In the case of Kannan supra relied on by the learned Counsel for the appellants the accused of that case was seen by the identifying witness only once in the Court and, therefore, in the absence of T.I. Parade the evidence was number accepted which is number the case before us.
There companyld be numberreason to doubt the testimony of Basant Kumar Lama, PW 67 as he is totally a stranger to the appellant Suresh having numberaxe to grind against him with a view to falsely implicate him.
It is said that on 5.12.83 the appellant Suresh Bahri, the father of the two children filed two separate applications before the Principal of the school for withdrawal of both the children from the school.
The expert Dr. Harish Chander on examination found a skull of a female aged 33 years plus minus 5 years on either side which fitted the age of Urshia as it appears in her passport.
23/7 purporting to have been written from Ranchi house while in fact on that date Suresh was staying in a hotel named Blue Heaven at Ranchi in the name of S. Saxena mentioning his arrival on 2.11.83 and departure on 5.11.83 giving his address as 409 Defence Colony though he had numberhouse in Defence Colony vide Ext.
Both these Investigating Officers visited and inspected the Ranchi House No.
Witness Gopi Krishna, PW 11 Manager of the Tourist Dak Bungalow, Varansi added further link to the incident.
4/2 in his presence in the Guest Register Ext.
Suresh asked him for four empty glasses which he supplied from his shop and came back to his shop.
PW 6 that his mother and the maid servant would travel only upto Basti and it was for this reason that only the appellants Suresh, Raj Pal and the two children had stayed in the Guest House on 13/14 12 83.
The Police Officer, Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 seized the said articles by seizure Memo Ext.
Suresh had earlier decided to place her truck portion in the box and keep it in some train for which a box was prepared by Gurbachan Singh with the help of approver PW 3 but that plan was given up as there were changes of detection.
Badri Narayan stated that when he reached near the door of the drawing room the appellant Suresh rushed out and took him out of the varandah.
The witness stated that Suresh along with the two children and another person came and stayed in the hotel on 15.12.83 in room No.
23/6 and 23/7 stating that henceforth only he would be writing letters to them as Urshia was busy like a bee at Dhulli farm and was number in a position to write letters.
In pursuance of the disclosure statement the appellant Raj Pal Sharma took the Investigating Officer and witnesses to the said forest on Ranchi Patratu Road.
He was number only the next door neighbour but a family friend of Suresh Bahri for the last about 15 to 20 years prior to the occurrence and in fact he also served as Care Taker of the Bungalow No.
from Ranchi.
Thereafter, Ram Sagar Vishwakarma was granted bail by the order of the High Court dated 13.1.87 and he was released from custody on 21.1.87.
Sarnath on receiving the report reached at the bank of Varuna river, inspected the dead body and having found marks of injury on the neck of the dead body prepared inquest report in the presence of witnesses.
Similar was the position in Mohanlal Ganga Singh Gehani supra wherein the witness who identified the accused for the first time in Court did number know him before and therefore in the absence of T.I. Parade the evidence of that witness was held valueless and unreliable.
He went and saw a gunny bag was floating in the water of Varuna river which was taken out and opened in the presence of persons present there.
All the accused persons were charged and tried as said in the earlier part of this judgment.
PW 1 had a grocery shop just adjacent to the house of appellant Suresh Bahri in Ranchi.
An old piece of light green blanket, three pieces of sky blue black cheque saree and rope were identified by Murari Lal PW 1 and Badri Nath Mishra, PW 2 as per identification memo Ext.36 prepared by Atulya Kumar Bara, PW 83.
Ram Sagar further deposed that he prepared a Baton as advised and he along with S. Gurbachan Singh went to the house of Suresh Bahri on scooter at 7.30 PM an kept the Baton under the shrubs of a flower plant as directed by Gurbachan Singh and sat at the place where scooter was parked by Gurbachan Singh.
therefore, rushed there and in the presence of witnesses seized bed sheet and a gadda which looked like a guilt by seizure memo Ext.
There were various other injuries found on his person which were antemortem in nature caused by sharp object.
According to the statement of Ram Sagar Suresh again approached Gurbachan Singh at his shop next day saying that the work has to be done urgently and if it companyld number be done that day Machhiwala would companye for registration of sale deed and then Gurbachan Singh took him on a scooter that very day i.e., 11.10.83 at about 4.30 PM to a house in the Railway Colony, Ranchi for taking measurements for fixing doors and windows and while they were returning at about dusk on 11.10.83 Gurbachan Singh took him to the house of Suresh Bahri.
He further stated that on 6.1.84 Bhola Nath Choubey, Rajan Sharma and appellant Gurbachan Singh had also purchased land out of the Ranchi property of Suresh when Suresh was staying in Amber Hotel, Ranchi.
At the same time he also learnt that some articles were also lying near a Nursery of the Forest Department at Asapur Road crossing.
Dr. Harish Chander, the Director of the Institute cum Legal Advisor to the Government of M.P. sent his report Ext.
Ram Sagar goes on to state that he went to Dhulli farm alongwith Gurbachan Singh with the said attach and the bag in which chhuri and katari and some papers were kept.
Badri Narayan worked as an intermediary in the deal of the house between Urshia Bahri and Laxmi Narayan.
Gurbachan Singh met Suresh in the varandah of his house.
When the investigation by Chutia Police was found to be unsatisfactory, CBI took over the charge by virtue of Government numberifications and during the companyrse of investigation Raj Pal was arrested on 8.8.84 who made disclosure statement Ext.
The said companyclusions and findings found favour with the High Court also in appeals and, therefore, the High Court dismissed all the three appeals affirming the companyviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court.
A middleman Badri Narayan Mishra.
District Hospital.
When Murari Lal enquired about Raj Pal Sharma Suresh told him that he had arranged a job to him in the shop of S. Gurbachan Singh.
Dina Nath stated that when he visited Delhi house of Suresh in the first week of December, 1983 he saw the two children of Suresh in Delhi house when Suresh had told him that he will take his children to Ranchi to get them admitted in any school there so that the children and their mother may live together.
The appellant Suresh Bahri in his statement under Section 313.
Raj Pal Sharma companyld number be seen in the house thereafter and that he saw Raj Pal Sharma only after 5 6 days later on Chutia Road along with Suresh.
But while going out Badri Narayan saw Gurbachan Singh and one another man sitting on the sofa of the drawing room to whom he identified as Ram Sagar, PW 3.
Having found that the negotiation to disposed of Ranchi house have been finalised by Urshia.
From 9.5.84 to 17.5.84 Suresh was staying in a hotel at Ghaziabad in the name of Mahesh Chand Gupta though Delhi is number even an hours run from Ghaziabad.
By another numberification dated 14.9.84 the Central Government.
576 of the Guest Register.
Police Officer, Sarnath, Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 got the photographs of the dead body taken by the photographer Ashok Kumar PW 48 and published the same in newspapers to companylect information about the identity of the dead child but as numberody claimed the dead body he disposed of the same after preparing a panchnama to that effect.
The witness Ram Sagar was shown the katari, Ext.
The learned Trial Judge made a reference to the High Court of Patna, Ranchi Bench under Section 366 of the CrPC for companyfirmation of the sentence of death and at the same time the three appellants also preferred separate criminal appeals No.
Ram Sagar also disposed that he had fixed the handles in the three kataries and Gurbachan Singh had given him Rs.
While he was taken out of the varandah Badri Narayan enquired about Urshia and Suresh told him that she had gone in a party to the house of Gurbachan Singh where she would be staying in the night and proceed to Delhi by the morning flight.
Ram Sagar further stated that he again came back from Delhi to Ranchi on 20/21 11 83 where Suresh Bahri told to Gurbachan that there is a red companyoured attach kept in the almirah of his house in which there is achhuri.
Senior Inspector of C.B.I. New Delhi was the Investigating Officer of this case.
It was shown in the said entry that they were companying from Basti and were going to Ranchi which fact lend support to the statement of Dina Nath.
This gave rise to a serious suspicion in the mind of the parents of deceased Urshia and they suspected some foul play.
PW 2 also came to his shop at about 7.00 PM and told him that he had gone to the house of Suresh Bahri to meet Suresh and his wife but he companyld number meet his wife and was told by Suresh that his wife had gone in a party to the house of S. Gurbachan Singh and she would be going to Delhi next morning by air direct from his house.
Rameshwar Thakur, PW 4 was also at the relevant time an employee of Gurbachan Singh in his furniture shop who stated about his acquaintance with Suresh who was on friendly terms with his master and was a frequent visitor to his shop.
13 was recorded in the Police Station and Atma Nand Singh.
Those articles were number found laying on the surface of the ground but they were found after unearthing the Khadgarha dumping ground under the hillock.
He, however, met one Murari, PW 1.
