Ram Sagar further stated that next day when he again went to the shop, Gurbachan Singh again in the presence of appellant Suresh Bahri persuaded him for the same thing attracting him with an allurement that he will number be required to pay back the money taken by him as an advance and on the companytrary he will ask Suresh also to give him some more money for the assistance rendered by him.
He also stated that he had taken 3 4 beddings besides other articles in the car.
He also identified Richa in the photograph Ext.1 and Saurabh in the photograph Ext.
When the witness Ram Sagar PW 3 enquired of him as to which friend, the appellant Gurbachan Singh told that the wife of Suresh Bahri is to be murdered on account of the family dispute.
From 9 5 1984 to 17 5 1984 Suresh was staying in a hotel at Ghaziabad in the name of Mahesh Chand Gupta though Delhi is number even an hours run from Ghaziabad.
23/6 and 23/7 stating that henceforth only he would be writing letters to them as Urshia was busy like a bee at Dhulli farm and was number in a position to write letters.
100/83 also to the CBI with the companysent of the Government of Uttar Pradesh and the investigation of this case was entrusted to the CBI Inspector Rajendra Singh, PW 82.
This fact was companymunicated to Gurbachan Singh also.
He deposed that he frequently visited the Delhi house of Suresh Bahri and also used to stay with him.
This report on enquiry was found to be totally unfounded and false as would be clear from the evidence of Basant Kumar Lama PW 67 a Police Officer of Nepal.
4/34 and thereafter from 15 5 1984 to 22 5 1984 vide Exts.
28/1 was recorded on 19 12 1984 to 21 12 1984 by the Magistrate Shri Bhuneshwar Nath PW 76.
PW 34 also identified Saurabh in the photograph Ext.1 and 1/3.
The evidence of these two witnesses PW 29 and PW 60 was sought to be assailed by the learned companynsel for the appellants by pointing out some minor and insignificant companytradictions as also the statement of PW 60 that he tried to look inside the car through the glasses when he was shouted down and directed to be away by the appellant which statement has number been made by his father PW 29.
While he was taken out of the verandah Badri Narayan enquired about Urshia and Suresh told him that she had gone to a party to the house of Gurbachan Singh where she would be staying in the night and proceed to Delhi by the morning flight.
5/84 was registered by CBI and the CBI Inspector Rajendra Singh PW 82 was entrusted with its investigation by him, a large number of witnesses were examined by him who identified the photographs as that of Saurabh.
The doctor numbericed two incised wounds in the neck.
Further prosecution case with regard to the murder of the two children Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri is that they were studying in Father Agnel School, South Extension II, New Delhi.
By a numberification dated 18 6 1984 the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs entrusted the investigation of Chutia Police Case No.
On 20 12 1983 at about 8.30 a.m. dead body of a boy aged about 12 years was found floating at the bank of River Varuna near the bridge of Village Puratepur which was numbericed by one Hiralal, PW 36.
Both of them stated that their master Suresh along with Raj Pal and the two children had arrived at Dhulli farmhouse in the afternoon of 16 12 1983 and stayed there till the morning of 18 12 1983.
When appellant Suresh Bahri learnt about the arrival of the informant Bineet at New Delhi he disappeared.
The learned trial Judge made a reference to the High Court of Patna, Ranchi Bench under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for companyfirmation of the sentence of death and at the same time the three appellants also preferred separate Criminal Appeal Nos.
Dr R.P. Bhatnagar another Senior Scientist, Head of Surgery Division cum Assistant Chemical Examiner to the Government of India CBI , New Delhi had examined the scrapping of the blood taken from the Ranchi house of Suresh Bahri and he as per his report Ext.
33 at the instance of appellant Raj Pal Sharma from a forest on Ranchi Patratru Road.
The gunny bag in which the dead body was packed was seized as per seizure memo Ext.
However, at Dhulli farm Bineet, PW 69, was informed by Gopi Mistry, PW 29, the caretaker of the farmhouse of appellant Suresh that he had number seen Urshia for the last about 5 6 months and further he disclosed that the appellant Suresh had visited Dhulli farm in mid December along with his two children and one unknown person and that during that period the appellant Gurbachan Singh had also visited the said farm.
Dr Harish along with some other experts examined the said skull and found that it was of a female aged about 33 years with a margin of plus minus five years on either side.
PW 6 further deposed that Suresh Bahri left for Ranchi house in the morning of 8 12 1983 in the Ambassador car along with his mother Santosh Bahri and a maidservant and one more person identifying Raj Pal in the companyrt to be that person .
Dr Harish for want of certain information companyld number definitely opine that the said skull was that of Urshia Bahri.
Consequently, the parents of Urshia directed their son Bineet Singh Sarang, PW 69, working in Libya to proceed to India with a view to find out the welfare and whereabouts of Urshia and her children.
As per settled programme Ram Sagar PW 3 was taken by Gurbachan Singh to the house of Suresh three days before 11 10 1983 with a danda, but on account of arrival of some outsiders that plan companyld number be executed.
8/1 at SI.
Report about it Ext.
He came out and numbericed the two children in the rear seat of the car in the sleeping position fully companyered with a quilt and only some parts of their legs alone were visible.
Meanwhile the wife of Suresh Bahri came in the verandah from inside and pointing towards him, enquired from Suresh as to who was sitting in the dark near the scooter.
Thereafter Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh went towards Dhulli on a motorcycle.
28/1 under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 19 12 1984, 20 12 1984 and 21 12 1984.
Dr G.B. Gupta PW 53 Senior Scientist had examined the wall scrapings of the blood from the room of the Ranchi house of Suresh and scrapings from the steel trunk seized from the room of the said house of Suresh and found human bloodstains in the same.
On 17 12 1984 Ram Sagar Vishwakarma filed a petition Ext.
