Back
2012 Supreme(UK) 237
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice Barin Ghosh and Hon’ble Mr. Justice U.C. Dhyani
Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 2006
BHUWAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Opposite Party
Decided on : 21.06.2012
For the Appellant : Mr. U.S. Bhakuni, Amicus Curiae
For the State :Mr. Amit Bhatt, Deputy Advocate General
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860, Secs. 302, 376, 363 and 366 — Offence punishable under — Kidnapping, Rape and Murder — According to prosecution, three independent witnesses saw victim last in the company of accused-appellant — The witnesses did not stop accused as they never had in their dreams that such a gruesome murder would take place after committing rape with innocent girl child — Also, when the witnesses saw victim and accused together they thought that accused was giving elderly affection to a child who was playing in his lap — They never thought that he would take recourse to such a dirty and foul step in order to satisfy his sexual lust and desire — This being a case of circumstantial evidence — The facts brought on record were considered so probable as to act upon the supposition that they existed — The accused failed to discharge his obligation u/s 114, Evidence Act — No reason to fathom that the accused-appellant was falsely trapped on account of non-existing enmity with anybody — No escape for the appellant — Prosecution was successful in bringing home the guilt of kidnapping, rape and murder against the accused/appellant to the hilt — No interference in conviction and sentence awarded by learned trial court. (Paras 10, 12, 16, 19 to 21)
Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 302] 376] 363 vkSj 366 & vUrxZr vijkèk] vigj.k] cykRdkj o gR;k & vfHk;kstu i{k ds vuqlkj rhu Lora= xokgksa us ihfM+r dks vfHk;qDr ds lkFk ns[kk Fkk & xokgksa us nks”kh dks blfy, ugha jksdk D;ksafd mUgksaus LoIu esa Hkh ugha lkspk Fkk fd ml eklwe cPph ds lkFk ;g ?k`f.kr vijk/k gks tk,xk & ;g ifjfLFkfrtU; lk{;ksa dk okn gS & vkSj lHkh rF; ?kVukØe dh vksj b’kkjk djrs gSa & vfHk;qDr u/s 114] lk{; vf/kfu;e vius dks nks”keqDr fl) ugha dj ik;k & dksbZ dkj.k ugha tks fl) djs fd nks”kh@vihykFkhZ dks >wBk Q¡lk;k x;k Fkk & vkSj nks”kh ds fy, dksbZ jkgr ugha & pw¡fd vfHk;kstu i{k nks”k lkfcr djus esa lQy gqvk Fkk blfy, ijh{k.k vnkyr ds vkns’k esa dksbZ gLr{ksi ughaA
¼izLrj 10] 12] 16] 19 ls 21½
Per: U.C. Dhyani, J.
A First Information Report (Ext. Ka-1) was lodged by the informant Lakshman Singh on 12.11.2004 at 9:30 am at Police Station Gadarpur District Udham Singh Nagar alleging that while his daughter Km. Vandana, aged about three years, was playing along with other children of the village at kharanja in front of his house at 6:30 pm, Bhuwan Singh son of Pancham Singh r/o of village Sethwala carried her towards the river. While carrying the girl child in his lap, he was seen by the villagers Preetam Singh, Radholi Devi and Smt. Premwati. Informant Lakshman Singh had gone somewhere for some work at that time. When he came back at home his wife Shimlo Devi told him about the incident and also said that Vandana (victim) had not come at home by then. The informant with the help his family members and villagers searched his daughter Vandana in night but she could not be traced. On 12.11.2004 again the informant with the help of his family and villagers started searching his daughter. At around 8:00 am the dead body of his daughter was found in half naked condition on the grass on the bank of river Nakatiya near the field of Krishna Singh. Bhuwan Singh killed his daughter after committing rape with her.
2. On the basis of complaint (Ext. Ka-1) of Lakshman Singh, chik FIR (Ext. Ka-10) was lodged at PS Gadarpur district Udham Singh Nagar on 12.11.2004 at 9:30 pm. The distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was 4 kilometers and hence, there appeared to be no delay in lodging the First Information Report, registered in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 302 and 201 IPC.
3. After the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused appellant Bhuwan Singh as regards offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 302 and 201 IPC. Trial began. Charges were framed against the accused-appellant Bhuwan Singh for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 302 and 201 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As many as 14 prosecution witnesses were examined. Statement of accused appellant Bhuwan Singh under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was taken in which he stated that complainant lodged a false report in connivance with one Preetam Singh. He had a scuffle with Preetam Singh in which he (Preetam Singh) had threatened that he will involve accused-appellant in a false case. Accused appellant did not adduce any evidence in defence.
4. After conclusion of the trial, learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar held accused-appellant Bhuwan Singh guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 302 IPC. He was awarded rigorous imprisonment for life as regards the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, ten years’ rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, three years’ rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC and five years’ rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 366 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, present appeal was preferred by the accused appellant Bhuwan Singh.
5. PW 3 Preetam Singh, PW 6 Radholi Devi and PW 11 Smt. Premwati were three witnesses who saw victim last in the company of accused-appellant. They are the most important witnesses, if the prosecution case is to succeed. Let us have a detailed look at the evidence of these witnesses one by one.
6. PW 3 Preetam Singh said in his examination-in-chief that on 11.11.2004 when he was coming from his residence at 6:30 pm, he saw accused-appellant Bhuwan Singh standing outside the house of Lakshman Singh. Bhuwan Singh used to come to his village quite often. Accused-appellant was having victim, aged about 3-4 years, in his lap. Thereafter he was seen taking the victim towards Nakatia river. PW 6 Radholi Devi and PW 11 Premwati also saw the same. Later on he came to know that victim Vandana was missing. Villagers