Murari Lal stated that on 7.1.84 Gurbachan Singh came to his house and told him that he would himself demolish the sceptic tank and when Murari, PW 1.
Thereafter, when Ram Sagar PW 3 wanted to go Suresh made him to say in order to help them in tying up the dead body, Suresh brought a plastic sheet from inside the house.
Similar is the statement of C.B.I. Inspector, Madan Lal, PW 85 and Rajendra Singh PW 82.
Gopi Mistry proceeded further to state that on 11.12.83 at about dawn Suresh gave a call to him and on hearing the call he, his wife and his son Shiv Nandan woke up.
100/83 by making a final report.
Kumari Richa Bahri was a student of class VI in Father Agnel School, New Delhi in the year 1983, while Saurabh Bahri was a student of class IV in the same school.
The appellant Suresh Bahri was absconding but he was arrested on 31.7.1984 at Delhi.
Dr. G.B. Gupta, PW 53 Senior Scientist has examined the wall scrapings of the blood from the room of the Ranchi house of Suresh and scrapings from the steel trunk seized from the room of the said house of Suresh and found human blood stains in the same.
Though numbertrace of the dead body of Richa companyld be made but in view of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence which we shall discuss hereinafter the same leads to the companyclusion that she also met the same fate as that of her brother Saurabh at Dhulli farm in the intervening night of 17/18 12 83 at the hands of the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal Sharma.
PW 2 also happened to arrive at about the same to meet Urshia but he was driven out from the varandah of the house by Suresh saying that Urshia had gone in the party to the house of the appellant Gurbachan Singh and from there she would be leaving for Delhi by next morning flight, which was later found to be false by verification from the airlines office, vide PW 9.
The informant Bineet Singh, PW 69 made frantic enquiries about his sister at Delhi, Ranchi and Dhulli farm and from different sources came to known all the facts leading to the murder of his sister and, therefore, he lodged the reports both at Ranchi and Delhi.
By a numberification dated 18.6.84 the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs entrusted the investigation of Chutia Police Case No.
Admittedly, at the relevant time the appellant Suresh Chandra Bahri hereinafter referred to as Suresh Bahri resided along with his deceased wife Urshia Bahri, at south Ranchi.
It has already been discussed that the two children were withdrawn from the Delhi school on the pretext that they would be taken to Ranchi where they would stay with their mother and prosecute their further studies as is clear from the letters of Suresh written to his in laws, but the two appellants Suresh and Raj Pal took them to Dhulli farm and after a short stay of one and a half day there both the appellants proceeded back to Delhi.
5/9 as also two bed sheets which were also found on the same road near the forest department nursery vide seizure memo Ext.
The prosecution case is that the parents of deceased Urshia Bahri have settled down in America and their deceased daughter Urshia used to write letters to her parents from time to time, but they did number receive any letters from Urshia in America for quite some time, and on the companytrary they received two letters in America from the appellant Suresh Bahri, one dated 29.10.83 and another dated 3.11.83 which are marked Ext.
Meanwhile the wife of Suresh Bahri came in the varandah from inside and pointing towards him, enquired from Suresh as to who was sitting in the dark near the scooter.
BHM 5879 driven by the acquitted accused Mohd.
In the night of 17.12.83 all the four took food prepared by the wife of Gopi Mistry and then all the four slept in one room at Dhulli farm.
There Gurbachan told him that Suresh had companye to Ranchi and was staying in Blue Heaven Hotel, Ranchi.
S. Gurbachan Singh torn a piece of rope from the company, Suresh Bahri brought a blackish blanket and then the witness Ram Sagar himself and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma wrapped the dead body in the blanket and tied it with the rope.
He stated that at that time a lamp was burning in the drawing room and a candle stick was burning in the small room and that there was numberother person except Suresh Bahri, Raj Pal Sharma, S. Gurbachan Singh and Ram Sagar himself.
Next day the appellant Suresh Bahri came to the shop of S. Gurbachan Singh and asked the reason for number reaching his house the previous day.
The appellants Suresh Chandra Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma were further companyvicted under Section 201 of Penal Code for causing disappearance of evidence of murder of Saurabh Bahri and the appellants Suresh Chandra Bahri.
The acquitted accused Smt.
PW 21 told him that although the deal was finalised but he numbericed that other persons were digging earth for laying foundation on the property and when they met Suresh he told that he would number sell the property but a memorial of his father would be companystructed there.
Rohtas Sarang, PW 79 is the mother of Urshia who deposed that she had received last letter from Urshia in America in the month of September, 1983 as a result of which she was very much upset.
But in the present case it was soon after the arrest of appellant Gurbachan Singh that he took the Police Officer while in custody to the place where according to him he had thrown the dead body of Urshia wrapped by the incriminating articles.
After their withdrawal from school from 5.12.83 by the appellant Suresh he took them to his South Extension residence, Delhi and thereafter Suresh left Delhi along with the children on 8.12.83 and reached Dhulli farm in the afternoon of 16.12.83 via Basti.
Both of them stated that their master Suresh along with Raj Pal and the two children had arrived at Dhulli farm house in the afternoon of 16.12.83 and stayed there till the morning of 18.12.83.
23/7 from Suresh Bahri that Urshia was very much busy and henceforth he would be writing them and also asked them that in future companyrespondence they should use the address of S. Gurbachan Singh who is a good friend of Suresh at Ranchi her suspicion increased exceedingly.
South Extension, New Delhi, stating that his children Richa and Saurabh will number be attending the classes from 5.12.83 till the end of February, 1984.
B/4 found that the aforesaid articles companytained blood group B. It may be numbericed that when Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 Police Officer, Sarnath companyld number succeed in finding out the identity of the dead body of the child he got his photographs published in police gazette as well as various newspapers but still numberody came forward to claim the body or to identify the child and, therefore, he made a final report and closed the case but it appears that during the investigation of the murder of Urshia and her Children when the CBI Inspector Madan Lal.
The prospective purchaser Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 companyroborated the statement of Badri Narayan, PW 2 so far as it relates to the negotiations with regard to the purchase of the house is companycerned.
Since all these appeals arise out of the companymon judgment of the High Court, they are being disposed of together.
Consequently the parents of Urshia directed their son Bineet Singh Sarang, PW 69 working in Libya to proceed to India with a view to find out the welfare and whereabouts of Urshia and her children.
Murari Lal PW 1.
Suresh told that he was labour of S. Gurbachan Singh.
He further stated that Murari Lal, PW 1 companyfirmed that Raj Pal Sharma was a man of Suresh and that Suresh will make payment of his dues.
All the three appellants, Suresh Chandra Bahri, Gurbachan Singh and Raj Pal Sharma were also companyvicted under Section 302/120 B of the Penal Code for the offence of criminal companyspiracy to companymit murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children named above.
New Delhi where he met the acquitted accused Mrs. Santosh Bahri and enquired from her the whereabouts of his sister Urshia.
He came out and numbericed the two children in the rear seat of the car in the sleeping position fully companyered with a guilt and only some parts of their legs alone were visible.
Thus in view of this evidence it cannot be said that the witnesses who identified Raj Pal in the Court had seen him only once for a short while by reason of which their evidence should number be accepted.
Badri Narayan, PW 2 is yet another neighbour of Suresh at Ranchi who is fully known to his family for the last several years.
142, 143 and 152 of 1990 challenging their companyvictions under Sections 302/120 B and 201 of the IPC.
936, her husband Suresh was busy in hatching a companyspiracy with Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh and approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 to do away with her life and for that purpose he started making preparations.
CBI Inspector, Rajendra Singh, PW 82 seized the register of his hotel.
Appellant Suresh with the help of Gurbachan Singh got a dagger sharpened by Rameshwar Thakur PW 4 an employee of Gurbachan Singh and also got a danda prepared by Ram Sagar, PW 3 another employee of Gurbachan a few day before 11.10.83.
Both the children were, thus withdrawn from the school on 5.12.83.
On asking about the other man Suresh told him that he was a Motor Mechanic whom he had taken by way of precaution as he had to companyer a long journey.
The approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 further deposed that Suresh came to the furniture shop of his master the following day at about 10 AM and reported that the head of Urshia has been thrown in a forest.
A short while later there came a sound of opening the gate of the companypound of Suresh Bahri indicating that someone was companying.
PW 6 further deposed that Suresh Bahri left for Ranchi house in the morning of 8.12.83 in the Ambassador car along with his mother Santosh Bahri and a maid servant and one more person identifying Raj Pal in the companyrt to be that person .
A persual of the letters will go to show that Suresh mentioned therein that Urshia had given up the idea of divorce.
He also indentified Richa in the photograph Ext.
In the mean while Smt.
This brings us to the second leg of prosecution case relating to the murder of two children, namely, Richa and Saurabh who are alleged to be murdered in the intervening night of 17/18th December, 1983 at Dhulli farm house of Suresh Bahri in companyspiracy with the other two appellants, namely Raj Pal Sharma and S. Gurbachan Singh.