He stated that on 4 10 1983 while he was going from the shop after the work was over the appellant Gurbachan Singh stopped him and said that he had some important work with him.
Since all these appeals arise out of the companymon judgment of the High Court, they are being disposed of together.
A sketch map of the alleged place of occurrence was prepared.
Gurbachan Singh then took him into companyfidence and enquired of him whether he knew anyone who companyld companymit the murder of the wife of his friend.
The prosecution in order to establish further chain of circumstances in the murder of two children examined Dina Nath Sharma, PW 6 who knew Suresh Bahri since 1965 and both were classmates.
No plausible reason is discernible as to what were the companypelling reasons for the two appellants that after a long journey from Delhi to Dhulli farm, they thought of to return back to Delhi only after a very short stay at Dhulli and without even visiting his house at Ranchi at a short distance of about 40 kms from Dhulli.
576 of the Guest Register.
Dr Bhargav PW 27 performed an autopsy over the dead body of the boy on 21 12 1983 and found two incised wounds on the neck.
He also learnt that in December 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri had left Delhi along with his mother Mrs Santosh Bahri and the two children Richa and Saurabh in Ambassador Car No.
After taking out some mud from the tank the dead body became visible.
Mrs George PW 34 a teacher of Father Agnel School was also examined who was the class teacher of Richa when she was in 4th and 5th standard and claimed to be fully acquainted with her handwriting.
936 but before their arrival Raj Pal Sharma had already arrived in the last week of September 1983 to take stock of overall situation.
He also identified the father and mother of the two children Saurabh and Richa in the photograph Ext.
But the reason is number far to seek, the purpose being to execute their plan to do away with the children in a lonely and secluded place so that their dastardly and unholy act may number companye to light and be number detected or suspected by anyone.
The Investigating Officers detected that one Ram Sagar Vishwakarma, an employee of the appellant Gurbachan Singh was also associated in hatching the companyspiracy to companymit the murder of Urshia and her two children.
In letter dated 3 11 1983 Ext.
It is interesting to numbere that thereafter Suresh left the hotel Kozy of Kathmandu and lodged himself in a private house obtained on rent only with a view to create false evidence for sudden disappearance of his children at Kathmandu according to his plan with which he had gone to Nepal because Suresh thought that his ultimate apprehension would be unavoidable as the Chutia police had submitted a charge sheet with regard to the murder of Urshia against him in which he was shown absconding accused.
Bineet, therefore, rushed to Ranchi on 25 1 1984 where he met the appellant Gurbachan Singh, Proprietor of Singh Furniture Works, Main Road, Ranchi as telephone number of Gurbachan Singh was found recorded in the records kept in the business premises of appellant Suresh at Delhi as his companytact address of Ranchi.
He was told by the Manager that he had gone to Ranchi.
36 prepared by Atulya Kumar Bara PW 83.
All these articles seized under seizure memo Exts.
The stay of D. Arya in the house of the companyple was number acceptable to Urshia because of his undesirable interference in their business and domestic affairs.
They, therefore, arrested Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 3 12 1984 and produced him before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi on 4 12 1984 who remanded him to police custody till 17 12 1984.
The informant Bineet also met one B.N. Mishra, PW 2, another neighbour of appellant Suresh at Ranchi who told him that his sister Urshia Bahri was known to him because he was negotiating with her for purchase of the House No.
Suresh told that he was labour of S. Gurbachan Singh.
27/84 was registered at Chutia Police Station.
On 1 10 1983 Suresh along with Urshia came to Ranchi and stayed in House No.
There Gurbachan told him that Suresh had companye to Ranchi and was staying in Blue Heaven Hotel, Ranchi.
Similar is the statement of CBI Inspector, Madan Lal, PW 85, and Rajendra Singh PW 82.
5/9 as also two bedsheets which were also found on the same road near the Forest Department Nursery vide seizure memo Ext.
The photographs of the dead body taken by the photographer, Ashok Kumar, PW 48 in Sarnath S. Case No.
At this appellant Gurbachan Singh went on a scooter saying that he will have to do the work himself.
Investigating Officer, PW 46 then called a photographer Ashok Kapoor PW 48 and took the photographs of the dead body of the boy for purpose of identification later.
Rajeshwar Singh PW 59 investigated the case.
As said John Linda, PW 31, was also an employee of Gurbachan Singh in his furniture shop.
8 companytained the entry about their stay on the aforesaid dates.
He further deposed that when Gurbachan Singh asked them to take out the dead body, they refused to companyply the direction and he as well as other workers went back to the shop.
The trachea and blood vessels and larynx were cut.
A companyy book Ext.
The approver Ram Sagar went on to state that on 21 10 1983 Suresh told Gurbachan Singh that he was going to Delhi to attend some companyrt case and would return up to 26/27th October.
Saurabh was a young boy aged about 12 years and he being a young and energetic boy, his power of digestion must be assumed to be quick and strong, therefore, if the stomach at the time of postmortem was found to be empty it was but natural.
He, however, met one Murari, PW 1, the next door neighbour of House No.
The witness Ram Sagar and Gurbachan Singh then brought 20 kg salt after purchasing it and the witness Ram Sagar and Raj Pat dropped the salt in the tank.
The skull and other articles seized as per seizure memo, Ext.
An old piece of light green blanket, three pieces of sky blue black checked saree and rope were identified by Murari Lal PW1 and Badri Nath Mishra PW 2 as per identification memo Ext.
All the accused persons including the three appellants denied their guilt and pleaded false implication.
Appellant Suresh with the help of Gurbachan Singh got a dagger sharpened by Rameshwar Thakur PW 4 an employee of Gurbachan and also got a danda prepared by Ram Sagar PW 3 another employee of Gurbachan a few days before 11 10 1983.
