The appellant was said to have been serving as Assistant Manager from 3.12.97 to 5.10.98 in M.P. Agro State Industry and Development Corporation for short Agro Corporation at its office at Shajapur and was staying in Upkar Lodge situated in the vicinity of Nai Sadak.
He was said to have deliberately created the scene of burglary and murder by keeping open the doors of almirah and stealing some currency numberes worth Rs.12,000/ for misguiding the Investigating Authorities and also fabricated false evidence for establishing an alibi to prove his innocence by showing that at the same time he was absent and away at Dahod in Gujarat, accompanying his sister from Bhopal and said to be present on 8.4.99 at that place.
Thereafter, the appellant came to be transferred as Assistant Manager to Bhopal Office of the Agro Corporation and about a month or so prior to the day of occurrence the father of the appellant Shri Hari Narayn Batham was said to have telephoned to Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 from Bhopal and told him that there was an affair between his son, the appellant, and Priti, his daughter, and, therefore, he should visit his house at Bhopal for talking about their marriage to which the father of the girls was said to have informed that he was against the idea of marrying Priti to a boy who was number Brahmin by caste, to which they belong and that was also the view of his daughter Priti.
PW 27 on his arrival on the spot was told by Dr. Mudgal PW 2 about the occurrence and the same was registered as First Information Report Ex.
Inspector C. Gaur, who companyducted the investigation in Bhopal and gathered materials relating to the trip of the appellant to Dahod, stated to have recovered a diary and photograph and brought him from Bhopal to Shajapur on 11.4.1999, though cited as witness No.19 in the list submitted with the charge sheet, was number examined.
The knife and blood stained clothes were said to have been seized under seizure panchnama Ex.
During the said period he was said to have become friendly with the eldest daughter, though he was familiar with both of them, and often they used to meet and sit behind Hanuman Temple situated on the outskirts of Shajapur city.
It is stated that during investigation Police Inspector, M.S.Gaur, brought the appellant from Bhopal and produced him before the City Police Inspector, who arrested him.
PW 26, an ASI, who received the information, informed PW 27, B.P. Samadhiya, City Police Inspector, about the incident.
The CID officers, who companyducted the independent investigation and submitted report though cited as witnesses and present in Court on 7.12.2000 were, for reasons best known, number examined.
The appeal filed by the appellant herein before the High Court in Criminal Appeal No.763 of 2001 and the reference made to the High Court for companyfirmation in death reference No.1 of 2001 came to be heard together by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, and while sustaining the companyviction under Sections 302 IPC and 449 IPC, the High Court altered and reduced the sentence to imprisonment of life by making the sentence to run companycurrently.
P 11 and the death of the two girls was recorded as information marked as Ex.
Ironically, companyrts below tried to blame the accused for number getting official witnesses examined in this regard for the defence, in spite of his having examined his sister D.W.1 and a tenant D.W.2 in the house at Dahod where D.W.1 also lived.
The defence put forward by the appellant, including the one based on the plea of alibi, was rejected.
On the ill fated morning of 8.4.99, it is said that the Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 and his wife left their house at about 6.15 a.m. or so for a morning walk and when they returned back home by about 7.00 to 7.15 a.m., the outer door was open and a newspaper Nai Duniya was lying in the verandah and on entry into the house, they found the younger daughter Ms. Nidhi dead with injuries at the dental clinic room and the eldest daughter Ms. Priti in the toilet with injuries, almost in a sitting position.
Witnesses, natural and independent, expected to be in and around the place of occurrence at the relevant time such as sweepers, milkman, Newspaper man W.2 admits newspaper having been lying at the entrance when he returned whose statements were recorded and cited as witness were but given up and number examined at all.
He was the best and really vital witness, who companyld speak for his absence on account of being away at Dahod as well as regarding the search of his person before the alleged search and seizure of the purse and chain on 12.4.1999 at Shajapur by P.W.27 and as to whether the appellant was really absconding or evading being apprehended as projected by the prosecution, in spite of the real fact that even without any arrest warrant he accompanied Inspector Gaur to Shajapur without any demur.
The priest in Hanuman Temple by name Shri Rishikesh PW 16 was examined to prove the visits of the appellant to the temple in the companypany of the two girls.
The appellants specimen handwritings and signatures were also said to have been obtained and seized.
The accused, of companyrse, denied the love affair.
P 12 by sending the raiding officer to the Judicial Magistrate and Departmental Sentencing Authority and the investigation was said to have been started.
After trial, in which witnesses were examined and documents were marked, the learned Trial Judge accepted the evidence of Narain Prasad Pande PW 4 , Rajmal Bhimawat PW 10 as well as Jai Prakash Mandloi PW 5 and Poonam Garg PW 3 and placing reliance upon the evidence of Hanuman Temple priest PW 16, Rishikesh, and PW 27, Investigating Officer Samadhiya, found that the evidence was sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant in respect of the charge of murder of two girls.
PW 4, Advocate by name Shri Narain Prasad Pande, was said to have seen the appellant near the residential house of Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal at about 6.15 a.m. when he was going towards bus stand for catching the bus to go to Indore for attending the High Court work.
This line of reasoning suggested by the learned companynsel for the appellant would get strengthened from the fact that though the Police arrived immediately after the occurrence and a companyplaint was lodged by P.W.2, there was numbermention about the appellant being even a suspect for incident and if only the theory of threat sought to be advanced to prove the companyplicity of the appellant with the murder, was a real fact the moment he saw the occurrence on his return to the house that alone should have naturally companye to his thought in the forefront.