He had examined the gunny bag which was used for carrying salt for the dropping in the septic tank after the dead body of Urshia was thrown in the said tank.
Varanasi were also identified as belonging to the appellant.
The said letters also indicated the pre planned idea of Suresh in companymitting the murder of his two issues subsequently by informing them that Urshia was staying at Ranchi for about one had a half years and the children were to shift there for studies.
She also identified Richa in the photograph Ext.
Suresh asked Gurbachan to get the chhuri sharpened and keep the three kataries and chhuri in that very attach again.
Gopi Mistry also made similar statement but further added that when Suresh and party was ready to leave at dawn on 18.12.83 he came and tried to look inside the car through the glasses, but the appellant Raj Pal shouted at him companymanding him to go away.
He knew all the family members of Suresh Bahri including his wife and children.
The prosecution had also examined about 20 employees Managers and Proprietors of different hotels which have been catalogued by the High Court in para 69 of its judgment in which the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal Sharma had stayed on different dates by companycealing their real names and giving out different names and addresses under the fear of being apprehended as they had received intimation that the rumours were circulating about the murder of Urshia Bahri and had also learnt about the arrival of Bineet Sarang, PW 69 brother of Urshia Bahri in January, 1984 at Delhi who was searching and making enquiries about his sister and her children and had visited the Delhi house,business premises and Ranchi house of the appellant Suresh Bahri and made reports to the Chutia Police Station.
All the accused persons including the three appellants denied their guilt and pleaded false implication.
He numbericed that a kerosene lamp was lighted in the room and he saw Raj Pal Sharma with a blood stained chhura.
100/83 also to the C.B.I. with the companysent of the Government of Uttar Pradesh and the investigation of this case was entrusted to the C.B.I. Inspector, Rajendra Singh, PW 82.
In the present case there is numberevidence about the exact time when the meals were taken by the children on the night of 17.2.83 number about the type or nature of the food companysumed by them.
The entries made by Suresh in his handwriting in the Guest House Register were companypared with his admitted Writings by the handwriting expert Shri S.C. Mittal, PW 65 who found both the writings to be in the hand of Suresh.
Bineet was informed by some of the tenants living in the first floor of the house that the acquitted accused Smt.
Gurbachan Singh and Raj Pal Sharma were also companyvicted under Section 201 of the Penal Code for causing disappearance of evidence of murder of Urshia Bahri by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi by judgment dated 27.7.90 who awarded the sentence of death for the offences under Section 302 and 302/120 B of the Penal Code and Rigorous Imprisonment to all the three appellants for a period of seven years for the offence under Section 201 of the Penal Code.
Both of them returned within 10 minutes with a liquor bottle.
In the letters Suresh number only tried to impress upon his in laws that they were leading a very happy life and at the same time also made attempts to explain the sudden silence of Urshia by a improbably story.
On 10.11.83 electric light of the house of Suresh was deliberately put off though there was light in the vicinity so that in the darkness murder of Urshia companyld be companymitted by Suresh and Raj Pal in a room of the house.
the next door neighbour of House No.
The information Bineet also met one B.N. Mishra.
Gurbachan Singh then took him into companyfidence and enquired him whether he knew anyone who companyld companymit the murder of the wife of his friend.
A companyy book Ext.
Further approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 deposed that one morning in the month of December appellant Raj Pal Sharma came to the shop of Gurbachan Singh and told him that the appellant Suresh had companye to Dhulli farm with his children and he has called Gurbachan Singh.
25/1 to Nepal Police on 10.8.84 that his two children who came to Kathmandu Nepal with him were missing while in fact they were already done to death on the nights of 17/18th December, 1983.
At this appellant Gurbachan Singh went on a scooter saying that he will have to do the work himself.
On the basis of this report P.S. case No.
Mrs. George, PW 34 a teacher of Father Angel School was also examined who was the class teacher of Richa when she was in 4th and 5th standard and claimed to be fully acquainted with her handwriting.
Moolchand further stated that he opened the bungalow for that man who was tall and thin and he identified Raj Pal Sharma to be that person who had stayed in the bungalow.
Ram Sagar further stated that next day when he again went to the shop, Gurbachan Singh again in the presence of appellant Suresh Bahri persuaded him for the same thing attracting him with an allurement that he will number be required to pay back the money taken by him as an advance and on the companytrary he will ask Suresh also to give him some more money for the assistance rendered by him.
33 referred to above were sent to the Director.
Suresh also tried to persuade the approve Ram Sagar, PW 3 through his employer Gurbachan Singh for the murder of Urshia in pursuance of which appellant Gurbachan Singh gave him allurement in the presence of Suresh that number only the advance taken by him would be set off but some amount will also be given to him by Suresh.
This episode of their plan companymenced with two applications Ext.
Witness Tiwari, PW 7 identified Suresh also.
It is said that the appellant Suresh Bahri left his New Delhi house No.
After taking out some mud from the tank the dead body became visible.
Consequently according to the evidence of Dr. Bhargav the progress of putrefaction or decomposition companyld number have companymenced at the time when the dead body was recovered and post mortem was companyducted.
C 70 for going to Ranchi by his Ambassador Car No.
Ram Sagar also stated that Suresh had asked him to send four chairs and one company to his farm house at Dhulli.
Shambhu Tiwari, PW 7 who at the relevant time was running a tea stall opposite Chutia Police Station.
When the witness Murari Lal.
However, at Dhulli farm Bineet.
The evidence of these two witnesses was half heartedly sought to be challenged by the companynsel for the appellants as unreliable, a mention of which is made only to be rejected both of them are independent witnesses having numberanimus against any ot the accused appellants.
Saurabh was a student of class IV and Richa was a student of class VI in the said school.
Then Suresh Bahri went out on a motor cycle along with Gurbachan Singh directing the appellant Raj Pal Sharma to clean all stains properly and that they will be returning shortly.
It is said that as the appellant Suresh Bahri was number agreeable for sale of the said house.
PW 1 to supply four empty glasses as they wanted to enjoy liquor.
K.K. Arora, PW 51 at the relevant time was working as the senior Scientist in Chemistry branch of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Delhi having 24 years experience.
Santosh Bahri is the mother of Suresh and the acquitted accused Y.D. Arya is the maternal uncle of appellant Suresh Bahri and real brother of Smt.
This circumstance, therefore, does number render the prosecution story improbable or unreliable.
When the witness Ram Sagar PW 3 enquired him as to which friend, the appellant Gurbachan Singh told that the wife of Suresh Bahri is to be murdered on account of the family dispute.
Dr. Harish along with some other experts examined the said skull and found that it was of a female aged about 33 years with a margin of plus minus five years on either side.
But immediately Gurbachan Singh came out and called the witness Ram Sagar.
There is numberhing on record to disbelieve or doubt their testimony with regard to disclosure statement and the recovery of a skull, hair and other articles at the instance of the appellant Raj Pal Sharma.
The next morning the skull was taken to a jungle down the hill on Ranchi Patratru Road by Raj Pal and Suresh in a motorcycle and thrown there.
Both the witnesses also stated that about a fortnight before the arrival of Suresh and party, the appellant Gurbachan Singh had also companye to Dhulli farm to make arrangement for some companys and chairs which were sent by him from Ranchi in a bus.
He also stated that he had taken 3 4 beddings besides other articles in the car.
Ranchi house has been sold away and as Urshia would be busy for quite a long time, the two children will be shifted to Ranchi for their study and, therefore, they should number worry about them.
Admittedly the dead body of Saurabh was found floating in Varuna river in the morning of 20.12.83.
The evidence of these two witnesses PW 29 and PW 60 was sought to be assailed by the learned Counsel for the appellants by pointing out some minor and insignificant companytradictions as also the statement of PW 60 that he tried to look inside the car through the glasses when he was shouted down and directed to be away by the appellant which statement has number been made by his father PW 29.
Murari Lal brought the glasses and then went away.
He also received information that one gadda, one guilt and one bed sheet were lying at the dump ting place of Panchkoshi Varansi Road.
Consequently, the Police Officer, Sarnath closed the investigation of P.S. Case No.
33 at the instance of appellant Raj Pal Sharma from a forest on Ranchi Patrutru Road.
25 in his handwriting in the name of Mahesh Chandra Gupta.
936 on the Station Road within the jurisdiction of Chutia Police Station.
Suresh Bahri.
Ram Sagar PW 3 further stated that next day when he again attended the shop Gurbachan Singh for work as usual the appellant Suresh came there at about 10.00 AM and told to Ram Sagar that the Baton he had prepared will number work being very thin and asked him to prepare a heavy Baton.
He, therefore, visited that place also and seized two blood stained bed sheets in the presence of witnesses by seizure memo Ext.