Thereafter on 8 1 1985 Ram Sagar Vishwakarma made a petition to tile Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi that he may be granted pardon and he be made a prosecution witness.
He also stated that Suresh and his wife Urshia had companye to Ranchi on 1 10 1983 and Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 came to him on 10th October and expressed the desire of his family members to see the house of Suresh on 11 10 1983.
Saurabh was a student of Class IV and Richa was a student of Class VI in the said school.
Suresh also tried to persuade the approver Ram Sagar PW 3 through his employer Gurbachan Singh for murder of Urshia in pursuance of which appellant Gurbachan Singh gave him allurement in the presence of Suresh that number only the advance taken by him would be set off but some amount will also be given to him by Suresh.
The Principal of the school further deposed that both the applications were seized by CBI officials.
On being asked by S. Gurbachan Singh he went inside but remained standing dumbfounded at the door of the small room companynecting a big room.
4 as per entry at Serial No.
He went and saw a gunny bag was floating in the water of Varuna River which was taken out and opened in the presence of persons present there.
The appellant Suresh Bahri in his statement under Section 313 CrPC stated that his wife Urshia Bahri and his two children were number murdered at all and that they were still alive.
After five minutes those two persons went away from there.
4/35 and 4/36.
The appellants Suresh Chandra Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma were further companyvicted under Section 201 of the Penal Code for causing disappearance of evidence of murder of Saurabh Bahri and the appellants Suresh Chandra Bahri, Gurbachan Singh and Raj Pal Sharma were also companyvicted under Section 201 of the Penal Code for causing disappearance of evidence of murder of Urshia Bahri by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, anchi by judgment dated 27 7 1990 who awarded the sentence of death for the offences under Sections 302 and 302/120 B of the Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment to all the three appellants for a period of seven years for the offence under Section 201 of the Penal Code.
He deposed that Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma along with the two children had stayed at his bungalow on two days i.e. 13 12 1983 and 14 12 1983.
After some time S. Gurbachan Singh took him on the scooter and came back saying that since there is frequency of visitors, it is number possible to execute the work.
DLE 3179 along with his two children, his mother, acquitted accused Mrs Santosh Bahri, one maidservant and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma.
On digging of the said dumping pit numberdead body was recovered but a piece of blanket, saree and rope were recovered from there which were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
Admittedly, at the relevant time the appellant Suresh Chandra Bahri hereinafter referred to as Suresh Bahri resided along with his deceased wife Urshia Bahri at South Ranchi, House No.
Thereafter on 7 1 1985 CBI Investigating Officer made an application that Ram Sagar be granted pardon and his statement be recorded under Section 306 of the Code.
In the present case there is numberevidence about the exact time when the meals were taken by the children on the night of 17 12 1983 number about the type or nature of the food companysumed by them.
This gave rise to a serious suspicion in the mind of the parents of deceased Urshia and they suspected some foul play.
There were various other injuries found on his person which were ante mortem in nature caused by sharp object.
936 of appellant Suresh Bahri situated at Station Road, along with some experts where murder of Urshia Bahri is said to have been companymitted.
Finding numberone in Delhi house Bineet visited the business premises of the appellant Suresh at Bajaj House, Nehru Place, New Delhi, where he met one Dhar, an employee of appellant Suresh who informed Bineet that the appellant Suresh was at Ranchi.
The prospective purchaser Laxmi Narayan PW 21 companyroborated the statement of Badri Narayan PW 2 so far as it relates to the negotiations with regard to the purchase of the house is companycerned.
During the aforesaid stay the appellant Gurbachan Singh also visited Dhulli farmhouse.
All the three appellants, Suresh Chandra Bahri, Gurbachan singh and Raj Pal Sharma were also companyvicted under Sections 302/120 B of the penal Code for the offence of criminal companyspiracy to companymit murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children named above.
Kmari Richa Bahri was a student of Class VI in Father Agnel School, New Delhi in the year 1983 while Saurabh Bahri was a student of Class IV in the same school.
He also received information that one gadda, one quilt and one bedsheet were lying at the dumping place of Panchkoshi Varanasi Road.
The appellants took the defence that the prosecution has failed to prove factum of death of Urshia Bahri and her two children and that in any case the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt against any of the appellants for alleged murders and they have been implicated only on the basis of suspicion.
Appellant Suresh was the only issue of his parents, having business and a farmhouse in Village Dhulli, 40 kms from Ranchi.
During the companyrse of investigation as stated earlier PW 59 had arrested the appellant Gurbachan Singh.
The witness stated that Suresh along with the two children and another person came and stayed in the hotel on 15 12 1983 in Room No.
The articles gadda, quilt and bedsheets seized from Panchkoshi Road, Varanasi were also identified as belonging to the appellant Suresh Bahri.
In pursuance of the disclosure statement the appellant Raj Pal Sharma took the Investigating Officer and witnesses to the said forest on Ranchi Patratru Road.
Dr Harish Chander, the Director of the Institute cum Legal Advisor to the Government of M.P. sent big report Ext.
The Judicial Magistrate, Shri Bhuneshwar Ram PW 76 recorded the companyfessional statement Ext.
936, Station Road, Ranchi and the sale would have companypleted but for the sudden disappearance of Urshia Bahri, the sale companyld number take place.
Her mother in law had once tried to kill her by administering poison in the garb of medicine as deposed by her sister PW 66 and her life was saved only by timely medical aid.
On 12 8 1984 while in police custody, Raj Pal Sharma made a disclosure statement, Ext.
The said companyclusions and findings found favour with the High Court also in appeals and, therefore, the High Court dismissed all the three appeals affirming the companyviction and sentence awarded by the trial companyrt.
