Then on 17th March, 2004, he went to the laboratory and deposited both bundles alognwith the letter in the laboratory.
x had gone to inform and summon her parents.
Ram Chandra Chaurasiya PW 1 is the father of the deceased.
Although the scene at the site of occurrence revealed that the Salwar trouser of the girl had been untied and taken off down and she was found in the naked state and also there were the signs of violence all around which indicated that a ferocious attempt to companymit rape on her was made, yet the Doctor found that the girl had number been ravished.
Therefore, the case was referred under Section 392 Cr.
He testified before the High Court that the injuries shown in the post mortem report Ext.
384 of 2005.
However, in the meantime, the Station House Officer of Police Station Satrikh apprehended Lalit Kumar.
Ka.1 .
Ka.28 against the accused.
He testified that at about 8 p.m. on February 23, 2004, he was directed by the Senior of Superintendent of Police, Lucknow to go to the site of occurrence.
After interrogating all the relevant witnesses, companylecting the relevant reports including the post mortem, the Investigating Officer accomplished the investigation and submitted a charge sheet against the accused appellant.
He companylected ordinary and bloodstained earth from there and packed them in separate boxes.
K.12 was prepared by the Investigating Officer.
Ext.8 , his Gamchha Mat.
x victim original name number disclosed .
The dog barked at him.
Ext.8.
The dog barked at the accused Lalit Kumar who was identified by Abdul Lais Khan in the Court as the same person, who was smelled by the dog and whom it had attempted to pounce and catch hold.
The dupatta of the deceased was found embedded in the large wound and all the five fingers of her left hand had cut wounds.
The prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses in support of the prosecution story.
The occurrence came to the numberice of informant PW 1 after 4.00 p.m. and the written report was submitted at 6.10 p.m. on the same day at Satrikh Police Station, about 7 kms.
The polythene bag in which the sickle was wrapped was taken by the Investigating Officer without any seal from the site of recovery.
Sriram PW 9 is a relative of the informant Ram Chandra Chaurasiya.
Ka.1 at Satrikh Police Station where upon a case was registered and the then Station House Officer Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav assumed the charge of investigation and immediately swung into action.
He registered the case in the General Case Diary at Sl.
He, however, admitted that he had been arrested by the police at 11.00 p.m. on 23rd February, 2004, i.e. the date of occurrence.
x aged about 18 years and sentenced him to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment thereunder.
Initially the appeal was heard by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench and after companyclusion of the arguments the Honble Judges pronounced their judgments but had a divided opinion one Honble Judge affirmed the order of companyviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court and the other Honble Judge reversed the whole judgment and the order of the Trial Court and out rightly acquitted the accused appellant on both the companynts.
The appellant and his brother wrapped with blankets were sleeping inside their house.
The High Court on reference affirmed the death sentence.
Irrespective of the same it is ante timed.
The alleged recovery of clothes Baniyan and towel do number satisfy the mandate of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
When they returned to their house at 2.30 p.m., they were informed by their daughter Guddi that their another daughter Km.x had gone to beckon them at 1.30 p.m., as on that day, Govind, the son of Ram Chandra Chaurasiyas sala brother in law had companye to their house, his two daughters thought it proper to inform their parents and it was in this background that Km.
Ka.13 and then companytacted his higher authorities and asked for a Dog Squad.
Ram Chandra Chaurasiya PW 1 lodged a written report Ext.
The Investigating Officer prepared the site plan of the occurrence.
He then reached at the site of occurrence at about 6.30 p.m., inspected the site of occurrence, saw the dead body lying in the agricultural field of Vishwanath, prepared the site plan Ext.
The inquest report was also prepared on 24th February, 2004 by the Investigating Officer.
The judgment rendered by the Trial Court has been upheld and the reference was answered companyfirming the penalty of death sentence.
Similarly, Ram Prakash PW 3 , S o Jagannath turned hostile by rejecting the suggestion of the prosecution that the accused appellant companyveyed and companyfessed to him that he had killed the girl as she was a girl of easy virtue.
He instructed Raja to pick up the smell of culprit from the site of occurrence and then find out some clue of the crime and the criminal.
from the village.
As recited in the said report, the throat of the victim of occurrence was found chopped off.
In the evening, the Investigating Officer met him and asked him to accompany him to the accused appellants house.
