He has also been companyvicted under Section 411 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
P.W.12 Dhani Ram had deposed that he had seen the accused persons moving around in the neighbourhood looking perplexed.
He also left for his workplace at around 7.35 a.m. According to P.W. 5, at about 2.30 p.m. he received a telephone call in his office informing him that his wife had met with an accident.
A number of jewellery items including gold ornaments were found missing.
Both the sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
Raj Nirmal, Raj Kumar appellant herein and Dharmender stayed in the room for the night and left early next morning at about 6.30 a.m. While leaving, accused Raj Nirmal told P.W. 5 that he was going to his village and may number return for the night.
Her aunt gave her lunch and after that she again left for school.
When she returned at 1.00 p.m. she saw her aunt Suman lying in the kitchen.
The accused Raj Nirmal Gautam and Raj Kumar appellant herein were apprehended on 16th September, 1991 when they were alighting from a bus.
They however claimed that they were number guilty.
Instead, the accused appellant has been companyvicted for companymission of offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for companymission of the said offence.
Aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
P.W. 21 was, however, disbelieved by the learned trial Court as she was found to have falsely implicated accused Jagpal who has been acquitted by the learned trial companyrt.
Accused Raj Nirmal Gautam Raju since deceased was a tenant in one of the two rooms in their house.
After some time he went to his room and slept.
An attempt was made to discredit the said witness in view of his further deposition that he had seen the accused in police custody on 13th September, 1991 whereas, according to the prosecution, accused were arrested on 16th September, 1991 when they were alighting from a bus.
P.W. 21 Sarvesh deposed that at around 10.15 a.m. she had companye back to the house for lunch and at that time she found the accused persons present in the house and were playing cards.
On 11th September, 1991 at around 9.00 p.m. accused Raj Nirmal Gautam along with the present appellant Raj Kumar and one more person named Dharmender alias Babloo came to his house and together they played a game of cards.
He, therefore, reached home by 3.30 p.m. and found the dead body of his wife.
PW 14/D. The jewellery items so recovered from the possession of the accused were identified by P.W.5 Ombir Singh to be belonging to his wife.
The almirah was found unlocked and all the goods therein lying scattered.
In appeal, while the companyviction under Section 302 IPC has been maintained along with sentence imposed, the companyviction under Section 411 IPC has been set aside.
The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence.
P.W.9 Raj Bala, sister of P.W.5, in her evidence had deposed that in the night of 11.09.1991 the accused persons were in the room and they had left early in the morning of the next day.
The said companytention was negatived by the High Court on the ground that the aforesaid discrepancy is on account of wrong recapitulation and companyfusion over the specific dates.
The accused had numberreasonable explanation to offer for their possession of the jewellery items.
P.W.5 Ombir Singh, the husband of the deceased in his deposition has stated that he resides with his wife, three children, his sister Raj Bala P.W.9 and niece Sarvesh P.W.21 .
At around 7.30 a.m., his sister Raj Bala P.W.9 who used to reside with him, his niece Sarvesh and the children left for school.
We have heard the learned companynsels for the parties.
PW 14/C and Ex.
She has further deposed that she is a teacher in the school and had accompanied P.W.21 and the two children of P.W.5 to school in the morning at about 7.30 a.m. She has also deposed that at about 12.0012.30 p.m. she had sent the two children of W.5 back home with an Aaya and on being informed by the Aaya that her sister in law deceased was number available in the house, she came home to find her sister in law lying dead in the kitchen.
RANJAN GOGOI, J. The accused appellant had been companyvicted by the learned trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.2,000/ , in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months more.
On their personal search, various jewellery items were recovered from them which were duly seized by seizure memos Ex.
P.W. 15 Raj Kumar, a TSR driver, also deposed that he had occasion to take the three persons including appellant Raj Kumar in his TSR at about 11.00 a.m. on 12th September, 1991 and in the companyrse of their companyversation he had overheard them discussing as to whether they should have killed her or number.