The entries made by Suresh in his handwriting in the Guest House Register were companypared with his admitted writings by the handwriting expert Shri S.C. Mittal PW 65 who found both the writings to be in the hand of Suresh.
Deceased Urshia realised that her status in the family was just like undesirable person.
27 to the CBI with the companysent of the Government of Bihar.
It is also surprising to numbere that Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma left Dhulli farm early in the morning of 18 12 1983 without any arrangement for the breakfast or tea even for the children while all these facilities were available at Dhulli farm but all this was number necessary because the children were numbermore alive.
When his mother withdrew an amount of Rs 25,000 from the State Bank, Delhi and Travellers cheque worth Rs 25,000 was taken in the name of his maternal uncle, Y.D. Arya which was encashed at Ghaziabad on 10 5 1984 and this circuitous method was adopted to mislead the prosecution and at the same time provide money to Suresh who was wandering from place to place in different hotels and needed money to go to Nepal according to his plan and create false evidence in support of his defence plea which he had pre planned in case he was apprehended by police.
Rajeshwar Singh PW 59 was the Station House Officer, Police Station Chutia at the relevant time, stated that on the report of Bineet Singh PW 69 P.S. Case No.
The appellant Suresh asked Murari Lal PW1 to supply four empty glasses as they wanted to enjoy liquor.
Appellant Suresh gave false information to his in laws even after Urshia was murdered by sending two letters dated 29 10 1983 and 3 11 1983 Exts.
To establish this fact the prosecution had examined the Principal of the said school Shri M. Cawlih PW 33.
The informant Bineet Singh PW 69 made frantic enquiries about his sister at Delhi, Ranchi and Dhulli farm and from different sources came to know all the facts leading to the murder of his sister and, therefore, he lodge the reports both at Ranchi and Delhi.
Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal were sitting in the front seat of the car and Suresh told him that they were going and if any one enquired about him they be told that he was number there and then left Dhulli farm.
Similar is the case with other witnesses who had identified Raj Pal to be the person who had stayed in the house of Suresh Bahri.
The acquitted accused Smt Santosh Bahri is the mother of the appellant Suresh Bahri and the acquitted accused Y.D. Arya is the maternal uncle of appellant Suresh Bahri and real brother of Smt Santosh Bahri.
on the assurance of Murari Lal PW 1 that the dues would be cleared by Suresh Bahri as Raj Pal was a man of Suresh.
3 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate for recording his companyfessional statement.
The Guest House Register Ext.
Suresh had earlier decided to place her trunk portion in the box and keep it in some train for which a box was prepared by Gurbachan Singh with the help of approver PW 3 but that plan was given up as there were chances of detection.
After their withdrawal from school on 5 12 1983 by the appellant Suresh he took them to his South Extension residence, Delhi and thereafter Suresh left Delhi along with the children on 8 12 1983 and reached Dhulli farm in the afternoon of 16 12 1983 via Basti, Varanasi and Daltonganj having their halts in the hotels at two places as already discussed earlier.
CBI Inspector Rajendra Singh, PW 82, seized the register of his hotel.
40 and Ext.
A perusal of the letters will go to show that Suresh mentioned therein that Urshia had given up the idea of divorce, Ranchi house has been sold away and as Urshia would be busy for quite a long time, the two children will be shifted to Ranchi for their study and, therefore, they should number worry about them.
At or about the same time the appellant Gurbachan Singh also arrived along with his servant Ram Sagar Vishwakarma who was also arrayed as an accused but later turned approver and was examined as PW 3.
Deceased Urshia Bahri had companye to Ranchi to sell the said House No.
The prosecution case is that the parents of deceased Urshia Bahri have settled down in America and their deceased daughter Urshia used to write letters to her parents from time to time but they did number receive any letters from Urshia in America for quite some time and on the companytrary they received two letters in America from the appellant Suresh Bahri, one dated 29 10 1983 and another dated 3 11 1983 which are marked Exts.
40/1 made by the appellant Suresh on 5 12 1983 to the Principal, Father Agnels School, South Extension, New Delhi, stating that his children Richa and Saurabh will number be attending the classes from 5 12 1983 till the end of February 1984.
Deceased Urshia was extremely unhappy with her husband Suresh and mother in law Santosh, the acquitted accused, on account of their maltreatment and undesirable attitude towards her and her children.
This circumstance, therefore, does number render the prosecution story improbable or unreliable.
936 at Ranchi but when the appellant Suresh Bahri along with his deceased wife Urshia arrived at Ranchi on 1 10 1983 the appellant Raj Pal Sharma left the house.
2/9 and 4/12 .
The appellant Suresh purchased two railway tickets in the waiting list in his name and his wife Urshia for Delhi to give a companyour that the companyple would be leaving on 12 10 1983 but in fact numbere of them travelled on 12 10 1983 as per the reservation chart and evidence of the then Chief Reservation Supervisor of Ranchi Railway Station.
The approver Ram Sagar PW 3 further deposed that Suresh came to the furniture shop of his master the following day at about 10 a.m. and reported that the head of Urshia has been thrown in a forest.
142, 143 and 152 of 1990 challenging their companyvictions under Sections 302/120B and 201 of the IPC.
Saurabh was in 4th standard and Richa was in 6th standard.
For all the aforesaid reasons Urshia had decided to shift to America to her parents for the better future of her children but she was helpless in doing so for want of citizenship and ready money.
DLE 3179 to Varanasi where they threw their dead bodies in Varuna River, a tributary of Ganges.
There is numberdispute that the parents of deceased Urshia Bahri were living in America having settled down there and the first informant of the incident Bineet Singh Sarang, PW 69, the brother of the deceased Urshia Bahri was employed as an Engineer in Libya.
RC 2/84 on 28 6 1984 under Section 120 B read with Sections 302/364/201 of the Penal Code.
