State of H.P. Vs. Balvinder Kaur and ors. - Court Judgment

Surjit Singh, J.

1. State is aggrieved by the judgment of the Sessions Court whereby respondents Balvinder Kaur and Saravjit Singh and another person named Ravinder Singh, since deceased, have been acquitted of the charge of conspiracy to murder, murder and destruction of evidence of murder with a view to screening the offenders. So it has filed the present appeal.

2. Facts, as they emerge from the prosecution evidence may be stated thus: Deceased Surjit Singh was employed as a Constable with Punjab Police. In the year 1987, his wife died. He was thereafter transferred to Mohali. He started living in the neighborhood of respondent Balvinder Kaur. Deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur developed illicit relations. Deceased rented some accommodation at Dharampur in the building of Raj Kumar (PW 3) in July, 1990 and occupied the same on 5-9-1990. Respondent Balvinder Kaur accompanied him. A son of the deceased aged about, eight years, named Chhapinder Singh alias Soni (PW 14) was also with them. All the three left the accommodation a few days later. On 30-9-1990 or 1-10-1990, the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur returned to the aforesaid accommodation at Dharampur. They were seen together in the said accommodation on 4-10-1990. On 5-10-1990, dead-body of the deceased was found down the railway track near a bridge with a large number of incised wounds. The dead-body was spotted by PW-1 Shri Premu, a Railway Keyman. Matter was reported to the Police. It may be stated here that deceased took on rent the accommodation from Raj Kumar (PW 3) under the assumed name of Avtar Singh. Dead-body was identified by Raj Kumar (PW 3) to be that of his tenant Avtar Singh on 5-10-1990 itself. Since there were number of incised wounds on the dead-body, a case under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. was registered. Inquest was conducted. Dead-body was got subjected to post-mortem. Dr. (Mrs.) Radha Chopra (PW 6) found the following ante mortem injuries on the dead-body:

1. One incised wound 1 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm on right side of forehead, situated 1 inch above the right supra orbital arch. Edges were smooth and clean-cut averted wound was tapering laterally. Clotted blood was present.

2. One contusion on left eye, colour green. No sub-conjunctival haemorrhage was present.

3. One incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm x 2 cm situated on left side of neck 1' above the left lateral end of clavicle. Wound was running obliquely. Tapering back ward. Margins were clean. Smooth and averted clotted blood was present.

4. One incised wound 6 cm x 2 cm x 5 cm deep running transversely, situated 2 cm above the middle of right clavicle. Margins were smooth, clean and averted. Tapering posteriorly.

5. One incised wound 1 cm x 1 cm x 1/2 cm on right mastoid bone. Margins were smooth, clean cut, tapering posteriorly. Clotted blood was present.

6. Incised wound 3-1/2 cm x 1-1/2 cm x 1 cm running longitudinally on right side of chest 2 cm below the mid point of right clavicle. Margins regular, clean cut, tapering down ward. Clotted blood was present.

7. An incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm running longitudinally, situated 1 cm below the injury No. 6. Margins were smooth, clean cut, tapering down -ward. Clotted blood was present.

8. One incised wound 5 cm x 2 cm x penetrating the thoracic wall on right side injuring right lung underlying, running longitudinally at the level of 4th, 5th and 6th thorasic rib, situated 3' away from the mid-line. Margins were smooth regular and clean cut, clotted blood was present.

9. 3-1/2 cm x 2 cm incised wound x penetrating the left thorasic wall injuring the left lung underlying and cutting the anterior wall of left ventricle completely, reaching the ventricle cavity of the heart situated at the level of nipple of left breast running longitudinally margins were clean, smooth and tapering downwards. Blood coming out from the wound on pressing the thorax.

10. One incised wound 3-1/2 cm x 2-1/2 cm x thorasic wall deep situated on the left side of the chest 2 cm infero latterly to injury No. 9. Margins smooth, clean cut, tapering medially situated transversely clotted blood was present.

