2018 Supreme(All) 2113
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : MRS. SUNITA AGARWAL AND VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, JJ.
NEMI CHAND ....Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. ....Respondent
(Jail Appeal No. 6100 of 2011, decided on 24th September, 2018)
Counsel :
From Jail and Avinash Jaiswal (A.C.) for the Appellant; A.G.A. for the Respondent.
Headnote:(Indian) Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 364, 377 and 302 – Abduction – Murder – Conviction – Accused-appellant abducted a five year old child, committed unnatural sexual offence and murdered him – Case based on circumstantial evidence – Deceased last seen with the appellant – PW-3 and PW-4 are witnesses of last seen together – PW-3 not cross-examined by appellant nor any such circumstances was placed by the defence which would shake credibility of this witness – PW-2 who deposed having last seen deceased with appellant had no enmity with accused – Mere fact that PW-2 is related to first informant PW-1 would not make him a tainted witness – Injuries on person of child and evidence collected from place of occurrence shows that child was battered to death – Version of occular evidences supported by medical evidence – Prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt – Impugned conviction upheld. [Paras 39 to 62]
Result; Appeal Dismissed.
By the Court.—Heard Sri Avinash Jaiswal, learned Amicus Curiae on behalf of the appellant and Sri Om Prakash, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 16.7.2011 passed by the Additional District and Session Judge, Court No. 17, Agra whereunder the appellant Nemi Chand has been convicted for abduction, commission of unnatural sexual offence with a five year old child punishable under Section 364 and 377 and for his murder under Section 302; with imprisonment for life with fine and 10 years imprisonment with fine, separately. In case of non deposit of fine, the appellant has to undergo further imprisonment for 1 and 1/2 years; respectively, for each set of offence. All the punishments are to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial is as follows :
The appellant and the victim Karan a child aged about five years (at the time of incident), both were neighbors i.e. residents of Gram Sevla, Mandir Wali Gali, Gwalior Road, Agra. A written report was submitted by Rajendra son of Sri Ram Bharose, father of the deceased Karan that on 22.4.2009 at about 7.45 p.m., his son Karan was playing outside his house while his wife was inside. The informant was not present at home. The appellant-Nemi Chand son of Bhagwan Das took the child near the road while playing with him. His son was missing since thereafter. Sheru son of Madan Lal, Pappu son of Bahadur Singh and Geeta wife of Bheem had seen the appellant taking the child with him. When the child had gone missing, the first informant went to the house of the appellant to enquire. Upon asking from the family members of the appellant i.e. his brother Raju and nephew Jitendra, they started fighting with the first informant in order to defend the appellant. After a long search, the dead body of his son Karan was found in a field about 100 meters from Nainana Brahmadh Modh Dairy Farm Gwalior Road. It was stated that the appellant had committed murder of his son and his brother and nephew were also accomplice in the same. The dead body was lying at the place noted above.
4. On the presentation of the said report, Chik FIR was lodged by Vijay Pal Singh, Constable Clerk, Police Station Sadar, Agra on 23.4.2009. The initial investigation was done by Sri V.K. Tiwari, the then Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar who made GD entry and recorded statement of the first informant. He had also prepared the recovery memos of clothes of the deceased Karan (exhibit Ka-2), plain earth and blood stained earth (exhibit Ka-5), clothes of accused Nemi Chand (exhibit Ka-16) in the presence of witnesses Sheru son of Madan Lal and Papu son of Bahadur Singh. The recovery memo exhibit Ka-2 bears the signature of the first informant whereas in the recovery memo of clothes of the appellant (exhibit Ka-16), signatures of the appellant exists. The inquest was made in the presence of the first informant namely Rajendra and four other witnesses. The time of commencement and completion of the inquest as reported therein is about 8.45 a.m. and 10.45 a.m.; respectively, on 23.4.2009. The description of FIR with the name of the first informant and cause of death has also been reported therein. The dead body is reported to have been recovered from a field near the Military Dairy Farm at Gram Nainana Brahmadh Modh Dairy Farm Gwalior Road. It is reported that when police reached the spot, the family members of the deceased were wailing and several other villagers were present on the spot. There were injuries on the dead body which revealed that the death was caused after commission of unnatural sexual offence with the child. The body was sent for postmortem.
5. The appellant was caught by Sheru and Pappu who had seen him with the deceased child before the child had gone missing. In another written report submitted by Pappu on 23.4.2009, with the signature of Sheru and the appellant, it is stated that while they were searching