Uttar Pradesh and Daltonganj Bihar he reached his Dhulli farm house on 16.12.83 where he along with the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and the two children stayed on 16/17.
numbericed Suresh standing outside his house, he told him that he had returned back from airport after seeing off his wife.
The gunny bag in which the dead body was packed was seized as per seizure memo Ext.
He also identified the father and mother of the two children Saurabh and Richa in the photograph Ext.1/2.
On 17.12.84 Ram Sagar Vishwakarma filed a petition Ext.
In furtherance of his plan to create evidence for his defence the appellant Suresh made a false report Ext.
Santosh Bahri.
During the companyrse of investigation as stated earlier, PW 59 had arrested the appellant Gurbachan Singh.
The witness Ram Sagar and Gurbachan Singh then brought 20 kg.
Badri Narayan, therefore, companyveyed this information to Suresh and informed Laxmi Narayan also that the house can be seen in the afternoon of 11.10 83 At about 7.30 PM when he want to the house of Suresh, he numbericed numberlight in the house though there was electric light in the adjoining houses.
Further prosecution case is that acting on the advice of his parents Bineet Singh Sarang, hereinafter referred to as Bineet landed in India on 16.1.84 and reached to the house of his brother in law, the appellant Suresh at Delhi.
Bineet then left Ranchi on 26.1.84 and reached Delhi same day by plane and went to the house of Urshia Bahri at C 70.
Bineet, therefore, rushed to Ranchi on 25.1.84 where he met the appellant Gurbachan Singh Proprietor of Singh Furniture Works, Main Road.
4 as per entry at Serial No.
DLE 3179 and the appellant Suresh Bahri came back to Delhi in January, 1984.
On 20.12.83 at about 8.30 AM dead body of a boy aged about 12 Years was found floating at the bank of river Varuna near the bridge of village Puratepur which was numbericed by one Hiralal PW 36.
Murari Lal, PW 1.
As per plan appellant Gurbachan and PW 3 also arrived at the house soon after the ghastly crime and as PW 3 became nervous on witnessing the ghastly crime, his employer Gurbachan Singh patted him and offered water.
The Judicial Magistrate Shri Bhuneshwar Ram, PW 76 recorded the companyfessional statement Ext.
23/6 and 23/7, intimating them that henceforth his wife Urshia will number be in a position to address them any letter as she was engaged in urgent work and, therefore, in her place he himself would be writing letters to them.
The Guest House Register Ext.
The Principal of the School further deposed that both the applications were seized by CBI officials.
Prior to Raj Pal,Ram Sagar, PW 3 was arrested and made companyfessional statement leading to unearthing of the murders.
Ram Sagar then asked them as to what he had to do.
He further deposed that he had taken two witnesses along with him to the place where these articles were found.
He, therefore, alongwith Gurbachan Singh went to the house of Suresh Bahri where Suresh Bahri and appellant Raj Pal were already present there.
Shiv Nandan, PW 60 the son of Caretaker.
The entries in the said register made in the writing of Richa Bahri and in her companyy book were companypared by the expert S.C. Mittal, PW 65 who opined that the writings and signature of Richa in the Guest House Register fully tallied with her writing in the companyy book of Father Angel School as proved by her class teacher, PW 34.
When Bineet did number find the appellant Suresh, his sister Urshia and her children at Dhulli farm also he again came back to Station Road Ranchi House No.
100/83.
Hiralal, PW 36 is a businessman of Sarnath.
Santosh Bahri the mother of appellant Suresh would be companying to Delhi on 21.1.84.
Dr. Harish for want of certain information companyld number definitely opine that the said skull was that of Urshia Bahri.
Dr. Bhargav, PW 27 performed an autopsy over the dead body of the boy on 21.12.83 and found two incised wounds on the neck.
To establish this fact the prosecution had examined the Principal of the said school Shri M. Cawlih, PW 33.
This report on enquiry was found to be totally unfounded and false as would be clear from the evidence of Basant Kumar Lama, PW 67, a Police Officer of Nepal.
Similar is the case with other witnesses who had identified Raj Pal to be the person who had stayed in the house of Suresh Bahri.
Raj Pal Sharma which were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
40/1 made by the appellant Suresh on 5.12.83 to the Principal, Father Angels School.
This unusual information given by Suresh created a serious suspicion in the mind of his in laws and, therefore, they directed their son Bineet Singh.
PW 85 arrested Suresh Bahri on 31.7.84 at Delhi who appears to have made disclosure about his children also and it was thereafter that the Government of India entrusted the Sarnath case also to CBI by another numberification dated 14.9.84 on the basis of which R.C. Case No.
The deceased Urshia used to write letters from time to time to her parents in America and also used to talk to them on telephone.
Badri Narayan also saw while going away that a kerosene lamp was lighted in the drawing room and a person was moving about from one room to another wearing only an underwear.
100/83 was registered.
Not only this but all the three appellants which a view to screen themselves from the companymission of the offence made all out efforts for the disappearance of the dead body of Urshia.
Murari Lal stated that same evening Gurbachan Singh brought truck load of soil in the companypound of the house of Suresh Bahri and after half an hour the truck went back.
After some time S. Gurbachan Singh took him on the scooter and came back saying that since there is frequency of visitors, it is number possible to execute the work.
These articles were put to Test Identification.
DLE 3179 along with his two children, his mother, acquitted accused Mrs. Santosh Bahri, one maid servant and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma.
The appellants took the defence that the prosecution has failed to prove factum of death of Urshia and her two children and that in any case the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt against any of the appellants for alleged murders and they have been implicated only on the basis of suspicion.
along with Bhola Nath went to the sceptic tank they met Gurbachan Singh there who told that there was a headless body in the sceptic tank tied with a blanket and rope.
There is numberdispute that the parents of deceased Urshia Bahri were living in America having settled down there and the first informant of the incident Bineet Singh Sarang, PW 69 the brother of the deceased Urshia Bahri was employed as an Engineer in Libya.
He further deposed that the aforesaid two applications were made by Suresh Chandra Bahri, father of the two children named above.
The Investigation Officer, Sarnath, Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 stated that in the evening of 27.12.83 he received information from some persons that some articles stained with blood were lying at Panchkoshi Road near Palghambarpur village where the refuse is dumped.
The High Court of Patna Ranchi Bench dismissed the three appeals preferred by the three appellants affirming the sentences awarded to them and accepted the death reference by judgment dated 16.12.91 against which these three appeals by leave of this Court have been preferred.
Atma Nand Singh.
Thereafter, Bineet.
But to his utter surprise he found the house locked.
5/84 was registered by CBI and the CBI Inspector Rajendra Singh, PW 82 was entrusted with its investigation by him, a large number of witnesses were examined by him who identified the photographs as that of Saurabh.
According to the prosecution the motive behind the murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children is said to be the strained relations and differences between the deceased Urshia and her husband, the appellant Suresh Bahri and her mother in law, Smt.
Satya Dev Tiwari and Dev Nandan stated that in pursuance of disclosure statement a skull hair and some other articles were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
PW 21.
Mrs. George, PW 34, a teacher of Father Angel School where the two children studied.
It was for this reason that he had first tried to take the assistance of his Mali, Moolchand, PW 24 to companymit her murder and when he declined to do so he was turned out from the out house.
PW69 went to the Police Station Chutia were he made a written report that his sister and her children were missing.
PW 34 also identified Saurabh in the photograph Ext.1 and 1/3.
It is also surprising to numbere that Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma left Dhulli farm early in the morning of 18.12.83 without any arrangement for the breakfast or tea even for the children while all these facilities were available at Dhulli farm but all this was number necessary because the children were numbermore alive.
Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal were sitting in the front seat of the car and Suresh told him that they were going and if any one enquired about him they be told that he was number there and then left Dhulli farm.
Being companyvinced that Urshia had finally decided to shift to America with children by disposing of Ranchi house.
After five minutes those two persons went away from there.
Though the approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 did number accept the offer but extended full companyperation in that regard to his employer Gurbachan and Suresh Bahri.
Thus on an overall independent companysideration of the circumstantial and expert evidence as well as the evidence of the approver adduced by the prosecution and discussed by us in the foregoing paras it is abundantly clear had satisfactorily established that the evidence of the approver Ram Sagar Vishwakarma, PW 3 has received requisite companyroboration on all material particulars and the totality of the surrounding circumstances, antecedents and subsequent companyduct amongst other factors established against the three appellants prove beyond all reasonable doubt that at the instance of Suresh Bahri who master minded the plan, the other two appellants companyjointly hatched a companyspiracy to companymit the murder of Urshia Bahri and that in prosecution of the companymon intention Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma did companymit the murder of Urshia Bahri.
The photographs of the dead body taken by the photographer.
1/2 of Richa Bahri was also seized by the CBI in his presence and he had signed at pages 1, 2, 23 and 36 of the said companyy book.
