Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O&M ) DATE OF DECISION :
25. 04.2014 Pushpa Devi .... APPELLANT Versus State of Haryana and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH Present: Mr. S.K. Verma, Advocate, for the appellant. *** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
1. Pushpa Devi wife of deceased Balraj Singh has filed the instant appeal against the judgment dated 12.4.2013 passed by the court of Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby accused Satish Kumar, Rakesh and Anoop (respondents No.2, 3 and 4 herein) have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 302 and 201 IPC for committing the murder of her husband.
2. Though there is a delay of 128 days in filing the appeal and the appellant has filed application (Crl. Misc. No.56 of 2014) for condoning the delay, yet we have heard learned counsel for the appellant on merits and have also perused the impugned judgment.
3. As per the prosecution version, it is a case of blind murder and Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -2- is based upon circumstantial evidence. On 12.12.2010, on receiving wireless message with regard to lying of a dead body along the fields situated adjacent to Chamarian Road, the police party headed by Bhim Singh SI/SHO of Police Station Sadar Rohtak, reached at the spot. Two cell phones were found lying near the dead body. On the basis of numbers available in one of those cell phones, family members of deceased Balraj were informed. Thereupon, Krishan (brother of deceased Balraj) along with his brother Kartar and one Sombir son of Balwan came at the place of occurrence. Krishan got recorded his statement to the police, on the basis of which FIR was registered. According to the complainant, the deceased was employed as a Peon in the Irrigation Department. Accused Satish, who was also employed as a Peon in the same department, had borrowed a sum of ` 2,00,000/- from the deceased about six months ago. He had assured the deceased to return the amount within one month. In spite of repeated requests made by the deceased, the said amount was not returned by accused Satish. On 11.12.2010 at about 6.00 p.m., the complainant saw that near Bus Stand, Rohtak, his brother Balraj was standing with accused Satish, Rakesh and Anoop. In his presence, his brother Balraj asked accused Satish to return the amount, who promised to return the same along with interest after reaching his house in village Chamarian. Thereafter, Balraj accompanied the aforesaid three accused to village Chamarian on his motor cycle. On 12.12.2010, at about 10.00 a.m., complainant Krishan received a telephonic Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -3- message from the police that dead body of his brother Balraj was lying in the fields adjoining to Chamarian Road. After reaching at the spot, he found injury marks on the head, face and neck of his deceased brother Balraj. He was sure that his brother was murdered by all the above named three accused by causing him injuries out of greed in order to avoid the return of the debt amount.
4. After completing investigation, challan was filed and charges under Sections 302 and 201 IPC were framed against the accused, to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined twenty witnesses and tendered into evidence report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, as Ex.P14 to Ex.P16, whereby human blood was detected on the pant of accused Anoop as well as on the blood stained earth lifted from the spot.
6. PW.1 Krishan (complainant) and PW.2 Sombir, both brothers of the deceased, who were the material witnesses, did not support the prosecution case.
7. PW.3 Dr. Satyawan, who conducted post mortem examination on the body of deceased Balraj, proved the Post Mortem Report of the deceased as Ex.P18.
8. PW.4 Kartar Singh and PW.5 Sunil Kumar turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -4- 9. PW.6 Ashok Kumar Patwari, who prepared the scaled site plan of the place of occurrence, is a formal witness and he proved the site plan Ex.P24.
10. PW.7 ASI Jogender Singh, who recorded the FIR (Ex.P25), and PW.8 EHC Anil Kumar, who delivered the special reports to the learned Area Magistrate and other higher police officials, are also formal witnesses.
11. PW.9 Constable Rajesh Kumar and PW.10 Constable Pardeep, who took the Dibi containing blood stained cotton swab and two sealed parcels, one containing viscera along with sample seal of the doctor and the other containing a pant along with sample seal, and deposited the same with the FSL, Madhuban, are formal witnesses.
12. PW.11 ASI Surender Singh, who took photographs of the dead body and the place of occurrence, proved the said photographs as Ex.P29 to Ex.P38.
13. PW.12 Baljit Singh, retired ESI, is another formal witness.
14. PW.13 Ashok Kumar, Additional Sub Divisional Engineer, stated regarding the employment of deceased Balraj in the Irrigation Department.
