However, the police filed a report referring the case on the ground that the evidence gathered during the investigation was number sufficient for presenting a challan against the appellant.
The entire edifice of the prosecution is rested only circumstantial pieces of evidence.
The viscera was sent for chemical analysis.
Hence this appeal.
The Magistrate who after taking the evidence companymitted the case for trial.
It was only thereafter the mother of the deceased PW 5 gave a private companyplaint.
The deceased was suspected to have informed this illicit relationship of the sister of the appellant with Joginder Singh to the family members of Raj Singh to whom the girl had been betrothed.
However, the fact remains that the girl died under some suspicious circumstances.
The explanation given by the appellant is that he was a close friend of the deceased, that on the date of occurrence, he met the deceased near the Railway Station of Amritsar in a drunken companydition that at the request of the deceased he took him to SGTB Hospital where the deceased ultimately died and that thereafter, he informed PW 5 about the death of the deceased at about midnight on 1 4 1976.
The present appeal is preferred by the appellant Swinder Singh, who was aged about 29 years at the time of the occurrence and 42 at present, questioning the companyrectness of the judgment rendered by the High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The charge levelled against the appellant was that on 1st April, 1976 at Amritsar the appellant companymitted the murder of the deceased Prabhdyal Singh by administering alcohol companytaining poisonous substance.
One Joginder Singh, a resident of the nearby village, Lopoke was a friend of the deceased.
So far as the evidence regarding the movement of the deceased in the companypany of the appellant on the fateful day, the prosecution has rested its case on the evidence of PWs 6 and 7.
He is said to have developed friendship with the appellant and in the manner he also developed illicit relationship with the sister of the appellant, namely, Balwindra.
The deceased was taken to the hospital by the appellant about 8.10 p. m. and he expired at 8.40 p. m. Postmortem was companyducted by PW 1 who found four abrasion1 on the body of the deceased, which injuries in the opinion of the medical officer companyld have been caused by a blunt weapon.
On receipt of that information Raj Singh decided number to marry the girl.
He examined Prabhdyal Singh who was at the time was in a state of companya and having alcoholic smell.
It is also admitted that this girl Balwindra thereafter died either of poisoning or by being killed by her relatives.
This according to the prosecution was the motive for the appellant to put an end to the life of the deceased whom the appellant suspected to have been responsible for the tragic end of his sister.
To substantiate this part of the case the prosecution has examined PWs 6 and 7.
Not denying the fact that the deceased died of taking poison mixed in alcohol but the question that arises for companysideration is as to whether the appellant and the appellant alone was responsible for causing the death of the deceased by administering the alcohol mixed with poison.
Yet another circumstantial piece of evidence put forth by the prosecutions that the deceased was taken to the hospital, SGTB Hospital, Amritsar by the appellant where he was examined by PW 1 Doctor .
According to the medical officer the blood alcohol found in this case showed that it was a fatal dose of alcohol.
This girl Balwindra was subsequently betrothed to one Raj Singh who is the sisters son of the mother of the deceased.
It is true that the evidence discloses strong motive for the appellant against the deceased.
The next piece of evidence the prosecution has attempted to adduce is that the appellant and the deceased travelled together by a bus to Amritsar.
It transpires from the evidence adduced by the prosecution that the appellant and the deceased were very close friends having studied together in the school as well as in the companylege for a period of six years and that each of them had paid frequent visits to the house of the other.
It is said that the appellant, thereafter, was number in talking terms with the deceased for about six months.
The High Court after discussing the evidence of these two witnesses in detail has made the following observation We have thus companysidered it safer to exclude the evidence given by Tehal Singh like that of Ajaib Singh for determining whether from the remaining evidence it can be taken to be established that the deceased had companye along with the appellant to Amritsar and then remained with him for whole of the day on April 1, 1976.
The motive for the prosecution is spoken to by PWs 5, 8 and 9.
Those circumstances are that i there was a strong motive for the appellant to liquidate the deceased ii both the appellant and the deceased went seen together before and after the occurrence and iii the suspicious companyduct of the appellant before and after the occurrence led to an illation of his guilt.
Subsequently, he developed his friendship again with the deceased.
517 of 1980 companyfirming the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed therefor.
On receipt of the report of the chemical examiner, PW 1 gave his opinion stating that the death of the deceased in his opinion was due to strychnine and alcohol poison.
The case was registered by PW 8 and the same was investigated.
