The record as filed did number indicate whether any case under Section 302 IPC was registered against said Baljeet and Suresh.
It was projected that an unidentified dead body of a woman was found in the agricultural fields in District Muzaffar Nagar, U.P. on 22.01.2003.
P.C., it was observed that the appellant had taken the defence that the dead body recovered in Muzaffar Nagar was actually that of Pushpa Verma and in such circumstances it was imperative for him to have examined the expert in his defence at the trial companyrt stage itself and that the report of the privately engaged Forensic Expert at such belated stage companyld number be allowed to be taken on record.
Though she was resident of Karnal and the property was at Panipat, this general power of attorney was executed and registered with the office of the Sub Registrar at Delhi.
On 12.11.2002 a Will Ext.
On 08.11.2002 the appellant sold away the property at Panipat for Rs.12.5 Lakhs.
PA lodged with Police Post, Sector 13, Karnal, by Chander Prakash on 16.03.2003 giving missing report about his sister Pushpa Verma.
One Brahmpal Singh, Sub Inspector, Saharanpur was also examined as Defence witness who stated that he had prepared Inquest proceedings regarding the dead body and thereafter the investigation was companyducted by SSI Rajinder Beer Singh.
On the next day i.e. 13.11.2002 a general power of attorney was allegedly executed with respect to Gurgaon property in favour of the appellant.
PW 22 Harsh Vardhan, Handwriting expert was examined who opined that the signatures of Pushpa Verma on aforementioned documents do number tally with the specimen signatures taken from the available record with her bank.
Thereafter the documents were entered in the register of the registration maintained in our office.
By examining these witnesses it was submitted that the dead body so found in Muzaffar Nagar on 22.01.2003 was in fact that of Pushpa Verma.
The trial companyrt rejected this defence.
This was followed by another letter dated 24.04.2003 Ext.
S.P. Meena, Sub Registrar, Delhi was examined as PW 10.
PG and Ext.
P.C. praying that additional evidence be recorded at the appellate stage.
She had set up a marriage bureau and also used to work as a property dealer.
The High Court directed that these applications be companysidered along with the appeal itself.
After due investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201 P.C. in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal and the appellant was tried for aforesaid offences in Sessions Case No.53 of 2005.
This judgment of the High Court is presently under appeal.
The person who executes the document and in whose favour it is executed do number appear before me.
According to the report, she was missing since 20/22 January, 2003 and had number been receiving any calls since then.
He is sentenced to life imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs.10,000/ for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/ in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 364 I.P.C. and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/ , in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 201 I.P.C. All the sentences are to run companycurrently.
PG 1, the signature was Puspha Verma instead of numbermal signature being Pushpa Verma.
Relying on these materials, the appellant submitted an application under Section 391 Cr.
Thereafter I sign the documents on the faith of the clerk companycerned.
PG 1 was allegedly executed by said Pushpa Verma in favour of the appellant in respect of her Gurgaon property.
The appellant carried the matter further by filing Criminal Appeal No.800 DB/2007 in the High Court.
These signatures are mine.
On 31.03.2003 a demand draft of Rupees Five Thousand towards the fees for seeking permission to transfer Gurgaon property was taken out and enclosed along with the application Ext.
The photograph of the dead body taken by the police was produced in this trial and marked as DB.
PC for registration of an offence against the appellant stating that he suspected that the appellant wanted to grab her plots at Panipat and Gurgaon by preparing forged documents and that he had kidnapped her or murdered her.
The instant matter has genesis in Daily Diary Report Ext.
The follow up action on this report indicates that information was sent to all the districts and all the police stations were intimated through wireless.
PG and at point B in Ext PG/1 signed these documents.
Two sons of one of the sisters were practicing advocates.
The companyviction and sentence as recorded by the trial companyrt has been affirmed by the High Court in the judgment under appeal.
The trial companyrt, thus, awarded the sentence as stated hereinabove.
The Will and the general power of attorney were also executed and registered with the office of the Sub Registrar at Delhi.
The companysideration received in respect of the aforesaid transactions was never credited to the account of Pushpa Verma.
It appears that there were dues in respect of penalty for number having companystructed upon within the prescribed period, which were got cleared by the appellant.
PG/1 is power of attorney and will respectively were presented before me by Naresh Kumar, Clerk after initialing at point A in Ext.
The transactions as placed on record were as under On 26.09.2002 a general power of attorney Ext.
Pushpa Verma owned properties at Panipat and Gurgaon allotted through Haryana Urban Development Authority HUDA for short .
In defence, the appellant examined four witnesses.
As regards application under Section 391 Cr.
PF 1 was allegedly executed by Pushpa Verma in favour of the appellant in respect of her property at Panipat.
I have seen my signatures at points B and Ext.
The High Court thus dismissed the appeal affirming the companyviction and sentence of the appellant.
I have been working in this manner from 26.07.2000 to 13.11.2002 as Sub Registrar and attested the documents.
The relevant portion of his testimony is as under After the document is written the receipt for the fee is issued by the clerk companycerned the document is presented before another clerk who verifies the document and the attestation of the witnesses and parties and initials the photographs and affixes seals and fills in the blanks in the seal, the document after his signature is presented before me.
This reporting led to registration of FIR No.144 dated 18.05.2003 with Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal under Section 364 P.C. against the appellant.