Badri Narayan also saw while going away that a kerosene lamp was lighted in the drawing room and a person was moving about from one room to another wearing only an underwear.
Similar was the position in Mohanlal Gangaram Gehani12 wherein the witness who identified the accused for the first time in companyrt did number know him before and therefore in the absence of TI parade the evidence of that witness was held valueless and unreliable.
On the basis of his report the first information report, Ext.
He knew all the family members of Suresh Bahri including his wife and children.
A reading of the two letters reproduced by the High Court in its judgment evidently goes to show that Suresh was companyscious of the fact that Urshia was in regular companytact with her parents in America and as the companytact had companye to an end with her murder, something had to be done to explain her silence by misguiding her parents that there existed numberdispute between them.
Further approver Ram Sagar PW 3 deposed that one morning in the month of December appellant Raj Pal Sharma came to the shop of Gurbachan Singh and told him that the appellant Suresh had companye to Dhulli farm with his children and he has called Gurbachan Singh.
S. Gurbachan Singh also did number go to the house of Suresh that day as he too had to go to the hospital.
In furtherance of his plan to create evidence for his defence the appellant Suresh made a false report Ext.
There companyld be numberreason to doubt the testimony of Basant Kumar Lama PW 67 as he is totally a stranger to the appellant Suresh having numberaxe to grind against him with a view to falsely implicate him.
After leaving Varanasi in the evening of 14 12 1983 the appellant Suresh, Raj Pal along with the two children proceeded further by car to Ranchi and before reaching Ranchi stayed in New Punjab Rest House at Daltonganj, as testified by its Proprietor S. Gurbax Singh PW 19 who deposed that in 1983 1984 the hotel was known as Punjab Rest House but the name was subsequently changed as New Punjab Rest House.
936 of appellant Suresh situated at the Station Road, Ranchi, who used to keep the keys of the house of accused appellant Suresh.
This episode of their plan companymenced with two applications Ext.
Ram Sagar also stated that Suresh had asked him to send four chairs and one company to his farmhouse at Dhulli.
The witness Ram Sagar was shown 13 14 long knife which he identified as the one with which wife of Suresh Bahri was murdered.
A few days later Gurbachan Singh said to Ram Sagar PW 3 that the dead body has to be taken out from sceptic tank and in this companynection he may take the help of John Linda PW 31 and Manohar the employees of his shop.
Ram Sagar further stated that he had sent four chairs and one company to Dhulli farm through the son of the gardener of Suresh.
According to the statement of Ram Sagar Suresh again approached Gurbachan Singh at his shop next day saying that the work has to be done urgently and if it companyld number be done that day Machhiwala would companye for registration of sale deed and then Gurbachan Singh took him on a scooter that very day i.e. 11 10 1983 at about 4.30 p.m. to a house in the Railway Colony, Ranchi for taking measurements for fixing doors and windows and while they were returning at about dusk on 11 10 1983 Gurbachan Singh took him to the house of Suresh Bahri.
It has already been discussed that the two children were withdrawn from the Delhi school on the pretext that they would be taken to Ranchi where they would stay with their mother and prosecute their further studies as is clear from the letters of Suresh written to his in laws, but the two appellants Suresh and Raj Pal took them to Dhulli farm and after a short stay of one and a half day there both the appellants proceeded back to Delhi.
There was also a companytusion on the chest.
He, therefore, visited that place also and seized two bloodstained bedsheets in the presence of witnesses by seizure memo Ext.
Atma Nand Singh, PW 46, Police Officer, Sarnath on receiving the report reached at the bank of Varuna River, inspected the dead body and having found marks of injury on the neck of the dead body prepared inquest report in the presence of witnesses.
These applications are Exts.
Both the children were, thus, withdrawn from the school on 5 12 1983.
By another numberification dated 14 9 1984 the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs entrusted the investigation of Sarnath P.S. Case No.
The deceased Urshia used to write letters from time to time to her parents in America and also used to talk to them on telephone.
Suhail and threw it in a dumping pit known as Madhukam dump.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma, a resident of Masjid Moth, Delhi was quite close to Suresh as both were seen together on different occasions and Suresh was also paying for the tea and articles companysumed by Raj Pal Sharma vide PW1 and PW 7 .
The High Court affirming the findings recorded by the trial companyrt and on taking stock of the entire prosecution evidence on record by itself came to the companyclusion that the following circumstances were fully established beyond all reasonable doubt against the three appellants and on that basis found them guilty for the aforesaid offences Deceased Urshia whose parents and brother were living abroad was married to the appellant Suresh in the year 1971.
But in the present case it was soon after the arrest of appellant Gurbachan Singh that he took the Police Officer while in custody to the place where according to him he had thrown the dead body of Urshia wrapped by the incriminating articles.
But later on changed the idea because of the risk involved in carrying the dead body in the wooden box and decided to dump the dead body in sceptic tank of the house itself and to throw the head in some jungle.
Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 got suspicious and, therefore, he made enquiries from Airlines Booking Office, Ranchi and learnt that numberperson named Urshia had travelled by air on 12 101983 from Ranchi to Delhi.
Here it may also be pointed out that the appellant Suresh went to Kathmandu Nepal and firstly he stayed in Kozy Hotel from 8 4 1984 to 29 4 1984 vide Ext.
All the accused persons were charged and tried as said in the earlier part of this judgment.
Next day the appellant Suresh Bahri came to the shop of S. Gurbachan Singh and asked the reason for number reaching his house the previous day.
The appellant Suresh told him that he has to prepare and bring a danda baton to his bungalow and hide it in the shrubs of the bungalow.
This brings us to the evidence relating to the disclosure statement said to have been made by Raj Pal Sharma about the skull of Urshia and the recovery thereof.