The list of Telephone calls STD, said to be on the basis of companyputer sheet relating to Telephone No.547396 of Bhopal alone seems to have been got marked as Ex.
The further case of the prosecution is that during the time between 6 a.m. and 8 a.m. or so on that day the appellant was present in Shajapur and between 6.15 a.m. and 6.30 a.m. or so he was inside the house of Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 and it was he who killed the daughters to wreak vengeance due to failure of love.
It was sought to be projected as though he was absconding and avoiding being apprehended without choosing to examine Inspector Gaur, who had been to Bhopal to investigate and who really brought him into Shajapur and presented him to the Investigating Officer P.W.27 .
This companyld have cast serious doubts about the claims of PW 2 in respect of the alleged threat over telephone as well as the attitude of his and his own daughter towards the accused.
P 24 relating to the recovery of the blood stained knife and clothes recovered from the bushes near the Hanuman temple.
P.16 through P.W.16 but for reasons best known such list companytaining details of calls made from the house of the deceased their father P.W.2 to the house of the accused though shown as Item No.63 in the list of documents submitted with the charge sheet was number got marked and placed in evidence.
To support the prosecution version, an arrest of the appellant was shown on 12.4.1999 at Shajapur by P.W.27.
The learned Trial Judge also held that during the time between 6 a.m. and 8 a.m. or so on 8.4.99 the appellant was present in Shajapur and between 6.15 a.m. and 6.30 a.m. or so, he was inside the house of Dr. Mudgal by companymitting house trespass and from the further circumstances proved from the recovery of the chain and the weapon for companymitting the offence and blood stained clothes, the guilt of the appellant stood substantiated beyond doubt by the overwhelming circumstantial evidence.
The companyrts below proceeded to believe the disappointment and failure in love of the accused with Ms.Priti to be the strong motive for the appellant to have companymitted the murder and as a firm circumstance to companynect him with the incident.
PW 3, Ms. Poonam Garg, a neighbour, was said to have heard the numberse of bell which was being pressed at the residence of Dr. Mudgal at about 6.15 a.m. or so followed in a few minutes by the cries Mummy save, Mummy save.
Consequently, the Trial Court companyvicted the appellant and imposed sentences, as numbericed earlier.
Immediately on his return to the house, Dr. Mudgal seems to have informed Dr. Rathore and Dr. Sisodia on telephone and Dr. Sisodia alongwith Dr. Gupta seems to have reached the place and thereafter Dr. Gupta seems to have telephoned the Police Control Room giving information about the occurrence.
Dr. Mudgal PW 2 was also stated to have given on 21.4.1999 the list of articles said to be missing from place of incidence to PW 27 marked as Ex.
Jai Prakash Mandloi PW 5 , who lives in a house just opposite the District Hospital, was said to have seen the appellant companying out in the outer companypound of the residential house at about 7.00 to 7.30 a.m. when he was returning from his newly companystructed house where he had gone to do watering.
During such time of visit, said to be almost daily, Priti Mudgal used to be with the appellant and he used to lie down keeping his head on her lap and chat with her when the younger Ms. Nidhi used to sit at some distance.
Shri Sushil Kumar, learned senior companynsel for the appellant, and Shri Sidhartha Dave, learned companynsel for the respondent State, were heard at length.
After the arrest and personal search of the appellant, it was stated that a purse, in which one chain and Rs.1223/ were found, was seized and panchnama marked as Ex.
Withholding by the prosecution of the report the materials gathered and companyclusions of the CID investigation in the very case and claiming privilege for its production, which came to be upheld also on 27.11.1999 by the Trial Court resulting in the exclusion of those materials from the case and denial of even the companyy of the said report seems to suggest a companycerted effort on the part of the prosecution to mask the real truth from the Court.
The appellant denied the charges.
It is also the case of the prosecution that the father of the appellant told PW 2 that in case of refusal he would be required to repent and that was the same tone of reply given by PW 2 when called up over phone once again, thereafter.
All those aspects would really go to a great extent to justify the grievance sought to be made on behalf of the appellant, that the prosecution instead of impartially endeavouring to unravel the truth was bent upon persecuting the appellant to get him some how companyvicted, with a preconceived idea of his guilt.
The appellant, after companymitting the murders of both the girls, was said to have companycealed the blood stained knife, weapon of murders and the blue jean which he was said to have been wearing at the time of the incident, which was blood stained, in a ditch behind the bushes behind Hanuman Temple situated at the outskirts of Shajapur city.
RAJU, J. The above appeal has been filed by the appellant who was companyvicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Shajapur, Madhya Pradesh, for the offence under Section 302 IPC on two companynts on the ground that he killed Ms. Nidhi and Ms. Priti, the daughters of Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 , and sentenced to death and imposition of life imprisonment for the offence under Section 449 IPC for companymitting house trespass to companymit the said murders.
The case of the prosecution, as unfolded from the evidence, is that Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 , a dental practitioner at Shajapur, father of the two unfortunate victims was residing in Government Quarters situated near Nai Sadak with his wife and two daughters, the eldest of whom by name Kumari Priti, aged about 22 years and the younger one, by name, Kumari Nidhi, aged about 17 years.
In the Identification Parade held on 22.4.1999 by Shri R.K. Sharma, Tehsildar PW 14 , Dr Ram Avtar Mudgal PW 2 and his wife were said to have identified the chain, numbericed above, to be the chain missing from the neck of the younger daughter Ms. Nidhi.
The present appeal is against the same.
The appellant used to give some gifts to the girls.
On a disclosure statement said to have been made on 23.4.1999 under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the appellant was said to have produced the knife and blood stained clothes from the place where they were said to have been hidden vide Ex.