11. One incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm running longitudinally, situated 2 cm below the injury No. 9. Margins were smooth, clean cut tapering down ward clotted blood was present.

12. One incised wound 4 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm on right side of chest in mid axillary line at the level of 8th and 9th thorasic rib. Margins were smooth, clean cut, tapering down-wards, clotted blood was present.

13. One incised wound 3 cm x 2 cm x abdominal muscle deep, situated 2 cm below the costal margin in left hypochondrium running transversely, tapering laterally peritoneum was intact. Margins were smooth, clean cut, clotted blood was present.

14. One incised wound 3 cm x 2 cm x abdominal muscle deep, situated 2 cm away from the umbilicus on left side. Margins were smooth, clean cut, tapering laterally. Clotted blood was present.

15. One incised wound 8 cm x 2 cm x tender deep on dorsum of right foot, margins regular, smooth and clean cut. Tapering downward. Clotted flood was present.

16. One incised wound 6 cm x 2 cm x 3 cm running obliquely on left arm on anterior surface situated 4' below the left shoulder joint. Margins were regular smooth and clean cut. Tapering latterly. Clotted blood was present.

17. One incised wound 7 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm running obliquely on right fore-arm situated 3 cm above the right wrist-joint. Margins were smooth, clean cut and clotted blood was present, tapering medially.

18. One incised wound 1 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm between right ring and middle finger, margins were smooth regular and clean cut. Clotted blood was present.

19. One incised wound 3 cm x 1-1/2 cm x 2 cm on left side of neck on the back running transversely, situated 2 cm away from the 6th cervical vertebrae tapering lately. Margins were smooth, clean cut and clotted blood was present.

20. One incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm situated 1 cm below the injury No. 19, margins smooth and clean cut tapering down-ward.

21. One incised wound 3 cm x 1-1/2 cm x 3 cm on interscapular region situated at the level of 4th and 5th thorasic running transversely tapering latterly, margins smooth and clean cut.

22. One incised wound 3 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm on body of right scapula running transversely, margins were smooth regular and clean cut, tapering laterly.

3. On 20-10-1990, Mohinder Singh (PW11), the father-in-law of the deceased, accompanied by a brother of the deceased also named Mohinder Singh and employed as Deputy Superintendent of Police with the Punjab Police, visited Dharampur with a photograph of the deceased and accused Balvinder Kaur. The photograph was shown to Raj Kumar (PW 3) who identified the man in the photograph as his deceased tenant Avtar Singh. He was told that the map was not Avtar Singh but Surjit Singh, a constable employed in the Punjab Police. On coming to know that the deceased was not Avtar Singh but was Surjit Singh and was living at Dharampur using the fake name, Police started further investigation in the matter. During the course of investigation, it came to notice that the deceased had been having illicit relations with Balvinder Kaur and that on the night of 4-10-1990, she had left Dharampur by the Taxi of Yash Pal (PW 4) for Chandigarh in the company of her husband Ravinder Singh (a co-accused who is now dead) and her son Saravjit Singh, her co-respondent herein. All the three were taken into custody.

4. Ravinder Singh deceased accused, made a disclosure statement leading to the discovery of a dagger Exhibit-P9. Balvinder Kaur respondent made a statement leading to the discovery of a shirt and a pant of deceased accused Ravinder Singh and a shirt and pant of her correspondent Saravjit Singh. The aforesaid clothes of Ravinder Singh and respondent Saravjit Singh, the dagger Exhibit-P9 and the clothes removed from the dead-body were sent to the Chemical Examiner and as per his report Exhibit PNN, the stains of human blood of Group-O were there on the clothes of the deceased, the two shirts Exhibits P17 and P19 and Pant Exhibit P16 got recovered by Balvinder Kaur and which allegedly belonged to her deceased husband and son and co-respondent Saravjit Singh as also on the dagger Exhibit-P9.