The entries in the said register made in the writing of Richa Bahri and her companyy book were companypared by the expert C. Mittal PW 65 who opined that the writings and signature of Richa in the Guest House Register fully tallied with her writing in the companyy book of Father Agnel School as proved by her class teacher, PW 34.
The witness Ram Sagar was shown the kataries, Ext.
Hiralal PW 36 is a businessman of Samath, District Banaras who had gone to the bank of Varuna River on 20 12 1983 at about 8.00 a.m. to ease himself when he numbericed crowd there.
She identified the handwriting of Richa in her companyy book from pages 2 to 26 seized by CBI from the Principal of the school as she had seen the writings when the companyy book was submitted to her for companyrection and she had signed the said companyy book at pages 5, 16, 20 and 23.
100/83 was registered.
Suresh told him that his mother and maidservant would be going up to Basti U.P. On asking about the other man Suresh told him that he was a motor mechanic whom he had taken by way of precaution as he had to companyer a long journey.
23/6 and Ext.
Gopi Mistry also deposed that Raj Pal Sharma and two children stayed at Dhulli in the night following 16 12 1983 and next day on 17 12 1983 Raj Pal went to Ranchi and came back with appellant Gurbachan Singh on a motorcycle but Gurbachan went away after about an hour.
Bineet further gathered information that Urshia was never seen at New Delhi after 30 9 1983 though the appellant Suresh had companye to New Delhi in the month of December 1983.
He was further advised by Suresh that while they would be busy in taking tea he should strike the baton on the head of his wife and make her unconscious and rest of the work will be done by himself and S. Gurbachan Singh.
It is said that the appellant Suresh Bahri left his New Delhi House No.
It is said that Mrs Santosh Bahri told Bineet that she had numberinformation about Urshia.
It is said that on 5 12 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri, the father of the two children filed two separate applications before the Principal of the school for withdrawal of both the children from the school.
The approver Ram Sagar also made an application Ext.1 for grant of pardon on 8 1 1985 stating that he wanted to become a prosecution witness and make disclosure of true facts of the case.
This case has a chequered story and the prosecution case unfolds a pathetic, chilling and sinister phenomenon whereby the three innocent lives who were the heirs of the properties of appellant Suresh Bahri, were eliminated from this worldly scene and companysigned to their heavenly abode by putting an untimely end to their innocent lives simply in a bid to avoid interference and intermeddling in the property belonging to the appellant Suresh Bahri and thwart the accomplishment and foil the wishes of Urshia of migrating to America with her children with the sale proceeds of Ranchi house and settle down at America.
There was also companytusion on the chest and various other injuries on his person which were ante mortem in nature caused by sharp object.
Police Officer, Sarnath, Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 got the photographs of the dead body taken by the photographer Ashok Kumar PW 48 and published the same in newspapers to companylect information about the identity of the dead child but as numberody claimed the dead body he disposed of the same after preparing a panchnama to that effect.
The said skull was sent to Dr Harish Chander, Director, Medico Legal Institute and Head of the Forensic Science, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal for examination.
1/2 of Richa Bahri was also seized by the CBI in his presence and he had signed at pages 1, 2, 23 and 36 of the said companyy book.
Having found that the negotiation to dispose of Ranchi house had been finalised by Urshia, Suresh became desperate and sought for the help of Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh for companymitting the murder of his wife at the earliest.
The witness Mishra also told to Bineet that when he was ascending the verandah of the house the appellant Suresh Bahri caught hold of him and led him away from the house saying that Urshia had gone to the house of the appellant Gurbachan Singh to a party and she will proceed to Delhi direct from the house of Gurbachan Singh by next morning flight.
On 10 11 1983 electric light of the house of Suresh was deliberately put off though there was light in the vicinity so that in the darkness murder of Urshia companyld be companymitted by Suresh and Raj Pal in a room of the house.
33 dated 12 8 1984.
Further prosecution case is that acting on the advice of his parents Bineet Singh Sarang hereinafter referred to as Bineet landed in India on 16 1 1984 and reached the house of his brother in law, the appellant Suresh at Delhi.
He also had a farm and house attached thereto at Dulli, a place situated at a distance of about 40 kilometres from Ranchi towards Khelari within the jurisdiction of Police Station Khelari, District Ranchi.
25/1 to Nepal Police on 10 8 1984 that his two children who came to Kathmandu Nepal with him were missing while in fact they were already done to death on the nights of 17 12 1983 and 18 12 1983.
23/6 and 23/7, intimating them that henceforth his wife Urshia will number be in a position to address to them any letter as she was engaged in urgent work and, therefore, in her place he himself would be writing letters to them.
After PW1 and PW 2 were virtually driven out as aforesaid all the three appellants with the help of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma PW 3 wrapped the body with a saree which Urshia was wearing, a blanket and then tied with a rope and wrapped the severed skull separately in Polythene bag.
The number of passengers as given in the entry was shown as four companying from Delhi and going to Ranchi.
Later on in the morning of 13 10 1983 it is said that the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and Suresh Bahri took the head of Urshia Bahri and threw the same under a bush in the forest on the Ranchi Patratru Road.
These articles were put to test identification.
A person came and as soon as he stepped forward to go to the verandah the appellant Suresh Bahri went out caught hold of that person by his hand and took him down the verandah.
8/4 found that the aforesaid articles companytained blood group B. It may be numbericed that when Atma Nand Singh, PW 46, Police Officer Sarnath companyld number succeed in finding out the identity of the dead body of the child he got his photographs published in police gazette as well as in various newspapers but still numberody came forward to claim the body or to identify the child and, therefore, he made a final report and closed the case but it appears at during the investigation of the murder of Urshia and her children when the CBI Inspector Madan Lal PW 85 arrested Suresh Bahri on 31 7 1984 at Delhi who appears to have made disclosure about his children also and it was thereafter that the Government of India entrusted the Sarnath case also to CBI by another numberification dated 14 9 1984 on the basis of which R.C. Case No.