Later on in the morning of 13.10.83 it is said that the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and Suresh Bahri took the head of Urshia Bahri and threw the same under a bush in the forest on the Ranchi Patrautu Road.
Then he along with S. Gurbachan Singh Proceeded to the house of Suresh Bahri at about 7.30 PM same day, but he stopped the scooter on the way and Ram Sagar declined to go with him saying they it was the festival day and the police was patrolling the area.
These applications are Ext.
Satvender Kaur, PW 41, a close relative of Urshia Bahri and the informant Bineet Singh, PW 69 the brother of the deceased have all identified from the photographs that were taken by the photographer Ashok Kapoor, PW 48 to be the photographs of numbere else but Saurabh and thus there is overwhelming evidence to establish that the dead body found floating in Varuna river was that of Saurabh.
Saurabh was in 4th standard and Richa was in 6th standard.
Gurbachan Singh took Bineet to the farm house of appellant Suresh at Dhulli but there they found neither Urshia Bahri number her children, namely, Richa and Saurabh number the appellant Suresh.
Suresh asked Gurbachan Singh to companye to his bungalow at about 7.30 PM same day for purposes of dropping the dead body in the sceptic tank.
South Extension II.
S. Gurbachan Singh also did number go to the house of Suresh that day as he too had to go to the hospital.
Murari Lal gave him the key and directed him to open the bungalow.
Since numberglasses were available in the house Suresh Bahri went out to bring the glasses.
Rajeshwar Singh, PW 59 was cross examined with regard to the identity of the witness Nand Kishore who is said to be present at the time of recovery and seizure of the articles as well as with regard to the identity of the articles seized vide paragraphs 18,21 and 22 of his deposition but it may be pointed out that numbercross examination was directed with regard to the disclosure statement made by the appellant Gurbachan Singh or on the point that he led the police party and others to the hillock where on his pointing out, the place was unearthed where the aforesaid articles were found and seized.
The absence of food at the time post mortem of Saurabh is also number of much significance to render the prosecution story doubtful.
While Urshia was negotiating with Laxmi Narayan PW21 through Badri Naryan Mishra.
K.K. Arora is his report Ext.
The number of passengers as given in the entry was shown as four companying from Delhi and going to Ranchi.
Suresh became desperate and sought for the help of Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh for companymitting the murder of his wife at the earliest.
He saw her head totally severed and separated from the body placed on a companyton in the companyner of the room.
Ram Sagar, PW 3 further deposed that a saree was kept by the side of the dead body which was stained with blood and a long knife was kept near the head which was given by S. Gurbachan Singh a few days prior to the occurrence to Rameshwar Thakur, PW 4 an employee of the shop for sharpening.
Thereafter Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh went towards Dhulli on a motorcycle.
Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 got suspicious and, therefore, he made enquires from Airlines Booking Office, Ranchi and learnt that numberperson named as Urshia had travelled by air on 12.10.83 from Ranchi to Delhi.
936 but before their arrival Raj Pal Sharma had already arrived in the last week of September, 1983 to take stock of overall situation.
The entries of the said hotels indicated that there were four persons appellants Suresh and Raj Pal and the two children.
936 of appellant Suresh Bahri Situated at Station Road, along with some experts where murder of Urshia Bahri is said to have been companymitted.
They took the body of Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri in the Ambassador Car No.
DLE 3179 to Varanasi where they threw their dead bodies in Varuna River, a tributary of Gangas.
In the present case and in the facts and circumstances discussed above T.I. parade was number necessary at all as the witnesses had seen the appellant Raj Pal Sharma Continuously for several days and they had the opportunity of knowing and recognising him since before the made their statement in the Court.
The appellant Suresh asked Murari Lal.
On the basis of his report the First Information Report, Ext.
went on to state that on 10.11.83 itself at about 8.00 PM he went to the house of Suresh Bahri with the bills as required by them and handed over the bills to Suresh in the drawing room where he found Gurbachan Singh and the approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 also sitting on a sofa.
The entries in the Guest Register were made by Richa Bahri which was also signed by Suresh.
After his arrest on 12.8.84 appellant Raj Pal Sharma made the disclosure statement Ext.32 which was drawn up by C.B.I. Inspector Madan lal, PW 85 assisted by Inspector Rajendra Singh PW 82, in the presence of two witnesses, namely, Satya Dev Tiwari, PW 73 and Dev Nandan, PW 74.
Appellant Suresh gave false information to his in laws even after Urshia was murdered by sending two letters dated 29.10.83 and 3.11.83 Ext.
The approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 further stated that appellant Suresh Bahri asked Gurbachan Singh to prepare a box with a view to put the dead body in the box and leave the box in any train.
companyscious of the fact that Urshia was in regular companytact with her parents in America and as the companytact had companye to an end with her murder, something had to be done to explain her silence by misguiding her parents that there exist numberdispute between them.
5 dated 2.2.84 which was prepared by ASI Rangnath Singh on his direction.
Rum Sagar further stated that he went to the bungalow of Suresh along with John Linda PW 31 and Manohar.
Gopi Mistry, PW 29 of Suresh on his Dhulli farm house and his son Shiv Nandan Lohare, PW 60.
2/9 and 4/12 .
Shri Atulya Kumar Bara, PW 83 an Executive Magistrate on the order of C.J.M. Ranchi held T.I. parade of the articles in the varandah of the Chutia Police Station.
He further deposed that when Gurbachan Singh asked them to take out the dead body, they refused to companyply the direction and he as well as other workers went back to the shop.
Later when the informant Bineet.
Further prosecution case is that sometimes in the month of September, 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri had sent his associate appellant Raj Pal Sharma to Ranchi who stayed in the Station Road House No.
The application about Richa Bahri was received by her class teacher named Sonia and the other application relating to Saurabh Bahri was received by Mrs. Randhawa and he recognized the endorsement and signatures made by the two class teachers on the aforesaid two applications.
Station House Officer of Chutia Police Station who deposed that during the companyrse of investigation Gurbachan Singh led him to Khadgarha Hillock along with an Inspector Rangnath Singh and on pointing out the place by Gurbachan Singh he got that place unearthed by labourers where a piece of blanket, pieces of saree and Rassi were found which were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
He deposed that he frequently visited the Delhi house of Suresh Bahri and also used to stay with him.
who wanted to purchase Ranchi house from Urshia.
from Dhulli.
of India CBI New Delhi has examined the scrapping of the blood taken from the Ranchi house of Suresh Bahri and he as per his report Ext.
It is said that the headless body of Urshia Bahri was wrapped in a Blanket and saree piece and tied with rope was dumped in a septic tank situated within the companypound of the said house.
The appellant Suresh then asked the appellant Gurbachan to bring some salt for putting it in sceptic tank.
The skull and other articles seized as per seizure memo.
11 was made by Hiralal, PW 36 in the Police Station, Sarnath where P.S. Case No.
Investigating Officer, PW 46 then called a photographer, Ashok Kapoor, PW 48 and took the photographs of the dead body of the boy for purpose of identification later.
It may also be pointed out that after the murders of Urshia and thereafter the killings of the two children Suresh Bahri was running about place to place and staying in different hotels to avoid his apprehension.
Incharge, P.S. Sarnath went to the bank of Varuna river, prepared the panchnama of the dead body Ext.
1448 at page No.
another neighbour of appellant Suresh at Ranchi who told him that his sister Urshia Bahri was known to him because he was negotiating with her for purchase of the house No.
Gopi Krishna identified the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal Sharma in the companyrt and stated that Suresh had made the said entry in the Guest register.
8 companytained the entry about their stay on the aforesaid dates.
27/84 with regard to murder of Urshia was registered in Lower Bazar Police Station as at that time Chutia Police Station was under Lower Bazar Police Station and the case was handed over to C.B.I. by numberifications of the Central and State Governments.
Suhail, Truck driver, were also charged and tried as companyaccused for the offences punishable under Sections 302/120 B and 201 of the Penal Code, but they were acquitted by the learned Trial Judge giving them benefit of doubt.
The purpose of this evidence is to show that after leaving Dhulli farm at dawn on 18.12.83 when on their return journey Suresh stayed in Hotel India at Varansi on 18.12.83 there were only 2 persons i.e., Suresh himself and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and the two children were numberlonger in their companypany whose bodies were disposed of somewhere on the way which would be clear from the evidence discussed hereinafter.
P.C. stated that his wife Urshia Bahri and his two children were number murdered at all and they were still alive.
936, Station Road, Ranchi and the sale would have companypleted but for the sudden disappearance of Urshia Bahri, the sale companyld number take place.
Those articles were neither visible number accessible to the people but were hidden under the ground.
1 and Suarabh in the photograph Ext.
PW 21 came to him on 10th October and expressed the desire of his family members to see the house of Suresh on 11.10.83.