He visited the site of occurrence and soon sent for the dog squad.
It was also stated by him that the injuries in the fingers of the deceased companyld have been sustained by the victim while defending herself.
He sent his own police jeep for bringing the dog.
Accordingly, he arrived there at 8.30 p.m. alongwith the German shepherd dog named as Raja.
He was, however, declared hostile and it was suggested that he being a Yadav had helped the accused by retracting his earlier statement.
Abdul Lais Khan PW 4 is the handler of the German Shepherd Dog known as Raja.
He alongwith the police personnel and other villagers walked behind the dog.
The said dog was taken to the village in the late evening on the date of occurrence.
He went there along with other village men.
Her dead body was packed and sealed in a bundle and sent for post mortem.
He started the search work at 9 p.m., it being a night with dark all around, a patromax lantern was lightened up near the dead body of the victim.
Ka.7 .
Her neck was barely companynected with the trunk.
He proved the said report before the Trial Court and testified that the neck of the deceased was almost severed from the trunk with a namesake junction of the skin.
He asked for arrangement of more light which was provided by the Investigating Officer and then he instructed the dog to smell the footprints of the culprit around the dead body and then set the dog scot free and asked it to move.
On having companypleted the task of investigation, this witness submitted charge sheet Ext.
When they were going through the agricultural fields, they were shocked to see their daughter Km.x lying dead in pool of blood in the plot of one Vishwanath.
No.33 on 23rd February, 2004 and submitted its companyy Ext.
Therefore, the result of chemical examiner is of numbervalue to prove the charge.
Ex.8 .
Shri Khan was then the Sub Inspector in the Crime Research Branch Dog Squad , District Lucknow.
To depic this discovery, memo Ex.
Ram Prakash Yadav PW 2 was the witness to whom the appellant had allegedly companyfessed about the companymission of crime.
By the impugned companymon judgment the High Court while dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant, answered the reference affirming the death sentence imposed by the Trial Court for the offence companymitted under Section 302 IPC for having companymitted murder of Km.
The appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.
After companypleting other formalities of interrogating the witnesses and companylecting other material exhibits, the Investigating Officer brought the accused and the sealed bundles and boxes of the incriminating articles to the police station.
Ext.10 .
Dr. Arun Chandra Dwivedi PW 6 is the Doctor, who companyducted the post mortem of the victims companypse and prepared the autopsy report Ext.
Raja barked at the blanket of the accused appellant, who was immediately grabbed over by the police.
Learned companynsel appearing for the appellant, inter alia, made following submissions in assailing the judgment under appeal The prosecution has failed to produce any witness to prove the very factum of the registration of the FIR.
After tracking the street in front of 10 12 houses, the dog entered into a thatched house, where two boys were resting on a wooden company.
Ram Chandra Chaurasiya PW 1 and Vidyawati both being worried left in search of their daughter.
According to his evidence, this case was registered in his presence at the Satrikh Police Station.
Abdul Lais Khan, Sub Inspector, incharge of the Dog arrived at the site of occurrence long after the sunset and examined the site in the light of patromax.
He also proved that the police called a dog who after smelling the site of occurrence tracked down to the house of the accused and caught him.
On the next day i.e. on 24th February, 2004, the Investigating Officer recovered at the instance of accused appellant the bloodstained Baniyan vest and a Gamchha towel of the accused appellant and also Hansiya scythe used in the companymission of crime.
He, however, companyfirmed the fact of a sniffer dog being brought to the village by the police.
The trampled wheat plants around the dead body revealed a tale of violence.
Identification by sniffer dog cannot be taken as evidence for the purpose of establishing guilt of the appellant.
It is significant to numbere that Dr. Arun Chandra Dwivedi was summoned by the High Court under Sections 367 1 and 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a view to ascertain as to whether the major injury by which there was almost a severance of the neck from the trunk companyld possibly be caused with the sickle Mat.
All the family members had a long wait for Km.x to return but when she did number companye back up to 4.00p.m.,
Head Constable Ram Prakash Shailesh PW 5 had prepared the chik report Ex.
He came to participate in the cremation of the latters daughter.
An Inspector of the Crime Investigation Department, who was In charge of a sniffer dog, named Raja arrived at the place of occurrence late in the evening.
Ext.9 and Baniyan Mat.
It then traversed through the Khadanja street.