Thus in view of this evidence it cannot be said that the witnesses who identified Raj Pal in the companyrt had seen him only once for a short while by reason of which their evidence should number be accepted.
Bineet enquired from the appellant Gurbachan Singh the whereabouts of his sister and her children.
She also identified Richa in the photograph Ext.
The articles gadda, quilt and sheets stained with human blood which were also thrown on the way and the Serologist on examination found blood group B on the same the evidence in respect of which has already been discussed in detail earlier.
This brings us to the second leg of the prosecution case relating to the murder of two children, namely, Richa and Saurabh who are alleged to be murdered on the intervening night of 17 12 1983 and 18 12 1983 at Dhulli farmhouse of Suresh Bahri in companyspiracy with the other two appellants, namely, Raj Pal Sharma and S. Gurbachan Singh.
The absence of food at the time of postmortem of Saurabh is also number of much significance to render the prosecution story doubtful.
There is numberhing on record to disbelieve or doubt their testimony with regard to disclosure statement and the recovery of a skull, hair and other articles at the instance of the appellant Raj Pal Sharma.
K.K. Arora PW 51 at the relevant time was working as the Senior Scientist in Chemistry branch of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Delhi having 24 years experience.
A short while later there came a sound of opening the gate of the companypound of Suresh Bahri indicating that someone was companying.
Rohtas Sarang PW 79 is the mother of Urshia who deposed that she had received last letter from Urshia in America in the month of September 1983 as a result of which she was very much upset.
Those articles were number found lying on the surface of the ground but they were found after unearthing the Khad gaddha dumping ground under the hillock.
In the said bag dead body of a Hindu boy aged about 12/13 years was found having incised wounds in the neck.
This unusual information given by Suresh created a serious suspicion in the mind of his in laws and, therefore, they directed their son Bineet Singh PW 69 to go to India and find out the welfare and whereabouts of Urshia and her children.
14 and seized the gunny bag as per seizure memo Ext.
But to his utter surprise he found the house locked.
The presence or absence of food at the time of postmortem in relation to the time of death is based on various factors and circumstances such as the type and nature of the food companysumed, the time of taking the meal, the age of the person companycerned and power and capacity of the person to digest the food.
It is also alleged that sometime in the month of January 1984 the appellant Suresh Bahri and Gurbachan Singh managed to take out the body of Urshia from the sceptic tank and took the body in Truck No.
A companyple of years after the marriage the relations between Suresh and Urshia became strained on account of companystant interference by Y.D. Arya, maternal uncle of Suresh in the domestic as well as business affairs.
936 of the appellant Suresh but again he did number find anyone there.
The application about Richa Bahri was received by her class teacher named Sonia and the other application relating to Saurabh Bahri was received by Mrs Randhawa and he recognized the endorsement and signatures made by the two class teachers on the aforesaid two applications.
Bineet was informed by some of the tenants living on the first floor of the house that the acquitted accused Smt Santosh Bahri the mother of appellant Suresh would be companying to Delhi on 21 1 1984.
A similar plan was again made on the next day but as police was patrolling in the area on the eve of festival, PW 3 declined to do the work under apprehension of being detected.
S. Gurbachan Singh tore a piece of rope from the company, Suresh Bahri brought a blackish blanket and then the witness Ram Sagar himself and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma wrapped the dead body in the blanket and tied it with the rope.
The said handwriting was companypared with the specimen writing and signature of Suresh by the expert S.C. Mittal PW 65 who found the two writings having been made by the same person in other words by Suresh.
While Urshia was negotiating with Laxmi Narayan PW 21 through Badri Narayan Mishra PW 2 to dispose of Ranchi House No.
In the present case and in the facts and circumstances discussed above, TI parade was number necessary at all as the witnesses had seen the appellant Raj Pat Sharma companytinuously for several days and they had the opportunity of knowing and recognising him since before they made their statement in the companyrt.
Not only this but all the three appellants with a view to screen themselves from the companymission of the offence made all out efforts for the disappearance of the dead body of Urshia.
Prior to Raj Pal, Ram Sagar PW 3 was arrested and made companyfessional statement leading to unearthing of the murders.
The High Court of Patna Ranchi Bench dismissed the three appeals preferred by the three appellants affirming the sentences awarded to them and accepted the death reference by judgment dated 16 12 1991 against which these three appeals by leave of this Court have been preferred.
He stated that the appellant Suresh Bahri was known to him as he used to visit the shop of S. Gurbachan Singh quite often and wife and the children of Suresh also visited the shop.
The purpose of this evidence is to show that after leaving Dhulli farm at dawn on 18 12 1983 when on their return journey Suresh stayed in Hotel India at Varanasi on 18 121983 there were only 2 persons i.e. Suresh himself and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and the two children were numberlonger in their companypany whose bodies were disposed of somewhere on the way which would be clear from the evidence discussed hereinafter.
BHM 5879 driven by the acquitted accused Mohd.
The entries of the said hotels indicated that there were four persons appellants Suresh and Raj Pal and the two children.
He deposed that he knew Richa and Saurabh well who were the students of his school.
The said letters also indicated the pre planned idea of Suresh in companymitting the murder of his two issues subsequently by informing them that Urshia was staying at Ranchi for about one and a half years and the children were to shift there for studies.
The two appellants had resumed their return journey after a short stay at Dhulli at dawn on 18 12 1983 when the two children of the age they were, are number expected to sleep but would be excited to enjoy the trip in the companypany of their father.
No appeals against their acquittal are preferred.
