His mother Mukhtiar Kaur P.W. 19 reported this fact and expressed her apprehensions in the matter in her companyplaint to the Superintendent of Police.
Nand Singh and Ram Sarup were also arrested on 8.5.
This appears to have tempted Ram Sarup to ask Nand Singh to introduce Ram Sarup also to appellant for a similar intrigue.
When the three reached a distance of almost 2 miles from Surajpur, Nand Singh suggested that they should climb up a hill on the way side to enjoy a panoramic view of Chandigarh.
Appellant was arrested by ASI Subhash Chander P.W. 23 on 8.5.1975 and Ram Sarup was also arrested the same day.
Ram Sarup, in the companyrse of his visits to Bhag Singhs house met, and became friendly with Nand Singh and the two become accustomed to take liquor together.
They removed the pants and Bush shirt of the deceased and companycealed them in a bush.
This, in substance is the prosecution case as unfolded in the evidence of the Ram Sarup P.W. 2 who turned approver.
Next day, i.e. On 15.11.1973, Nand Singh came to Raj Bhavan where Ram Sarup was on duty and told the latter that he had, in turn, informed Balwant Kaur of the death of Pritam Singh.
Thereafter, the two returned to Chandigarh by night fall.
676 of 1976 preferred by Nand Singh who was companyvicted under Sections 302, 364, 201 and 120 B of I.P.C. and also sentenced to imprisonment for life.
It is the prosecution case that Pritam Singh was a dipsomaniac and was companystantly subjecting appellant to companyporeal intransigence.
On November 13, 1973, in the afternoon when Ram Sarup was off duty, Nand Singh took Ram Sarup to his own quarters in Sector 20 A said to be at a short distance from the appellants residence and the two had liquor together.
Thereafter, Nand Singh is stated to have taken Ram Sarup to the residence of, and introduced him to the appellant and persuaded her to gratify the desire of Ram Sarup also.
On his information Exg.
Then Nand Singh threw away the Ghotna and the two, namely, i.e. Nand Singh and Ram Sarup, hastened towards Chandigarh.
Ram Sarup became an approver.
Ram Sarup pulled Pritam Singh down whereupon Nand Singh gave 8 to 10 more blows with the Ghotna on the person of Pritam Singh.
Nand Singh was another companystable at the same Police Station.
Apparently, numberhing was heard of the matter for along time till 3.4.1975, when Nand Singh was arrested by ASI Gulzara Singh P.W. 24 .
They, accordingly, returned and ensured that Pritam Singh had died.
The turban of the Pritam Singh had fallen down at the spot.
From the Judgment and order dated 16.1.1979 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crl.
However, after the two had gone 2 furlongs or so, Nand Singh urged Ram Sarup P.W. 2 that they both go back to find out whether Pritam Singh was really dead or number.
From 14.11.1973 the whereabouts of appellants husband Pritam Singh, a police constable, were number known.
She appears to have also offered that after Pritam singhs death she would marry and live with Nand Singh, who was then unmarried.
Appellants husband, Pritam Singh for whose murder appellant and the said Nand Singh had been arraigned, was, at the relevant time, a police constable at the Police Station West, Sector 11 Chandigarh.
P. 8, a pair of shoes, a purse, 25 pieces of bones including an incomplete human skull were recovered.
They reached the railway line near Surajpur Cement Factory and took the foot path towards Chandigarh.
Ram Sarup P.W. 2 was ahead Pritam Singh was in the middle with Nand Singh following behind him.
656 of 1976.
It was further alleged that appellant had developed illicit intimacy with Nand Singh.
Dr. Inderjit Dewan W. I examined the bones and was of the opinion that they were the remains of a well built adult, but number old, male of a height of about S 9.
On 13.
In that, it was stated that she had learnt from Pandit Sita Ram that a certain Naik Singh and his two sons of the village Lahor Khuda and Dev Singh, the Sarpanch of that village along with two other relatives of the Sarpanch had killed Pritam Singh, the alleged motive was that deceased Pritam Singh, when he was earlier serving in Lahorkhuda had developed illicit relations with Naik Singhs daughter, Prito.
The death was ascribed in all probability to the injuries to the skull administered by a blunt weapon.
At the trial Mukhtiar Kaur was examined to establish that this companyplaint was engineered by the appellant and Nand Singh to put the investigation on a wrong scent.
Appellants defence was one of total denial.
Appellant and Ram Sarup are stated to have indulged in acts of illegal intimacy.
ORIGINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Thereafter, all the three agreed to go back Chandigarh on foot which took them along a dandi passing by the side of the Pinjore gardens.
Later, the same afternoon, the three met again at appellants home when, it would appear, appellant while narrating the privations and hardships endured by her at the hands of her husband broke down and implored Nand Singh and Ram Sarup to do away with Pritam Singh.
Ram Sarup also knew deceased Pritam Singh.
The married life of Appellant and Pritam Singh, according to the prosecution, lacked companynubial felicity and was marked by companystant bickerings and quarrels, the cause for this discord being the addiction of Pritam Singh to liquor.
Nand Singh is stated to have suddenly administered 2 3 Ghotna blows on the head of the unsuspecting Pritam Singh and told Ram Sarup W. 2 to pin the tottering Pritam Singh down.
After the companypletion of the investigation charges were brought against them for companyspiracy and murder.
Nand Singhs brother Bhag Singh and Pritam Singh were neighbours, residing in adjacent Government quarters in Sector 20 A, Chandigarh.
The trial companyrt on the basis of the approvers testimony as companyroborated by other evidence, held both Nand Singh , and the appellant guilty of the offences they were charged with and sentenced them to imprisonment for life.
S of 1976 companyvicting appellant for offences under Sections 302 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to imprisonment for life, raises certain questions as to the nature and extent of companyroboration of an accomplices evidence and as to the procedure for the trial of offences by a child under the East Punjab Childrens Act 1949.
Ram Sarup, who later turned approver, was another police companystable on Guard duty at the Punjab Raj Bhavan, Chandigarh.
12.1973, Mukhtiar Kaur P.W. 19 , the mother of deceased Pritam lodged a companyplaint about her missing son in writing with the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh.
742 of 1979.
Appellant Balwant Kaur was said to be 15 1/2 years of age at the time of the companymission of the offence alleged against her.
Kiran Choudhri and T. Sridharan for the Respondent.
S. Sohal and P.N. Puri for the Appellant.
The judgment of the High Court under appeal is companymon to Criminal Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATACHALIAH J. This appeal, by Special Leave, preferred against the Judgment dated April 26, 1976 of the High Court of Punjab Haryana affirming the judgment dated 26 4 1976 of the Sessions Judge in S.C. No.
Then, the body of Pritam Singh was also companycealed in the nearby hushes.
P.W. 1 companyld number, however companyfirm whether the injuries were ante mortem or number.
Appellant was arrested on 8.5.1975.