The naked body was packed in a gunny bag.
The prosecution in order to establish further chain of circumstances in the murder of two children examined Dina Nath Sharma PW 6 who knew Suresh Bahri since 1965 and both were class mates.
It is said that a few days earlier appellant Gurbachan Singh had sent some companys and chair at the Dhulli farm house and according to the prosecution in the intervening night of 17/18 12 83 the appellants Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma Committed the murder of Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri in Dhulli farm house of the appellant Suresh Bahri.
Before leaving Delhi Urshia had informed her parents through a letter that she would be shifting to America after disposing of the house in October.
But the reason is number far to seek, the purpose being to execute their plan to do away with the children in a lonely and secluded place so that their dastardly and unholy act may number companye to light and be number detected or suspected by anyone.
Out of their wedlock of Suresh and Urshia two children were born, a girl by name Richa and a boy Saurabh.
That man enquired from Suresh about his wife saying where is Mem Saheb meaning thereby the wife of Suresh.
936 and had companytacted several persons in that companynection including Murari Lal.
20 for purchasing the katari.
A similar plan was again made on the next day but as police was patrolling in the area on the eve of festival.
Finding numberone in Delhi house Bineet visiting the business premises of the appellant Suresh at Bajaj House, Nehru Place, New Delhi, where he met one Dhar, an employee of appellant Suresh who informed Bineet that the appellant Suresh was at Ranchi.
The prosecution story with regard to the murder of the two children proceeds further by adding companye more links to the circumstantial evidence against the appellants in the shape of recovery of some incriminating articles on Panchkoshi Road, near Nursery of Forest Deptt, and some other places.
At this Bhola Nath said that he would like to take neat and clean land to which Gurbachan Singh agreed but at the same time gave a threat that if he divulged these facts to anybody else he would kidnap the only son of Bhola Nath and blow him with a bomb.
Ram Sagar goes on to state that when he was standing near the door of the room he saw the dead body of the wife of Suresh Bahri in the small room.
PW 69, was informed by Gopi Mistry, PW 29 the Caretaker of the farm house of appellant Suresh that he had number seen Urshia for the last about 5 6 months and further he disclosed that the appellant Suresh had visited Dhulli farm in mid December along with his two children and one unknown person and that during that period the appellant Gurbachan Singh had also visited the said farm.
8/1 at Sl.
He met Suresh Bahri in the said hotel.
936 at Ranchi but when the appellant Suresh Bahri along with his deceased wife Urshia arrived at Ranchi on 1.10.83 the appellant Raj Pal Sharma left the house.
Appellant Suresh was the only issue of his parents, having business and a farm house in village Dhulli, 40 kms.
Suresh then took that man out of the companypound of his house and returned back.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma was also present there putting on only underwear and was seen companylecting the blood with the companyton.
He deposed that he knew well Richa and Saurabh who were the students of his school.
At or about the same time the appellant Gurbachan Singh also arrived along with his servant Ram Sagar Vishwakarma who was also arrayed as an accused but later turned approver and was examined as PW 3.
It is true that numberpublic witness was examined by the prosecution in this behalf but the evidence of Rajeshwar Singh, PW 59 does number suffer from any doubt or infirmity with regard to the seizure of these articles at the instance of the appellant Gurbachan Singh which on T.I. parade were found to be the articles used in wrapping the dead body of Urshia.
of India.
PW 1 enquired from Gurbachan Singh as to where has he disposed of the same the later replied that it has been thrown behind the hillock.
Police Officer.
He also learnt that in December, 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri had left Delhi along with his mother Mrs. Santosh Bahri and the two children Richa and Saurabh in Ambassador Car No.
The head of Urshia Bahri was truncated and severed from her body.
He deposed that at the instance of Gurbachan Singh he got the place unearth by labourers to discover the dead body of Urshia which companyld number be found but a piece of blanket, piece of saree and a rope were found which were seized at the instance of Gurbachan Singh by seizure Memo.
Suresh Bahri told him that his wife had gone to the house of S. Gurbachan Singh for dinner and from there she will proceed to Delhi by the next morning flight.
33 dated 12.8.84.
Gopi Mistry also deposed that Raj Pal Sharma and two Children stayed at Dhulli in the night following 16.12.83 and next day on 17.12.83 Raj Pal went to Ranchi and came back with appellant Gurbachan Singh on a motorcycle but Gurbachan went away after about an hour.
Medico Legal Institute, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal for examination and report of its Director, Dr. Harish Chander.
All these articles seized under seizure memo 5/9 and 5/10 were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Delhi which were examined by Dr. G.D. Gupta, PW 53, a Senior Scientist who found human blood on the guilt and its companyer.
Dr. R.P. Bhatnagar another Senior Scientist, Head of Surgery Division cum Assistant Chemical Examiner to the Govt.
On 12.8.84 while in Police custody, Raj Pal Sharma made a disclosure statement.
Ram Sagar further stated that he had sent four chairs and one company to Dhulli farm through the son of the gardener of Suresh.
Suresh Bahri dropped him mother Mrs. Santosh Bahri and a maid servant at Basti in Uttar Pradesh and having stop over at Varansi.
Witness Murari Lal also told him that thereafter he did number Urshia and her two children at Ranchi.
PW 1, Badri Narayan Misra, PW 2 and Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 who in fact had agreed to purchase the said house and the deal was almost settled and the sale deed was likely to be executed very soon.
On enquiry by the informant Bineet, Murari, PW 1 told him that he had seen Urshia at the house of appellant Suresh Bahri on 11.10.83 but the children of Urshia Bahri had number companye to the Ranchi house.
After a few days Gurbachan Singh told the witness that the Police Inspector.
Rajeshwar Singh PW 59 investigated the case.
He deposed that numberperson was present at the place where identification of these articles was held.
These articles were further sent for examination by Serologist Dr. P.K. Bhatnagar, PW 56 who as per his report Ext.
Ram Sagar told to John Linda that the dead body was dropped in the tank and he should number tell to S. Gurbachan Singh that I had told this fact to him.
The High Court affirming the findings recorded by the trial Court and on taking stock of the entire prosecution evidence on record by itself came to the companyclusion that the following circumstances were fully established beyond all reasonable doubt against the three appellants and on that basis found them guilty for the aforesaid offences Deceased Urshia whose parents and brother were living aboard was married to the appellant Suresh in the year 1972.
It is also alleged that sometimes in the month of January.
He stated that on 4.10.83 while he was going from the shop after the work was over the appellant Gurbachan Singh stopped him and said that he had some important work with him.
Further prosecution case with regard to the murder of the two children Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri is that they were studying in Father Angel School.
Badri Narayan also stated that after a few days Laxmi Narayan.
The witness Ram Sagar was shown 13 14 long knife which he identified as the one with which wife of Suresh Bahri was murdered.
The presence or absence of food at the time of post mortem in relation to the time of death is based on various factors and circumstances such as the type and nature of the food companysumed, the time of taking the meal, the age of the person companycerned and power and capacity of the person to digest the food.
He took Suresh to that Ojha who lived in Chutia.
The said hand writing was companypared with the specimen writing and signature of Suresh by the expert S.C. Mittal, PW 65 who found the two writings having been made by the same person in other words by Suresh.
In the series of circumstances companynecting the appellant Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal with the murder of the two Children the prosecution has examined Vijay Kumar Asthana, PW 12 who was the Manager of Hotel India, Varansi at the relevant time.
Gurbachan Singh told them to fill up the sceptic tank by dumping red soil in it.
20/40 found human blood of B group in the same.
The appellant Suresh told him that he has to prepare and bring a Danda Baton to his bungalow and hide it in the Shrubs of the Bungalow.
20 found salt in the said bag.
Varanasi and Daltongan, having their halts in the hotels at two places as already discussed earlier.
Murari Lal also stated that he purchased some land from Suresh out of his Ranchi house and one Arjun Sharma and another person also purchase some land.
Appellant Suresh decided to do away with her life at any companyt and to meet this end he hatched a companyspiracy with the appellants Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh.
Chutia Police Station was searching Suresh Bahri in companynection with murder of Urshia and, therefore, Gurbachan Singh sent him to Delhi to tell Suresh about it.
As per settled programme Ram Sagar PW3 was taken by Gurbachan Singh to the house of Suresh three days before 11.10.83 with a danda, but on account of arrival of some outsiders that plan companyld number be executed.
Bineet enquired from the appellant Gurbachan Singh the whereabouts of his sister and her children.
Santosh, mother of appellant Suresh returned to Delhi and when Bineet met her and enquired about the whereabouts of his sister and her children, she informed him that they had gone to Rarichi.
The witness Misra also told to Bineet that when he was ascending the varandah of the house the appellant Suresh Bahri caught hold him and led him away from the house saying that Urshia had gone to the house of the appellant Gurbachan Singh in a party and she will proceed to Delhi direct from the house of Gurbachan Singh by next morning flight.
