Eyewitness testimony holds credibility even when minor contradictions exist; motive for crime established through related witness accounts legitimizes conviction under Section 302 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by appellant against a judgment dated 20.09.2019 and order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Deoband, Saharanpur in Sessions Trial No. 603 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 247 of 2015, under Section 302 IPC whereby the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in case of default in payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo additional imprisonment of one year.

Brief Facts of the case

2. The brief facts of the case as set up in the first information report is that a written report was filed by Smt. Babita, wife of Harpal Singh, resident of Rankhandi, Police Station Deoband, District Saharanpur that Rajendra Singh, son of late Subedar Singh (hereinafter referred to as “the accused- appellant”) wanted to sell the ancestral property of his part, which was being opposed by her husband Harpal Singh (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) for the future of his (accused) children due to which the accused-appellant harbour enmity with the deceased and used to abuse the deceased. He also extended threat to the deceased for dire consequences. On 28.04.2015, some dispute took place between the accused and the deceased in the evening and thereafter accused left the place. At about 09:30 or 10:00, the accused-appellant came back and sat in ambush in his earlier house and as soon as deceased reached there, the accused- appellant attacked him indiscriminately by Balkati over head and body. On hearing the noise, when the first informant came out of the house, she saw the accused assaulting her husband (deceased). On her shrieks, members of her family and co- villagers rushed to the spot. Seeing the witnesses, the accused fled away along with Balkati towards north. Her husband was taken to the Government Hospital, Deoband, where doctor referred him to District Saharanpur, where he succumbed to his injuries.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid report, a case was registered against the accused-appellant at Case Crime No.247 of 2015, under Section 302 IPC, which was entered in GD at 12:20 hours.

4. After the registration of the FIR, the law set into motion and investigation of the case was entrusted to PW-7, Braj Mohan Yadav, who rushed to the spot and recorded the statement of the informant-Smt. Babita, wife of the deceased, inspected the spot and also recorded the statements of witnesses Rampal and Mahipal. He also collected plain and bloodstained earth from the spot, sealed it and prepared memo thereof. On 03.5.2015, he recorded the statements of witnesses Raj Kumar, Kunwar Pal, Mukesh Kumar, Hariom Gulshan, Vijendra Singh, Chirag, Bittu, Monti, Smt. Baby and Smt. Anita. On 30.05.20215 he copied the postmortem report in the case diary. On 04.6.2015, he arrested the accused and recorded his statement. On 07.6.2015, he recorded the statements of witnesses Amit Tomar, Raj Kumar, Mange Ram, Constable Pradeep Kumar and Constable Rajendra Singh. He also prepared site plan for recovery of the weapon of assault. After culmination of investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge sheet against the appellant under Section 302 IPC, which he proved as Ext. Ka-11.

5. PW-7, Braj Mohan Yadav, the investigating officer of the case has also recovered the weapon of assault (Balkati) on the pointing out of the accused-appellant from the bushes of sugarcane field of Kumri, son of Phool Singh Thakur in the presence of Raj