5. There was a writing on the reverse of the photograph Exhibit PH/1, which had been shown to PW3 Raj Kumar, which gave the impression that the deceased and Balvinder Kaur respondent were having an affair. The Police also recovered from the tenanted premises at Dharampur a letter Exhibit P9, torn in a number of pieces, which was allegedly written by the deceased to the respondent Balvinder Kaur expressing his love for her. The identity of the deceased as Constable Surjit Singh was further established by the comparison of his finger prints available in his service record with the Punjab Police with the skin of finger tips, which had been removed at the time of post-mortem.

6. Trial Court has dis-believed the prosecution story that the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur were having love affair or illicit relations. It has also dis-believed the evidence of discovery of blood stains clothes of deceased Ravinder Singh and respondent Saravjit Singh. It has also not completely believed the testimony of PW3 Raj Kumar, particularly on the point that respondent Balvinder Kaur was with the deceased on the date of the occurrence. Taxi Driver Yash Pal (PW 4) did not support the prosecution story.

7. We have heard the learned Additional Advocate General and gone through the record. We have also heard Shri Anup Chitkara, Counsel representing the respondents.

8. Balvinder Kaur respondent has denied that she was having illicit relations with the deceased. She admits that she had been with the deceased at Dharampur but, according to her, she was with him only for a week when her son was also accompanying him and that she came to assist the deceased in arranging the house-hold articles in his tenement at Dharampur. She has stated that she and the deceased were treating each other as sister and brother and this fact was known to her husband as also the son, besides the two sons of the deceased.

9. Learned Advocate General has taken us through the writing on the reverse of the photograph Exhibit-PH. From the reading, it cannot be made out that the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur were having any amorous relationship. One of the sentences in the writing shows that respondent Balvinder Kaur had applied a 'Tilak' of her blood on the forehead of the deceased which is suggestive of the fact that she made the deceased her god brother.

10. That apart, it has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt if the writing Exhibit PH/1 is in the hand of the deceased. Prosecution's case is that besides Exhibit PH/1, the deceased wrote letter Exhibit PK expressing prangs of separation from Balvinder Kaur respondent. PW-32 S.I. Ujagar Singh, under whom the deceased had been working stated that the writings Exhibit PK and PH/1 are in the hand of the deceased. Apparently, the two writings are dis-similar. The fact that the two writings are dis-similar is also testified by PW-11 Mohinder Singh, the father-in-law of the deceased, who categorically stated that the writing Exhibit-PK is not in the hand of the deceased. We may notice that Exhibit PK is the letter, torn pieces of which were allegedly recovered from the tenanted premises of the deceased at Dharampur. Now if letter Exhibit-PK is not in the hand of the deceased and it is sought to be proved that it is a letter written by him to Balvinder Kaur, it can safely be said that a deliberate attempt had been made to falsely implicate the respondents in the crime and evidence of motive for the commission of crime was fabricated. The fact that a son of the deceased was also at Dharampur, when respondent Balvinder Kaur was there negates the theory of there being illicit relations between the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur.

11. Evidence that Balvinder Kaur was with the deceased up to 4-10-1990, i.e., the alleged date of commission of the murder of the deceased, consists of the testimony of Raj Kumar (PW 3). We have already noticed that Yash Pal (PW 4), the taxi driver, who allegedly drove the respondents Balvinder Kaur and her husband late Ravinder Singh and her son Saravjit Singh respondent from Dharampur to Chandigarh, did not support the prosecution version.

12. Testimony of Raj Kumar (PW 3) that respondent Balvinder Kaur had been with the deceased up to 4.10.1990 does not inspire confidence. The witness stated that the deceased finalized the deal regarding renting out of a portion of his house on 28.7.1990 and paid rupees 200/- as advance and occupied the premises on 5.9.1990 on which date, he paid the balance rent amounting to rupees 200/-. He stated that the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur stayed in the house for about a month along with a son of the deceased and returned after about twenty to twenty-five days. Now if the deceased and respondent Balvinder Kaur had occupied the house on 5.9.1990 and they stayed there for about a month, the date of their leaving Dharampur comes to around 4th or 5th October, 1990. At the same time, he says that they returned in the tenement for about twenty to twenty-five days. How could this have been possible when the deceased has admittedly died on 4.1.1990? The testimony of this witness is contradicted by PW-22 Bayasan Devi who lives in his neighbourhood. The witness stated that deceased lived in the house for three-four months and he was accompanied by respondent Balvinder Kaur. Raj Kumar (PW 3) does not say that Balvinder Kaur lived with the deceased for three four months nor does he say that even the deceased remained in the premises for such a long period.