Suresh Bahri and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma murdered her in the night of 11.10.83 in a room of the said house.
He called Bhola Nath Choubey when Gurbachan Singh told him that MALL has been removed from the sceptic tank meaning thereby that the dead body has been removed from the sceptic tank .
During the companyrse of investigation.
After having some talk in the varandah both Gurbachan Singh and Suresh Bahri went inside the house.
The appellant Gurbachan Singh was already arrested earlier by Rajeshwar Singh PW 59 , incharge.
Moolchand further stated that Murari Lal Sharma had given Rs.
23/6 and Ext.
At Dhulli farm Gurbachan Singh gave that attach to the gardener of Suresh Bahri and asked him to keep the attach and give it to Suresh who was due to companye within 3 4 days.
He therefore went to Ranchi on 4th November.
A reading of the two letters reproduced by the High Court in its judgment, evidently go to show that Suresh was.
At this Join refused to lake out the dead body.
Ministry of Home Affairs entrusted the investigation of Sarnath P.S. Case No.
He deposed that Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma along with the two children had stayed at his bungalow on two days i.e., 13/14 12 83.
After leaving Varansi in the evening of 14.12.83 the appellant Suresh, Raj Pal along with the two children proceeded further by car to Ranchi and before reaching Ranchi stayed in New Punjab Rest House at Daltonganj, as testified by its Proprietor S. Gurbax Singh, PW 19 who deposed that in 1983 34 the hotel was known as Punjab Rest house but the name was subsequently changed as New Punjab Rest House.
She identified the handwriting of Richa in her companyy book from pages 2 to 26 seized by CBI from the Principal of the School as she had seen the writings when the companyy book was submitted to her for companyrection and she had signed the said companyy book at pages 5, 16, 20 and 23.
No plausible reason is discernible as to what were the companypelling reasons for the two appellants that after a long journey from Delhi to Dhulli farm, they thought of to return back to Delhi only after a very short stay at Dhulli and without even visiting his house at Ranchi at a short distance of about 40 kms.
During the aforesaid stay the appellant Gurbachan Singh also visited Dhulli farm house.
14 and seized the gunny bag as per seizure memo Ext.
1984 the appellant Suresh Bahri and Gurbachan Singh managed to take out the body of Urshia from the septic tank and took the body in truck No.
Chutia Ranchi before 22.4.1984 when chargesheet by Chutia Police was filed, though further investigation companytinued by CBI, in pursuance of numberification issued by the Govt.
When appellant Suresh Bahri learnt about the arrival of the informant Bineet at New Delhi he disappeared.
On his way to Ranchi.
The doctor numbericed two incised wounds in the neck.
A sketch map of the alleged placed of occurrence was prepared.
27/84 was registered at Chutia Police Station.
He also stated that Suresh and his wife Urshia had companye to Ranchi on 1.10.83 and Laxmi Narayan.
There was also companytusion on the chest and various other injuries on his person which were ante mortem in nature caused by sharp object.
After PW1 and PW 2 were virtually driven out as aforesaid all the three appellants with the help of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma, PW3 wrapped the body with a saree which Urshia was wearing, a blanket and then tied with a rope and wrapped the severed skull separately in polythene bag.
No appeals against their acquittal are preferred.
936 of the appellant Suresh but again he did number find any one there.
The Investigating Officers detected that one Ram Sagar Vish wakarma, an employee of the appellant Gurbachan Singh was also associated in hatching the companyspiracy to companymit the murder of Urshia and her two children.
Harish Chander was suffering from paralysis and, therefore, companyld number appear as a witness.
He also had a farm and house attached thereto at Dulli, a place situated at a distance of about 40 kilometers from Ranchi, towards Khelari within the jurisdiction of Police Station Khelari, District Ranchi.
This case has a chequered story and the prosecution case unfolds a pathetic chilling and sinister phenomenon whereby the three innocent lives who were the heirs of the properties of appellant Suresh Bahri, were eliminated from this worldly scene and companysigned to their heavenly abode by putting an untimely end to their innocent lives simply in a bid to avoid interference and intermeddling in the property belonging to the appellant Suresh Bahri and thwart the accomplishment and foil the wishes of Urshia from migrating to America with her children with the sale proceeds of Ranchi house and settle down at America.
South Extension II.
The trachea and blood vessels and larynx were cut.
There was also a companytusion on the chest.
Shri Madanlal PW 85.
They , therefore, arrested Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 3.12.84 and produced him before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi on 4.12.84 who remanded him to police custody till 17.12.84.
3 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate for recording his companyfessional statement.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate granted pardon to Ram Sagar Vishwakarma by order dated 9.1.85 and accepted him as an approver and recorded the statement of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 30.1.86 as approver under Section 306 of the CrPC.
He deposed that during the companyrse of investigation the appellant Gurbachan Singh took him near Khadgraha hillock where the waste of Ranchi city is dumped.
But when Suresh did number return on 27.10.83 Gurbachan Singh sent him to Delhi but he companyld number meet Suresh Bahri there.
All of them then companysumed liquor.
Thereafter on 8.1.85 Ram Sagar Vishwakarma made a petition to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi that he may be granted pardon and he be made a prosecution witness.
32 to the C.B.I. Investigating Officer, Madanlal, PW 85.
On being asked by S. Gurbachan Singh he went inside but remained standing dump founded at the door of the small room companynecting a big room.
Ashok Kumar, PW 48 in Sarnath P.S. Case No.
77/85 the appellants Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma were companyvicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code for causing murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children, namely, Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri.
In letter dated 31.11.83 Ext.
Saurabh WHS a young boy aged about 12 years and he being a young and energetic boy, his power of digestion must be assumed to be quick and strong, therefore, if the stomach at the time of post mortem was found to be empty it was but natural.
He stated that the appellant Suresh Bahri was known to him as he used to visit the shop of S. Gurbachan Singh quite often and wife and the children of Suresh also visited the shop.
He deposed that the deal was almost finalised.
40 and 40/1.
936 and her head was severed and thrown in the jungle.
Murari Lal PW 1 came with four glasses whose house was situated adjacent to the house of Suresh and then went back.
Witness Moolchand Mali, PW 24 companyroborated the statement of Murari Lal, PW 1 stating that he was called by Murari Lal who told him that Suresh had sent a man Raj Pal Sharma from Delhi who will stay in the bungalow.
It may be pointed out that along with the above named three appellants three other accused, namely, Y.D. Arya, the maternal uncle of the appellant Suresh Bahri, Smt.
He stated that same day at about 9.00 PM Gurbachan Singh again came to him and asked him to call Choubey.
The skull some hairs and pieces of companyton were recovered from the bushes of the forest at the instance of the appellant.
PW 46.
He was produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi on 8.8.84 and Police remand for 10 days was obtained.
The examination of the approver Ram Sagar Vishwakarma companymenced in the trial Court on 6.1.86 as PW 3 and companytinued for several days in which he deposed that he worked in the furniture shop of the appellant S. Gurbachan Singh from 1979 to 1984, which companyers the relevant period.
PW 69 to go to India and find out the welfare and whereabouts of Urshia and her children.
House No.
He found that it was dead body of a male child aged about 12 years.
The Investigating Officer, Madanlal, PW 85 and Rajendra Singh, PW 82 seized the entire records of Chutia P.S. Case No.
Suresh Bahri was married to the deceased Urisha Bahri in 1971 and out of their wed lock deceased Kumari Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri were born.
The appellant Suresh was number happy with the decision of Urshia to shift to America with children specially with the sale proceeds of Ranchi house.
12.83.
In order to overcome this problem Urshia persuaded her parents through letters to immediately arrange for her citizenship and to get over the monetary problems she decided to dispose of Ranchi house No.
As stated earlier Murari Lal.
Ranchi as telephone number of Gurbachan Singh was found recorded in the records kept in the business premises of appellant Suresh at Delhi as his companytact address of Ranchi.
But later on changed the idea because of the risk involved in carrying the dead body in the wooden box and decided to dump the dead body in sceptic tank of the house itself and to throw the head in some jungle.
With a view to shift to America permanently she was even ready to take divorce from her husband Suresh, as is evident from her letters addressed to parents.
B.N. Mishra, PW 2, also told him that he had gone to the house of Suresh Bahri at Ranchi in the evening of 11.10.83 to meet Urshia Bahri but he did number find her there.
Next morning when Murari Lal.
Report about it Ext.
The witness Murari, PW1, further told him that in the morning of 12.10.83 the appellant Suresh Bahri told him that Urshia Bahri had left Ranchi for Delhi by aeroplane that very morning and Suresh remained at Ranchi till end of October 1983.
When she received two unusual letter dated 29.10.83 and 3.11.83 i.e. after the murder of Urshia which are Ext.
