IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SUNEET KUMAR, VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, JJ.
Manvir – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Jail Appeal No. - 4325 of 2009
Decided on : 17-05-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376, 302, 228A - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 8 – Criminal Procedural Code, 1973 - Section 174 – Appeal - Offence of Murder – Punishment for Rape - Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct - Whether accused is innocent or guilty whereas in some cases it is subsequent conduct that becomes very important in determining the innocence or guilt of accused - Whether a person has died under unnatural circumstances or unnatural death and if so, what is cause of death - It is well known that the close relatives of a murdered person are most reluctant to spare the real assailant and falsely involve another person in place of the assailant (Para 42).
Findings of the Court – On basis of aforesaid facts and circumstances, prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt - The allegations against accused – appellant under Sections 376 and 302 of Indian Penal Code stands proved by prosecution - Court do not find any infirmity in impugned judgement and sentence passed by trial court convicting accused – appellant for offence under Sections 376 and 302 of Indian Penal Code - Entence awarded by trial court is in accordance with law and needs no interference.
Result – Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Vikram D. Chauhan, J.
1. Heard Ms. Abida Syed, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present jail appeal is filed by appellant through Senior Jail Superintendent, Agra against the judgment dated 5 December, 2007 and sentence dated 6 December, 2007 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Gautambudh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 497 of 2006 (State Vs. Manvir) arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2006 under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sector-49, NOIDA. Appellant - Manvir has been convicted under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant is sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs.5,000/- and under Section 302 I.P.C., life imprisonment has been awarded to appellant - Manvir and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- is awarded.
3. As per the legal proviso to Section 228A I.P.C., it is not expedient to disclose the name of the victim in this case; she is being referred as victim in the judgment.
4. On 2 July, 2006 at 6:15 a.m., a First Information Report was lodged by Sunil Singh, son of late Kailash Singh at Police Station, Sector 49, Gautambudh Nagar against appellant – Manvir under Sections 376 and 302 of Indian Penal Code.
5. The prosecution case as per First Information Report is that the informant – Sunil Singh is tenant of Sri Rajendra Singh and was residing along with her wife and mother; mother of the informant is aged about 80 years; in the intervening night of 1/2 July, 2006, mother of the informant as usual was sleeping in the open space, adjacent to the room of the informant; informant along with his other family members was sleeping at the terrace; at about 12:00 in the night his neighbour Manvir, son of Ram Prasad (who was living in the same house), was walking near the place where the mother of the informant was sleeping; informant and his family members went to sleep at terrace; at about 5:00 a.m. when the informant and his family members (wife Renu Devi and son Deepak) came down, they saw Manvir was washing the blood stains with water and the door could not be opened. Thereafter, the son of the informant, namely, Deepak crossed the boundary wall and opened the door. Manvir on seeing the informant and his family members ran away from the house; informant and his family members found that his 80 years old mother was blood stained and her petticoat was up to the knee level; wife of the informant also informed that blood was coming out from the private part of his mother; Manvir committed rape and killed his mother.
6. On the basis of above mentioned First Information Report dated 2 July, 2006, a case was registered being Case Crime No. 136 of 2006 under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code against appellant – Manvir.
7. In pursuance of the First Information Report, investigation was carried out. Investigating Officer prepared recovery memo dated 2 July, 2006 (Ex. Ka-7) for recovery of the pillow, three bedsheets and broom (Jharu). The aforesaid recovery was witnessed by Naresh Mahto, son of Ram Chandra and Sushil Kumar Singh, son of Thakur Maheshwar Singh. Recovery memo was prepared by Investigating Officer – Matadeen Verma (P.W. - 5).
8. Investigating Officer on 2 July, 2006 recovered the underwear of accused Manvir in presence of Naresh Mahto, son of Ram Chandra and Sushil Kumar Singh. Recovery memo was prepared by Investigating Officer – Matadeen Verma (P.W. - 5). Recovery memo also recorded that the aforesaid undergarment was having blood stains. The recovery memo was marked as Ex. Ka-8 before the trial court.
9. Inquest of the deceased was conducted on 2 July, 2006 by Investigating Officer – Matadeen Verma (P.W. - 5) on the direction of S.H.O – Vishwajeet Singh. The inquest report was marked as Ex. Ka-2 before the trial court. The inquest report noted following injuries on the deceased :-
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.