15. PW.14 Virender Singh, cousin of deceased Balraj, witness to the recovery of blood stained pant of accused Anoop and registration certificate of the motor cycle of the deceased at the instance of accused Anoop, did not support the prosecution case. Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -5- 16. PW.15 ASI Jai Bhagwan, who got conducted the post mortem examination of the deceased, is a formal witness.
17. PW.16 Krishan Lal, Kanoongo, Election Office, proved his report Ex.P44/A on the police request Ex.P44, that voter card number of Balraj was 93 and his booth number was 138.
18. PW.17 Anil Kumar, Clerk, proved his report Ex.P45/A on the police request Ex.P45 to the effect that Platina motor-cycle No.HR-12K/ 6709 was registered in the name of Balwan Singh son of Giani Ram resident of village Nonand.
19. PW.18 ASI Om Parkash and PW.19 SI Bhim Singh, proved the documents prepared by them during investigation of this case.
20. PW.20 Balwan Singh, the registered owner of Platina motor- cycle No.HR-12K/ 6709, stated that he got released his motor cycle on superdari.
21. In their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., all the accused denied the incriminating evidence appearing against them in the prosecution evidence, and pleaded their false implication. They took the plea that the recoveries were planted upon them, and the disclosure statements as well as the demarcation memos were fabricated documents.
22. In their defence, the accused did not examine any witness.
23. The trial court, while observing that the witness of last seen, witnesses of the disclosure statements as well as recoveries at the instance Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -6- of the accused, did not support the case of the prosecution, and the alleged motive has not proved, held that the prosecution has failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to prove that in all human probability, the accused and none else have committed the murder of Balraj. Accordingly, vide judgment dated 12.4.2013, all the accused have been acquitted of the charges framed against them by giving them benefit of doubt.
24. Against the aforesaid judgment of acquittal, the instant appeal has been filed by Pushpa Devi wife of deceased Balraj.
25. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the trial court, without properly appreciating the evidence available on record, has acquitted the accused of the charges, whereas the prosecution by leading sufficient evidence has fully established its case against the accused beyond shadow of reasonable doubt.
26. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the impugned judgment.
27. In this case, there is no direct evidence with regard to the murder of Balraj. The case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that if case of the prosecution is based upon the circumstantial evidence, it is the duty of the prosecution to (i) establish all the circumstances beyond reasonable doubt; and (ii) the circumstances so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far complete Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -7- as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
28. PW.1 Krishan (complainant), brother of deceased Balraj, was witness of last seen and witness to the recovery of pant of accused Anoop as well as demarcation of the place of occurrence by accused Anoop; turned hostile.
29. PW.2 Sombir, another brother of the deceased, was witness of disclosure statements of accused Rakesh and Satish, recovery of a purse containing ` 285/-, identity card of Canal department, voter identity card of deceased Balraj, photocopy of ration card, bill of mobile phone and bill of some machine of Balraj from the house of accused Satish, recovery of motor cycle from the house of accused Rakesh, and demarcation of the place of occurrence by accused Rakesh and Satish.
30. Both the aforesaid witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution.
31. Similarly, PW.4 Kartar Singh, witness of motive, also did not support the prosecution case. He denied that accused Satish had borrowed ` 2,00,000/- from deceased Balraj in his presence. He also denied that during the night of 11.12.2000, accused Satish called his nephews Rakesh and Anoop, where Balraj was also called, and after serving liquor to Balraj, the accused murdered him. Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. A. No.D-6-DB of 2014 ( O& M ) -8- 32. PW.5 Sunil Kumar, witness of disclosure statements as well as recoveries at the instance of accused Rakesh and Satish, and PW.14 Virender Singh, witness of recovery of the blood stained pant of accused Anoop and the Registration Certificate of the motor cycle, at the instance of accused Anoop, also did not support the prosecution case.
33. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the evidence of last seen, recovery and motive beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence available on record does not complete the chain of circumstances. Thus, the trial court has rightly concluded that the prosecution has failed to complete the chain of circumstances so as to prove that in all human probability, the accused and none else have committed the murder of Balraj. We are of the opinion that the impugned judgment does not require any interference. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court.
34. Consequently, the instant appeal is, hereby, dismissed, summarily. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE April 25, 2014 ( KULDIP SINGH ) ndj JUDGE Dass Narotam 2014.05.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document