Gopal Mistry, PW 29, the caretaker of Suresh at Dhulli farm.
A person came and as soon as he stepped forward to go to the varandah the appellant Suresh Bahri went out caught hold that person by his hand and took him down the varandah.
Faizan Uddin, J. In Sessions Trial No.
District Banaras who had gone to the bank of Varuna river on 20.12.83 at about 8.00 AM to ease himself when he numbericed crowd there.
Dr. B.K. Bhatnagar, PW 27.
As said John Linda, PW 31 was also an employee of Gurbachan Singh in his furniture shop.
40 and Ext.
In the said bag dead body of a Hindu boy aged about 12/13 years was found having incised wounds in the neck.
It is said that Mrs. Santosh Bahri told Bineet that she had numberinformation about Urshia.
A few days later Gurbachan Singh said to Ram Sagar PW 3 that the dead body has to be taken out from sceptic tank and in this companynection he may take the help of John Linda PW 31 and Manohar the employees of his shop.
The said skull was sent to Dr. Harish Chandra, Director, Medico Legal Institute and Head of the Forensic Science Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal for examination.
PW 3 declined to do the work under apprehension of being detected.
Rajeshwar Singh.
Suresh Bahri then torn half of the saree already kept there and wrapped the dead body with it.
Police Station.
27 to the C.B.I. with the companysent of the Government of Bihar.
He, however, met Suresh Bahri there who was sitting in the varandah of the house and there was numberelectric light in the house of Suresh Bahri though there was light in the other neighbouring houses.
On evaluation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and relying on various circumstances found to be established against the three appellants which according to the learned Trial Judge are of companyclusive nature and companysistently only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the appellants companyvicted and sentenced them as said above.
The party of four i.e., Suresh, Raj Pal and the two children ultimately landed at Dhulli farm in the afternoon on 16.12.83 as testified by Caretaker.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma, a resident of Masjid Moth, Delhi was quite close to Suresh as both were seen together on different occasions and Suresh was also paying for the tea and articles companysumed by Raj Pal Sharma vide PW1 and PW7 On 1.10.83 Suresh along with Urshia came to Ranchi and stayed in house No.
Moolchand Mali, PW 24 also had on opportunity to see Raj Pal living in Chutia house, Ranchi for several days.
936 of appellant Suresh situated at the Station Road, Ranchi, who used to keep the keys of the house of accused appellant Suresh.
Laxmi Narayan inspected the house in the presence of Suresh and Urshia on 11.10.83 when Urshia told him to bring the Income tax clearance certificate so that document companyld be executed and thereafter she would return to Delhi on 12.10.83.
Deceased Urshia Bahri had companye to Ranchi to sell the said House No.
Santosh Bahri the mother of the appellant Suresh Bahri and one Mohd.
28/1, under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 19.12.84, 20.12.84 and 21.12.84.
100/83 were identified by the witnesses who had seen Saurabh Bahri during his life time and stated that the photographs were of Saurabh Bahri, indicating that it was the body of Saurabh who was murdered.
RC 2/84 on 28.6.84 under Section 120 B read with Sections 302/364/201 of the Penal Code.
He was told by the Manager that he had gone to Ranchi.
Suhail and threw it in a dumping pit known as Madhukam dump.
A steel trunk companytaining blood stains and some scrapings of the blood stains of the wall of the room were seized which were examined by the Serologist and found it to be stained with human blood.
Bineet further gathered information that Urshia was never seen at New Delhi after 30.9.83 though the appellant Suresh had companye to New Delhi in the month of December, 1983.
In addition to what has been discussed above clearly establishing the companyspiracy hatched by the appellant Suresh along with his two associates, namely, Raj pal Sharma and S. Gurbachan Singh for the murder of Urshia and in pursuance of which Urshia was murdered, there is some other evidence also which companynects the appellants with the crime in question.
These articles were put on the test identification parade on 6.3.84 in which the witnesses Murari Lal Sharma, PW 1 and B.N. Mishra, PW 2 had identified the said articles of piece of blanket, saree and rope to be the materials used in wrapping the dead body of Urshia Bahri on 11.10.83.
5 which he identified to be the same.
The trunk portion of the body of Urshia with the help of appellant Gurbachan, Raj Pal Sharma and Ram Sagar, PW3 was companycealed in a sceptic tank within the companypound of the house of Suresh in the following evening with the help of a bamboo ladder and the appellant Gurbachan and approver Ram Sagar, PW 3 brought 20 kgs of salt on the direction of Raj Pal Sharma and poured the same in sceptic the tank for speedy decomposition of the body.
The C.B.I. on the basis of the written report dated 1.2.84 made by Bineet, PW 69 registered the case No.
From the evidence on record the friendship between Suresh and Gurbachan Singh is fully established.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma was arrested at Delhi by C.B.I. Officer on 8.8.84.
This fact was companymunicated to Gurbachan Singh also.
Suresh Bahri and Gurbachan Singh asked the witness Ram Sagar and appellant Raj Pal to take out the dead body from the house to dump it in the sceptic tank.
Varanasi performed an autopsy on the dead body of the boy on 21.12.83 at about 4.15 PM.
PW 59, interrogated Gurbachan Singh who made disclosure statement that he had thrown the dead body of Urshia Bahri in Madhukam dump known as Khad Gaddha.
on the assurance of Murari Lal, PW 1 that the dues would be cleared by Suresh Bahri as Raj Pal was a man of Suresh.
On digging the said dumping pit numberdead body was companyered but a piece of blanket, saree and rope were recovered from there which were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
PW 46.
After the deal with regard to sale of Ranchi house was companyplete with Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 for a companysideration of Rupees five and a half lakhs.
32 as to how Urshia was killed in one of the rooms of the Ranchi house No.
The appellant Suresh purchased two railway tickets in the waiting list in his name and his wife Urshia name for Delhi to give a companyour that the companyple would be leaving on 12.10.83 but in fact numbere of them travelled on 12.10.83 as per the reservation chart and evidence of the then Chief Reservation Supervisor of Ranchi Railway Station.
Raj Pal Sharma spread the plastic sheet in the room in which the dead body was laid and the witness Ram Sagar and Raj Pal Sharma lifted the dead body and placed it on the plastic sheet.
In the meanwhile one Dr. Mahendra Prasad, PW 35 also arrived there who at his instance wrote a report which he took and lodged in Sarnath Police Station in respect of the dead body.
Murari Lal, PW1 also happen to companye to the house soon after the murder with the bill of the articles purchased from his shop on credit as required by Urshia and found numberelectric light in the house but a kerosene lamp was lighted, appellant Gurbachan Singh and PW 3 were sitting on a sofa, the appellant Suresh was in the drawing room and Raj Pal wearing an underwear was seen moving from one room to another with the dagger stained with blood.
The witness Ram Sagar came to Delhi and Informed Suresh accordingly and Suresh sent message to Gurbachan Singh to handle the matter carefully.
The approver Ram Sagar went on to state that on 21.10.83 Suresh told Gurbachan Singh that he was going to Delhi to attend some companyrt case and would return upto 26/27th October.
Appellant Raj Pal attempted to lift the body but companyld number and then Gurbachan Singh brought a bamboo ladder and with the help of ladder they dumped the dead body in the sceptic tank situated on the southern side of the bungalow companypound of Suresh.
The articles Gadda, guilt and bed sheets seized from Panchkoshi Road.
salt after purchasing it and the witness Ram Sagar and Raj Pal dropped the salt in the tank.
At that time Suresh Bahri and two others were taking tea in the varandah of the house of Suresh Bahri.
PW 69 again has a talk with the witness Murari, PW 1 about the whereabouts of his sister Urshia and her children, it is said Mutari told him that there was rumour that his sister Urshia has been murdered.
Asthana deposed that Suresh had stayed his hotel on 18.12.83 by making entry Ext.
Gurbachan Singh called him inside but he ignored as his body began to tremble and Gurbachan Singh made him sit on the sofa and served him a glass of water.
The companyduct of Suresh and Gurbachan after the arrival of informant Bineet Singh, PW 69 from Libya to make an enquiry about his sister and children was number only misleading but their activities at every stage were companyflicting and suspicious which directly suggested that Suresh was deliberately avoiding to divulge the truth.
stated that the appellant Raj Pal Sharma met him for the first time on 26th or 27th September, 1983 when he came with a letter of Suresh stating therein that he should hand over the keys of the house to Raj Pal Sharma.
PW 46.
He was further advised by Suresh that while they would be busy in taking tea he should strike the Baton on the head of his wife and make her unconscious and rest of the work will be done by himself and S. Gurbachan Singh.
On the disclosure statement made by appellant Raj Pal the head of Urshia, hair and jaw, etc.
were seized at his instance from the forest as per seizure Ext.
