murdering her and for destroying the evidence by throwing her body in a canal. He is sentenced to life imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs.10,000/-for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/-in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 364 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 201 I.P.C. All the sentences are to run concurrently. The conviction and sentence as recorded by the trial court has been affirmed by the High Court in the judgment under appeal.
4. The instant matter has genesis in Daily Diary Report (Ext. PA) lodged with Police Post, Sector 13, Karnal, by Chander Prakash on 16.03.2003 giving “missing report” about his sister Pushpa Verma. According to the report, she was missing since 20/22 January, 2003 and had not been receiving any calls since then. The follow-up action on this report indicates that information was sent to all the districts and all the police stations were intimated through wireless. On 18.05.2003 Chander Prakash moved an application (Ext. PC) for registration of an offence against the appellant stating that he suspected that the appellant wanted to grab her plots at Panipat and Gurgaon by preparing forged documents and that he had kidnapped her or murdered her. This reporting led to registration of FIR No.144 dated 18.05.2003 with Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal under Section 364 I.P.C. against the appellant.
5. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201 I.P.C. in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal and the appellant was tried for aforesaid offences in Sessions Case No.53 of 2005. During investigation the body of Pushpa Verma could not be recovered nor was there any eye-witness to the actual act of kidnapping or murder. The prosecution mainly relied upon following circumstances to bring home the charges against the accused:
A. The documents pertaining to properties of Pushpa Verma at Panipat and Gurgaon showed that general powers of attorney were allegedly executed in favour of the appellant, on the basis of which he had entered into transactions in respect of properties at Panipat and Gurgaon and had pocketed the consideration.
The transactions as placed on record were as under:-
a. On 26.09.2002 a general power of attorney Ext. PF-1 was allegedly executed by Pushpa Verma in favour of the appellant in respect of her property at Panipat. Though she was resident of Karnal and the property was at Panipat, this general power of attorney was executed and registered with the office of the Sub-Registrar at Delhi. This document empowered the appellant with all rights including power to dispose of the property at Panipat.
b. On 08.11.2002 the appellant sold away the property at Panipat for R
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