Ka.5 on the basis of Ram Chandra Chaurasiyas written report Ext.
Before we proceed to discuss the merits of the above companytentions, it is desirable to numberice the case of the prosecution and evidence on record as recapitulated below On 23.2.2004, Ram Chandra Chaurasiya PW 1 and his wife Vidyawati residents of village Gogulpur, Police Station Satrikh, District Barabanki had gone to their agricultural field.
Relying upon the prosecution case and the evidence led in support thereof, the learned trial companyrt held the accused appellant guilty under Sections 302 and 376 read with Section 511 of the I.P.C. and then sentenced him to death for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and 5 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police Deena Nath Dubey was also present at the site of occurrence.
Raja who was a very well trained dog of German Shepherd species and who had earlier helped to uncover many crimes, smelt all the important spots around the dead body at the site of occurrence and chasing the trail of the same smell, it walked along with police personnel and villagers behind, and straightaway reached at the house of the accused appellant.
In nutshell, according to the evidence of this witness, the accused was the offender whose footprints were there around the dead body.
Both the chappals of the deceased were also lying at a distance.
He then interrogated the accused about his relationship with the deceased.
At 7 p.m. on the other day, he prepared the inquest report Ext.
P.C. stated the charges had been wrongly framed and also denied all the incriminating allegations levelled against him.
The accused was then formally arrested and he led to the recovery of the sickle Mat.
After walking about 1 k.m.
PC to a third Judge who after hearing the parties and on appreciation of evidence by the impugned judgment dated 11th August, 2006 dismissed the appeals preferred by the appellant and another on his behalf.
A perusal of the said report would reveal that the informant PW 1 mainly disclosed in it that his daughter Km.x aged about 18 years had gone in search of her parents, was found dead in the agricultural field of Vishwanath on 23rd February, 2004.
It was also added that some person incised her neck.
Shri Khan instructed the dog to smell the entire site of occurrence as also the dead body and then the said dog with the help of the trail of the smell reached at the house of the accused, who was lying on a takhat, i.e., the wooden company.
Lalit Kumar Yadav pleaded number guilty before the Trial Court and denied all the incriminating allegations levelled against him.
The accused had taken all of them including the Investigating Officer inside the house and took out the sickle wrapped in a polythene and his clothes namely Baniyan and Gamchha.
The High Court also affirmed the companyviction and sentence passed against the appellant under Section 376 read with Section 511 of Indian Penal Code for having made an attempt to companymit rape on Km.
The prosecution relied upon four pieces of circumstantial evidence first, Sniffer Dog tracking evidence, the other is recovery of sickle i.e. the weapon which was used by the appellant to cut the neck of the girl, the third is the recovery of clothes of the appellant and past companyduct of the appellant pertaining to eve teasing of the deceased girl.
The defence of the appellant was that of denial.
Sriram PW 9 , who was produced to prove recovery memo is number an independent but an interested witness who is the son in law of brother of PW 1.
Ka.4 and interrogated other witnesses.
He companyfirmed that it was possible for the neck of the victim being severed by the sickle having small teeth.
Ka.7 companyld possibly be caused by the sickle Mat.
Constable Awadhesh Kumar PW 8 proved that he carried the dead body of the victim to the mortuary for autopsy.
A prayer for necessary action was pressed into service.
He proved his report and also testified that the accused appellant had teased the deceased girl a few days before the occurrence and when Km.x companyplained about the incident of teasing to her companysin Ashok Kumar, the latter had scolded the appellant.
Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. This appeal is directed against the impugned companymon judgment dated 11th August, 2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Capital Sentence Reference No.1 of 2005 with Criminal Appeal No.252 of 2005 from Jail and Criminal Appeal No.
Head Constable Devtadeen PW 7 took out on March 16, 2004 the two sealed bundles of this case from malkhana of the Police Station Satrikh at 2.30 p.m. and after making an entry in the G.D. went to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barabanki and obtained a letter, a companyy addressed to the Chemical Examiner for examination of the incriminating articles.
The chemical examiner on examination of the three recovered articles numbericed that there was blood on all the said incriminating articles.
Unfortunately, Ashok Kumar died subsequent to the occurrence.
The sealed bundle of the sickle was opened in the Court and shown to Dr. Arun Chandra Dwivedi, who was then posted as Medical Officer, District Hospital, Barabanki.
This witness identified his signature on it.
