Back
2002(6) Supreme 304
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab & Haryana High Court)
Umesh C. Banerjee & Y.K. Sabharwal, JJ.
Gurpreet Singh -Appellant
versus
State of Haryana -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 2001
Decided on 12-9-2002
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : KTS Tulsi, Sr. Advocate, Tara Chandra Sharma, Rishi Malhotra, Ajay Sharma, Ms. Neelam Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondent : J.P. Dhanda, Ms. Raj Rani Dhanda, K.P. Singh, Dhan Singh Nagar, Advocates.
Held : Admittedly there is no eye-witness available in the matter under consideration and the prosecution case is sought to be established from the circumstantial evidence and it is in this sphere the settled law as noticed above is that circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is drawn should be proved and thus circumstances must be conclusive in nature. The established circumstances should also be complete and there should not be any missing link in the chain of evidence. The court ought thus to scrutinise the evidence and deal with each circumstance and thereafter find the chain of the established circumstances being complete, in the event, the answer is in the affirmative, there should not be any hesitation in the matter of return of a verdict of guilt on the basis of circumstantial evidence. In the event, however, there is a snap in the chain and the conclusion may not steadfastly point or reach the accused, the latter is entitled to a benefit of doubt. In this context the observations of this Court in Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam & Anr. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993 (2) SCC 684) lends credence to the view expressed above. It is indeed a relevant fact in the contextual facts that parties admittedly, were having estranged relationship: As a matter of fact, divorce proceedings has already been initiated - a payment of Rs. 3,00,000/- is to be effected to the wife by the husband and this is being consented to in writing since divorce was by mutual consent of the parties. It is to be noticed that whereas there is no eye-witness account but the incriminating conduct and activity of the accused have been proved by overwhelming evidence. The investigating officer found the appellant sitting in the other room and the body of the wife totally burnt in a sitting posture that of course goes on well with the Medical Jurisprudence as noticed above since heat would have the effect of stiffening and contraction of muscle causing the arms to become flex and knees bent. The photographs produced before the Court show the devastation of fire, obviously a definite attempt to see that one does not survive in any event. The appellant-accused has not offered any reason nor explanation except a plea of alibi which the High Court ascribed to be as false denial as noticed hereinbefore. The chain of events dispels any doubt as sought to be suggested by Mr.Tulsi and there seems to be sufficient evidence on record to connect the appellant with a brutal killing of a wife, the motive of which is apparent. The social evil popularly described as bride-burning thus does not show a descending graph in spite of the legislature stepping up and introducing penal provisions therefor. The sordid tale of young girls becoming victims of lust for money and other materialistic objects continues - the appeal in the present case thus is also no exception. On the wake of the aforesaid, we are unable to record our concurrence with the submissions of Mr. Tulsi. The appeal therefore fails. The conviction and sentence passed against the appellant as confirmed by the High Court is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. The appellant to serve out the sentence. (Paras 22 to 26)
JUDGMENT
Banerjee, J.-The appellant Gurpreet Singh an Indian Air Force personnel had a love marriage with one Kalpna, a Nurse in a Military Hospital (since deceased). Later the facts reveal that Gurpreet left his job from Indian Air Force and joined as Assistant Vigilance Officer in Maruti Udyog in Gurgaon and Kalpna was also adjusted in the same Maruti Udyog in a section known as Bharat Seats. They lived in House No. C-2-113/4 D.L.F. Phase-I, Qutab Enclave, Gurgaon and had a son Sundeep out of their lawful wedlock.
2. It appears that the parties to the said marriage did not pull on well and the deceased and the appellant made a joint petition (Ex.P.N.) before the learned District Judge, Gurgaon under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce by mutual consent on 14.12.1993; though concededly they lived under one roof till Kalpna breathed her last as noticed hereinbefore in this judgment. The next date fixed in the petition was 17.7.1994.
3. Incidentally, on the further factual score it appears that purchase of flat No.C-2-113/4, Gurgaon (Ex.A4) prior to filing of consent petition however was in the joint name of both the spouses. The deceased thus had a half share in the flat and the consent petition for divorce created a bounden obligation for the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the wife.
4. Materials available in the matter depict that around 11.00 or 11.30 O clock in the night of 13/14.2.1994, there were some sounds of shrieks and cries from the house of Gurpreet Singh and Ashok Mazumdar, (P.W. 1), a Businessman, living in House No. 113/3-2-2 D.L.F. Colony, Phase I, Gurgaon, not being aware of the happenings got up from sleep and saw from the window that the smoke was emitting from the said apartment and he noticed the appellant and his servant being present there. The neighbourly gesture prompted him to telephone the police as well as the fire brigade and Sub Inspector Bir Singh (P.W.5), on receipt of the wireless message from Police Station Sadar, Gurgaon reached the spot located in the area of Silver Oak Apartments, Qutab Enclave. The Sub Inspector found the appellant-accused sitting in his room while the victim Kalpna lying in burnt condition in another room. The two rooms were burnt but the room in which the appellant-accused was sitting was not having marks of burns. The records depict that the Sub Inspector despatched a ruqa that Kalpna had been murdered by setting her on fire on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PG/1 was recorded by S.I. Devinder Singh.
5. The burnt remains of the clothes of the deceased were taken into possession by Inspector Murari Lal, (PW.7) who, as the records depict, recorded the statement of Ashok Mazumdar (Ex. PA) and that of one Raj Kumar Chawla (since deceased). Though 10/12 persons also gathered at the spot but they were not prepared to state or disclose anything. Records further depict that preparation of site plan (Ex. PQ) as also the inquest report (Ex. PP). Five match sticks in a match box were taken into possession (Ex. PJ) along with a plastic can with cap and a writing pad (vide recovery memos Exs. PK, PL and PM). After the photographs Ex.PT/1 to PT/4 of the dead body were taken, the same was sent for post-mortem examination.
6. On 16.2.1994, the appellant was arrested because Shri Ashok Mazumdar, PW. 1 had already mentioned in his statement to the police that about 15/16 days prior to the occurrence he had seen Gurpreet Singh appellant giving beatings to Kalpna and she was bleeding from her mouth and obviously he expected his hand in the murder. There was the presence of the accused on the place of occurrence with unusual calmness without any attempt even to explain how the occurrence took place obviously led to the inference that he and none else had a hand in the crime.
7. A site plan according to scales was got prepared from PW.3 Mool Chand Punia, a Draftsman, who gave a note in the site plan that the deceased was stated to be found in a complete sitting p
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
