The crime was companymitted on June 11, 1975.
8 of 1976.
Criminal Appeal No.
The companyviction of other three accused persons were set aside and they were acquitted on the ground that there was numbercommon intention between them and Dharam Pal to companymit the murder of Janki Devi.
Upon hearing the cry, the neighbours Bal Kishan Vaid, PW 20 and Ramakant PW 22 came to the house.
The prosecution story runs like this.
Dharam Pal wanted to chase her, but Janki Devi stood in front of Dharam Pal and stopped him from proceeding further.
Her parents also did number approve of this alliance.
The three other persons are Surinder Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Shankar.
Later she developed strong dislike towards Dharam Pal and refused to marry him.
292 and 319 of 1976 and Murder Reference No.
Dharam Pal was the first to enter the house.
Before the doctor came, she succumed to her injuries.
Bal Kishan hurriedly went out to call a doctor.
The other accused did number produce any witness in their defence.
Janki Devi told them that it was Dharam Pal who stabbed her.
Geeta raised an alarm.
But while returning, all of them did number go together.
On June 11, 1975 at about 3.00 PM, Geeta and her mother Smt.
They stopped the taxi nearby the house of Janki.
At this stage, Dharam Pal inflicted injuries on Janki Devi with the knife.
Janki Devi were inside the house.
Bal Kishan Vaid and Rama Kant, who were the neighbours of Janki Devi supplemented the statement of Geeta.
They went and took that taxi and disappeared.
They peeped outside from the window and found Dharam Pal standing with three other persons.
His three companypanions followed him.
At the trial, the prosecution adduced as many as 33 witnesses.
The police after companypletion of the investigation char gesheeted the aforesaid four persons along with one Raghbir Singh.
implicated him.
As regards the murder of Janki Devi, there was an immediate intimation to the Police Control Room.
The Police came to the spot without any loss of time.
DLT 1348.
The other accused had taken the stand that they had numberconnection or relation with Dharm Pal and they even did number know him.
The trial companyrt upon companysideration of the evidence found Dharam Pal guilty of murder and awarded him the sentence of death.
Dharam Pal produced one defence witness, Ramesh Chand.
After a shortwhile, the said persons forced entry into the house by breaking open the door.
Criminal Appeal No, 407 of 1978 is by Dharam Pal challenging the validity of his companyviction and sentence of life imprisonment awarded under Section 302 IPC.
Then somebody knocked at the door from outside.
On hearing the knock, Geeta and her mother came for opening the door.
Dharam Pal pleaded that since he refused the hand of Geeta, she felt offended and had falsely .
On seeing an open chura in the hand of Dharam Pal, Geeta out of fear rushed to the kitchen and bolted herself from inside.
It may be mentioned that Dharam Pal and his companypanions came by a taxi No.
Geeta gave her detailed statement about the occurrence to the Police which became the First Information Report, The investigation proceeded on that basis.
Geeta was residing with her parents in one of the quarters at Laxmi Bai Nagar, New Delhi.
They asked Geeta to open the door, but she refused to do it.
He was holding an open chura in his hand.
But they became suspicious since the hole in the door had been blocked by placing fingers on it.
408 of 1978 is by the informant in the case seeking sentence of death to Dharam Pal and also challenging the acquittal of three accused Surinder Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Shankar.
Then the said persons fled away from the scene of occurrence.
Vijay Bahadur Singh, PW 6 is the Taxi Driver.
Janki Devi inspite of being fatally injured opened the door and went to the stairs and cried.
Geeta, PW 1 originally had some love affair with Dharam Pal.
Dharam Pal after the incident ran towards eastern side, while the others ran towards western side.
According to him, Geeta was living a life of indulgence and she had shielded the real culprits.
Jagannatha Shetty, J. These two appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of a Delhi High Court dated May 6, 1977 rendered in Criminal Appeal Nos.
