Back
2014 Supreme(UK) 344
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Servesh Kumar Gupta
Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 2010
RAJU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
Decided on : 11.12.2014
For the Appellant :Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. A.S. Gill, Dy. Advocate
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 300 and Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 27 - Dead body of deceased found lying in vegetable field - On investigation it was found that accused was having illicit relation with deceased - And deceased was last seen in company of accused - Also, investigating officer held that accused had confessed before him - And had handed over knife to police party - Held such recovery at instance of accused not admissible u/s 27, Evidence Act - When no public witness regarding recovery of knife was present and knife was never sent to FSL - Also, accused was never seen in company of deceased, wherefrom her dead body was recovered - Held prosecution could not establish its case beyond reasonable doubt - Accused accquitted of charges. (Paras 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16,17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 300 vkSj lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872] /kkjk 27 & e`rdk dk e`r 'kjhj lCth ds [ksr esa iM+k Fkk & tk¡p ij ik;k x;k fd vfHk;qDr ds e`rdk ds lax vlaoS/kkfud laca/k Fks & e`rdk dks vfHk;qDr ds lkFk ns[kk x;k Fkk & tk¡p vf/kdkjh ds lk{; ls /kkfjr Fkk fd vfHk;qDr us mlds le{k vijk/k laLohÑr fd;k Fkk o pkdw iqfyl ikVhZ dks Fkek;k Fkk & /kkfjr fd dfFkr cjkenxh vUrxZr /kkjk 27] lk{; vf/kfu;e LohÑr ugha & tcfd pkdw dh cjkenxh fdlh Hkh tu lk{kh ds lEeq[k ugha gq;h uk gh dfFkr pkdw dks ,QŒ,lŒ,yŒ Hkstk x;k Fkk & vfHk;qDr dks ?kVuk LFky ij e`rdk ds lkFk Hkh ugha ns[kk x;k Fkk & /kkfjr fd vfHk;kstu i{k fuLlansg okn LFkkfir djus esa vlQy jgk Fkk & vfHk;qDr dks nks"keqDr fd;k x;kA ¼izLrj 10] 11] 12] 13] 14] 15] 16] 17] 18] 19] 20] 21½
Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. (Oral)
Present appeal is preferred assailing the judgment and order dated 31.07.2010, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Session Trial No. 228/2229 of 2006 whereby accused appellant was held guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C. and under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act; and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional imprisonment of one year under Section 302 I.P.C.; to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional imprisonment of six months under Section 201 I.P.C.; to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional imprisonment of three months under Section 4/25 Arms Act.
2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that Balkar Singh PW1 got registered an F.I.R. on 06.03.2006 with Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar to the effect that Balkar Singh PW1 is the resident of Banskhera Kala, Police Station Kashipur; at about 8:30 A.M. in the morning of 06.03.2006, he was going towards his khet (agricultural field); when he reached near agricultural field of his brother Puran Singh near Gurudwara Nankana Sahib, he could see dead body of one lady, having cut on her neck, lying in the vegetable field; unknown person after committing murder of the lady would have thrown the dead body in the vegetable field; he (Balkar Singh PW1) also came to know that dead body of one another person was also lying on the railway track near Aliganj Kashipur and that dead body was also having cut on his neck; he could not identify the dead body of the lady, therefore, having registered the report, appropriate action be taken.
3. During the investigation, it came to the notice of the Investigating Officer that accused appellant was having illicit relation with Sugra deceased and Sugra deceased was last seen in the company of accused appellant at about 10:30 P.M. on 05.03.2006 by Safi Ahmad PW6, therefore, appellant was interrogated; appellant has confessed his guilt before the police and undertook to recover the knife used in the crime; he took the police party to his home and after opening the box, appellant took out the knife and handed over the knife to the police party and stated that by the same knife, he has committed murder of Smt. Sugra (deceased).
4. Having investigated the matter, police submitted two separate chergesheets against the sole accused appellant. One for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. and another for the offence punishable under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act. 3
5. After committal of the Trial to the Session Court, both the trials, one under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. and another under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act were consolidated.
6. To prove the prosecution story, informant Balkar Singh PW1, Abdul Salam PW2, Jumma PW3, Farid PW4, Dr. Manoj Kushwaha PW5, Safi Ahmad PW6, S.I. Chandrapal Singh PW7, S.I. Sanjay Kumar PW8, Shri C.G. Goswami PW9, A.S.I. Anand Singh PW10, Kali Ram PW11 and Constabl Dayal Ram Arya PW12 were examined from the side of the prosecution and thereafter statement of the accused under Section 313 were recorded. From the side of defence Ram Chandra DW1 and Deepak DW3 were examined.
7. We have heard Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. A.S. Gill, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. G.S. Negi, Brief Holder for the State and have carefully perused the record.
8. As per Ex.Ka.12 recovery memo of the knife, accused appellant took the police party to his residence and having opened the tin box, took out the knife and handed over to the police and stated before the police that this was the knife whereby he has cut the neck of Sugra. PW7 S.I. Chandra Pal Singh, the