13. Raj Kumar (PW 3) is also contradicted by his statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the said statement Exhibit-DA, with which he was duly confronted, he stated that the deceased had been paying rent to him from month to month regularly but in his testimony as PW-3, he stated that he lived there only for one month and paid half of the rent at the time when the deal was finalized and the remaining half on 5.9.1990 when he occupied the premises. Thus, the testimony of PW3 Raj Kumar does not prove that respondent Balvinder Kaur was with the deceased at Dharampur on the date when he was murdered or that she left Dharampur on 4.10.1990 by a taxi in the company of her husband late Ravinder Singh and respondent Saravjit Singh, her son.

14. Evidence regarding recovery of dagger Exhibit-P9, allegedly at the instance of deceased respondent Ravinder Singh, is also lacking. Both the independent witnesses of the disclosure statement and the recovery pursuant to the said statement, namely PW-5 Vijay Kumar and PW-2 Nanak Chand, turned hostile. Prosecution cross-examined them with the leave of the Court but could not elicit anything suggesting that the deceased Ravinder Singh made the disclosure statement or got recovered the dagger which is alleged to be the weapon of offence. The above stated position apart, it is also doubtful if dagger Exhibit-P9 was the weapon of offence because Dr. (Mrs.) Radha Chopra (PW 6) who conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased, testified that the tip of the dagger was blunted and if this weapon were used for causing the injuries, there must have been some peculiarity in the pattern of the injuries, corresponding to the blunted tip of the dagger, which was not there.

15. Evidence regarding recovery of shirts and pants of the deceased accused Ravinder Singh and respondent Saravjit Singh, allegedly at the instance of respondent Balvinder Kaur, is also doubtful. According to the disclosure statement, the record of which is Exhibit PAA, Balvinder Kaur had washed the clothes and spread them for being dried up and concealed them. There is no mention in the record of the said statement as to whether the clothes had been kept concealed. The prosecution examined Rattan Singh (PW-16) to prove the facts of making of disclosure statement and the discovery of clothes pursuant thereto. The witness stated that Balvinder Kaur produced one sky blue pant from a wooden box and one stripped shirt from the bath-room and stated that the same belonged to her husband. He further stated that thereafter respondent Balvinder Kaur took out a red coloured attache-case from the kitchen and produced one black coloured pant there from and also produced one half sleeves shirt of grey colour which was lying on an iron box and stated that the said pant and shirt belonged to her son Saravjit Singh.

16. Now the statement of the witness is contrary to the contents of the seizure memo Exhibit-PBB. As per this memo, one pant was produced from a wooden box which box was lying in the first room from the entrance side, grey shirt was produced from a hook in front of the latrine, the other pant was produced from an red coloured attache-case which was lying in a room adjacent to the kitchen and the second shirt was lying on a big box kept out side the kitchen. No local witness was associated at the time of search of the house of the respondent and thus, there was violation of Section 100 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

17. Prosecution also tried to prove that the respondent Saravjit Singh was having fractured elbow on 5.1.1990 when he went to the General Hospital, Chandigarh per testimony of Dr. Ashok Gupta who stated that the respondent was having plastered arm. The explanation offered by respondent Saravjit Singh is that he had a fall from scooter on 5.1.1990, and as a result of which his arm got fractured. This plea of the respondent is corroborated by writing Exhibit-DE which he submitted to his superior Officer, for obtaining leave of absence from duty.

18. In view of the above discussion, we do not think this to be a fit case for interference with the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence the appeal is dismissed.