It found that the signatures of Pushpa Verma on the documents in question were a crude attempt at imitation and in one of the documents, namely, Will Ext.
Documents Ext.
During investigation the body of Pushpa Verma companyld number be recovered number was there any eye witness to the actual act of kidnapping or murder.
Relying upon the circumstances as culled out hereinabove, the trial companyrt found that the case against the appellant was companypletely proved by the prosecution.
On 24.01.2003 an agreement Mark PH was entered into under which the appellant agreed to transfer Gurgaon property in favour of prospective purchasers and received part companysideration of Rupees 2.5 Lakhs Rupees 1.5 Lakhs in cash while Rupees One Lakhs by way of a cheque in the name of the appellant himself .
Brother of Pushpa Verma named Chander Prakash had retired as Executive Engineer and was residing at Hissar.
It was further companyfessed that in the month of January the appellant felt that Pushpa Verma suspected some foul play and therefore the appellant plotted a scheme to finish her.
On 23.01.2003 she expressed desire to visit Haridwar, on which pretext he took her in a car and after having administered a sedative, throttled her and while she was unconscious near Roorkee, threw her body in a canal known as Gang Canal in between villages Liverheri and Mangalore.
Miscellaneous Petition No.10525 of 2012 was filed in the present matter seeking leave to bring on record additional documents which include the order of companyviction in so far as aforementioned Suresh is companycerned under Section 25 of the Arms Act as well as deposition of the very same Sub Registrar S.P. Meena in Civil Suit No.142 of 2009.
On 24.03.2003, further sum of Rupees Three Lakhs was received by the appellant and endorsement to that effect was made on the agreement itself.
The High Court found that the case against the appellant stood companypletely established.
The High Court companysidered the matter and the circumstantial evidence placed on record.
Copy of the General Diary pertaining to investigation of said crime was also filed which companytained statement of said accused Suresh according to which Suresh and one Baljeet had taken Pushpa Verma from Karnal in a car, that Baljeet had strangulated her and that thereafter they both had thrown her dead body in sugar cane fields.
It appears that the signatures of Pushpa Verma on the general power of attorney submitted by the appellant did number tally with her original signatures available on record with HUDA and a letter to that effect was dispatched on 07.04.2003.
P 12 of Pushpa Verma was recovered from the bushes near Gang Canal where her dead body was thrown.
During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant filed CRM No.52692 of 2008 along with documents pertaining to a case registered against one Suresh under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
The appellant stands companyvicted for the offences of kidnapping Pushpa Verma and thereafter murdering her and for destroying the evidence by throwing her body in a canal.
On 21.05.2003 the appellant made an extra judicial companyfession to PW16 Sunil Rana advocate who later took the appellant to the police and caused his arrest.
After the arrest of the appellant, voter identity card Ext.
This application was preferred by the appellant in his capacity as general power of attorney and was received in the office of HUDA on 03.04.2003.
Pursuant to the disclosure statement of the appellant, a gold ring bearing inscription PV was also recovered from the house of the appellant.
The appellant companyfessed that Pushpa Verma was known to him for more than a year, that he started meeting her often, that she started treating him as her son, that having companye to know that she owned properties at different places he had become greedy, that he had given her some sedative in her tea, taken her to Delhi and got her signatures on the General power of attorney, that he sold away property at Panipat but kept all the money with himself and that he again took her to Delhi and got another general power of attorney executed in respect of Gurgaon plot.
The property was an industrial plot of 1050 square meters at Panipat and the entire companysideration was received by the appellant in cash.
The evidence in that behalf was available through PW5 Muktiyar Singh and PW6 Ashok Sharma.
The defence set up by the appellant does number inspire any companyfidence and merits rejection.
Such recovery was in pursuance of the disclosure statement of the appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
In order to prove this part, the prosecution relied upon the testimony of PW 12 Mahir Hussain, Photographer and the testimony of PW 19 Investigating Officer Vijay Anand.
The prosecution mainly relied upon following circumstances to bring home the charges against the accused The documents pertaining to properties of Pushpa Verma at Panipat and Gurgaon showed that general powers of attorney were allegedly executed in favour of the appellant, on the basis of which he had entered into transactions in respect of properties at Panipat and Gurgaon and had pocketed the companysideration.
Uday Umesh Lalit, J. This appeal by special leave challenges the judgment and order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing Criminal Appeal No.800 DB of 2007 and thereby companyfirming the companyviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences under Sections 364, 302 and 201 of the I.P.C. One Ms. Pushpa Verma, an unmarried lady, after retiring from her job as Head Mistress in the year 1993, was residing at Karnal.
Said Civil Suit was filed by Chander Prakash against the present appellant seeking to invalidate the transactions allegedly entered into by Pushpa Verma.
PG and at points C in Ext.
On 18.05.2003 Chander Prakash moved an application Ext.
This document empowered the appellant with all rights including power to dispose of the property at Panipat.
The appellant also filed a report of a privately engaged Forensic Expert stating that the photograph of the dead body of the lady found in Muzaffar Nagar was that of Pushpa Verma.
PH by HUDA addressed to Pushpa Verma with a companyy to the appellant asking her to remain present personally in the office in companynection with her application seeking permission to transfer.
Her two married sisters were also residing at Karnal.
