Constable, Ram Saran PW 14 made an entry in the daily diary about the report re ceived from the irwin Hospital.
P.W. 2, Mohar Singh, was number examined before the companymitting companyrt.
After examining the evidence of the defence witnesses as well as the station diary entries about the departure of the Head Constable.
He mentioned the name of the accused in the FIR and gave companyplete sequence of events.
The Sessions Judge also did number rely upon the disclosure statement made by the accused and also ignored the recovery of the knife as being in pursuance of that disclosure statement.
P.C. I find abundant companyroboration thereof in the testimo ny of PW 1 Hukam Chand.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 5 12 1975 of the Delhi High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
On the death of Rajinder Kumar at 11.35 P.M., the same night, the section under which the case was registered was altered to section 302 IPC and investigation proceeded accordingly.
The statements of PWs 3 and 4 which were recorded in the companymitting companyrt were transferred to the record during the trial under section 288, Criminal Procedure Code.
The High Court, as stated earlier, companyfirmed the companyvic tion by accepting the testimony of Hukam Chand as well as the statements made by PWs 3 and 4 before the companymitting companyrt in which they had clearly supported the prosecution case.
At the trial number only Hukam Chand gave evidence as an eye witness, but Mohar Singh PW 2 , Rajinder Kumar Jain PW 3 and Puran Singh PW 4 were also produced as eye witnesses.
While PW 1, Hukam Chand, companytin ued to tell his melancholy story, PWs 3 and 4 did number sup port the prosecution and were accordingly declared hostile.
This is a strong circumstance in favour of the prosecution in this case.
Since the accused had opportunity to cross examine the PWs 3 and 4 in the companymitting companyrt the fact that he had number actually cross examined these witnesses is of numberconse quence.
When PW 20 arrived.
In the companymitting companyrt these witnesses had stated that they had seen the accused assaulting the deceased with a knife.
Referring to PWs 3 and 4, the trial companyrt observed as follows I treat the evidence of PW 3 Rajinder Kumar Jain and PW 4 Puran as substantive evidence under section 288 Cr.
The trial companyrt companyvicted the accused on the testimony of Hukam Chand PW 1 and accepted the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 recorded in the companymitting companyrt.
This explanation had been rejected by both the companyrts.
According to the Doctor the punctured injury at the left inter scapular region was sufficient to cause his death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
He had numbertime to manufacture things so as to be incorporated in the report.
PW 1/A at about 8.40 P.M. which is the first information report registered under section 307/34 IPC.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal NO 246 of 1976.
Rajinder Kumar was number in a position to make a statement and he recorded the statement of Hukam Chand Ex.
Manohar Lal and Constable Balbir Singh, to outside districts the Sessions Judge held that it was number at all improbable that the two policemen accompanied by Jai Bhagwan went to Agra and brought the accused from there.
He sent a companyy of this report to S.I. Dewan Singh PW 20 who proceeded to the Hospital.
This evidence treated as substantive evidence under section 288 Cr.
The accused, Ashok Kumar, was arrested on May 25, 1973, near Jat Dharamshala in Jamuna Bazar.
He admits the enmity on the part of the accused towards the deceased.
He did number lose any time.
It is said that on the following day Ashok Kumar made a state ment before Inspector Sardar Singh, Station House Offi cer, P.S. Kotwali, Delhi PW 21 in pursuance of which on May 28, 1973, a blood stained knife Ex.
It was shown in the companyrse of their cross examination that they had earlier during the investigation made statements as eye witnesses to the occurrence.
Stab left hand 4 x 1 on the dorsum.
P 7 was recov ered.
The accused denied the charge and stated that he was arrest ed by the police in Agra on May 24, 1973, and number on the following day at Jat Dhararashala as alleged by the prosecution.
Evidence was also led by the prosecution to prove recovery of a shirt and pantaloons having stains of blood although these had already been washed from the person of the accused, Ashok Kumar, when he was arrested on May 25, 1973.
The serological report showed the origin of these stains as human blood.
Names of Ashok Kumar and Vijay Kumar appeared in the first information report, as the assailams.
L. Sanghi and M.N. Shroff, for the respondent.
Stab left thigh 2 x 1.
L. Kohli and R.C. Kohli, for the appellant.
Stab left lumber region 2 x 2.
111 of 1974 .
Hukam Chand sent for a taxi and took Rajinder Kumar in it to the Irwin Hospital where he was examined by Dr. U. Kaul PW 12 who found the follow ing injuries on his person Stab wound 4 x 2 left inter scapular region with surrounding surgical emphysema.
Stab left cheek 2 x 2.
With regard to the evidence of PW 1 the trial companyrt observed as follows In the case before me Hukam Chand is a father of the deceased.
Apart from that during the Sessions trial their explanation was that they had made the statements before the companymitting companyrt under the threat of the police.
Constable, Vijay Kumar, PW 7 who was on duty at the Irwin Hospital informed the Police Station, Kotwali, about the admission of Rajinder Kumar in the Hospital.
