SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Del) 569

High Court Of Delhi
PARBAT SINGH AND PARTAP SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE, DELHI ADMINISTRATION - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 256 of 1996
Decided On : 05/01/2001

Advocates Appeared:
amicus curiae, Kamna Vohra, V.K.Malik

Delhi High Court

(May 31, 2001) 2001 (TLS)125170

2001-DLT-92-775 :: 2001-AD (Del)-5-644

PARBAT SINGH AND PARTAP SINGH Vs. State, Delhi Administration

Mahmood Ali Khan

( 1 ) AN Addl. Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant parbat Singh Partap Singh for committing offence of murder of Mota and Ms. Dhapa under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 3000. 00 and in default to further undergo rigourous imprisonment for one year. The appellant is aggrieved and has filed the present appeal.

( 2 ) THE facts, as disclosed by the FIR and the evidence led by the prosecution, are that the complainant ms. Meera along with her husband, father-in-law Mota (since deceased) and an aunt. of her husband Ms. Dhapa (also deceased), was residing in a jhuggi in AG-Block, near DESU sub-Station, in Shalimar Bagh. Her family was using a space adjoining that jhuggi for bathing and cleaning of clothes. On that space the appellant Parbat Singh @partap Singh erected a jhuggi about two or three month before the occurrence which led to frequent quarrels between him and the family of the complainant. On the fateful day i. e. 9. 1. 1987 the husband of the complainant had gone to his native village and the complainant was making her child asleep inside the jhuggi. It was 9. 00 PM. Her father-in-law Mota was sitting along with her husband s aunt Ms. Dhapa outside the jhuggi. She heard hurling of abuses on each other by the appellant parbat Singh and her father-in-law and aunt of her husband outside. Thereafter she heard rolla (commotion) outside. She came out and saw the appellant Parbat Singh @partap Singh rushing into his jhuggi and marching out with an axe in his hand and giving blow of axe on the neck of Mota. Ms. Dhapa who was squatting on the ground near Mota went to the rescue of Mota and the appellant struck a blow of axe on her head as well. Both of them collapsed. The appellant upon seeing the complainant rushed towards her but the complainant fled and raced to the nearby market where she found two policemen namely Const. Sher Singh, Public Witnessl7 , and Const. Chotu Ram. She informed them of the assault on her father-in-law and the aunt of her husband and brought them to the place of occurrence. They were a little before the place of occurrence when the complainant pointed at the appellant parbat Singh @partap Singh who tried to flee with his axe but was overpowered. The policemen took away the axe from him and secured him. The PCR van. and the I. O. SI Puran Chand with staff also reached there. . The injured Mota and Ms. Dhapa were removed to the H. R. Hospital in an ambulance by SI Sohan pal Singh where they were declared as brought dead. The 10 seized the axe, prepared the site plan, picked up the broken pieces of bangles, chappals of two different colours, the plastic mat, blood samples from two places, earth control, the cot, a woollen cap, a quilt etc. from the place of occurrence; he got the photographs of scene of the occurrence; he completed all other formalities; deposited the case property in the malkhana of the police station; conducted inquest proceeding on the bodies of Mota, deceased and Ms. Dhapa, deceased; wrote other relevant papers; got the post-mortem examination conducted on both the bodies and handed over the bodies to the relatives. He collected the post-mortem examination report, and the report about blood sample etc. , produced axe before the doctor for his examination, deposited the articles received from the mortuary in the malkhana and also sent them to the CFSL. He obtained the report of the CFSL. He also got a scale plan of the scene of the occurrence made. After the investigation was completed, he prepared challan and submitted to the court. The case was sent to the court of Sessions where the charge under Section 302 Indian Penal Code was framed, to which the appellant Parbat Singh pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The learned Addl. Sess



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top