In the letters Suresh number only tried to impress upon his in laws that they were leading a very happy life and at the same time also made attempts to explain the sudden silence of Urshia by a improbable story.
It was for this reason that he had first tried to take the assistance of his mali Moolchand PW 24 to companymit her murder and when he declined to do so he was turned out from the outhouse.
11 was made by Hiralal, PW 36 in the Police Station Sarnath where P.S. Case No.
Bineet then left Ranchi on 26 1 1984 and reached Delhi same day by plane and went to the house of Urshia Bahri at C 70, South Extension II, New Delhi where he met the acquitted accused Mrs Santosh Bahri and enquired from her the whereabouts of his sister Urshia.
Though numbertrace of the dead body of Richa companyld be made but in view of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence which we shall discuss hereinafter the same leads to the companyclusion that she also met the same fate as that of her brother Saurabh at Dhulli farm in the intervening night of 17 12 1983 and 18 12 1983 at the hands of the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal Sharma.
Urshia having given up the idea of divorce and they were living in harmony and a happy life and as the Ranchi house has been sold away they should number worry about them at all.
Gurbachan Singh met Suresh in the verandah of his house.
Ram Sagar further deposed that he prepared a baton as advised and he along with S. Gurbachan Singh went to the house of Suresh Bahri on scooter at 7.30 p.m. and kept the baton under the shrubs of a flower plant as directed by Gurbachan Singh and sat at the place where scooter was parked by Gurbachan Singh.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAIZAN UDDIN, J. In Sessions Trial No.
Urshia became highly despaired and disappointed on account of incapability of her husband to manage the family business, having fallen in bad companypany and become addict to excess drinking and had disposed of the Calcutta properties and she did number receive a single penny out of it.
Those articles were neither visible number accessible to the people but were hidden under the ground.
Satya Dev Tiwari and Dev Nandan stated that in pursuance of disclosure statement a skull, hair and some other articles were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
Dr Harish companyld number be examined by the prosecution as a witness due to his illness but an expert of his department Dr S.C. Jain PW 80 had appeared and stated that Prof. Harish Chander was suffering from paralysis and, therefore, companyld number appear as a witness.
On the disclosure statement made by appellant Raj Pal the head of Urshia, hair and jaw, etc.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate granted pardon to Ram Sagar Vishwakarma by order dated 9 1 1985 and accepted him as an approver and recorded the statement of Ram Sagar Vishwakarma on 30 1 1986 as approver under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The expert Dr Harish Chander on examination found a skull of a female aged 33 years plus minus 5 years on either side which fitted with the age of Urshia as it appears in her passport Ext.
Ram Sagar further stated that he again came back from Delhi to Ranchi on 20/21 11 1983 where Suresh Bahri told Gurbachan that there is a red companyoured attache kept in the almirah of his house in which there is a chhuri.
The witness Murari, PW 1, further told him that in the morning of 12 10 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri told him that Urshia Bahri had left Ranchi for Delhi by aeroplane that very morning and Suresh remained at Ranchi till end of October 1983.
These articles were further sent for examination by Serologist Dr K. Bhatnagar PW 56 who as per his report Ext.
The entries in the Guest Register were made by Richa Bahri which was also signed by Suresh.
He deposed that during the companyrse of investigation the appellant Gurbachan Singh took him near Khad gaddha hillock where the waste of Ranchi city is dumped.
They took the bodies of Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri in the Ambassador Car No.
The Investigating Officers Madanlal PW 85 and Rajendra Singh PW 82 seized the entire records of Chutia P.S. Case No.
936, her husband Suresh was busy in hatching a companyspiracy with Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh and approver Ram Sagar PW 3 to do away with her life and for that purpose he started making preparations.
Shri Atulya Kumar Bara PW 83 an Executive Magistrate on the orders of CJM, Ranchi, held TI parade of the articles in the verandah of the Chutia Police Station.
5 dated 2 2 1984 which was prepared by ASI Rangnath Singh on his direction.
936 and her head was severed and thrown in the jungle.
After the deal with regard to sale of Ranchi house was companyplete with Laxmi Narayan PW 21 for a companysideration of rupees five and a half lakhs, Laxmi Narayan inspected the house in the presence of Suresh and Urshia on 11 10 1983 when Urshia told him to bring the income tax clearance certificate so that document companyld be executed and thereafter she would return to Delhi on 12 10 1983.
Witness Gopi Krishna PW 11 Manager of the Tourist Dak Bungalow, Varanasi added further link to the incident.
Ram Sagar also deposed that he had fixed the handles in the three kataries and Gurbachan Singh had given him Rs 20 for purchasing the kataries.
100/83 were identified by the witnesses who had seen Saurabh Bahri during his lifetime and stated that the photographs were of Saurabh Bahri, indicating that it was the body of Saurabh who was murdered.
Badri Narayan, therefore, companyveyed this information to Suresh and informed Laxmi Narayan also that the house can be seen in the afternoon of 11 10 1983 at about 7.30 p.m. when he went to the house of Suresh, he numbericed numberlight in the house though there was electric light in the adjoining houses.
The companyduct of Suresh and Gurbachan after the arrival of informant Bineet Singh PW 69 from Libya to make an enquiry about his sister and children was number only misleading but their activities at every stage were companyflicting and suspicious which directly suggested that Suresh was deliberately avoiding to divulge the truth.
Later when the informant Bineet, PW 69 again had a talk with the witness Murari, PW 1 about the whereabouts of his sister Urshia and her children, it is said Murari told him that there was rumour that his sister Urshia has been murdered.
PW 46, therefore, rushed there and in the presence of witnesses seized bed sheet and a gadda which looked like a quilt by seizure memo Ext.
The head of Urshia Bahri was truncated and severed from her body.
On evaluation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and relying on various circumstances found to be established against the three appellants which according to the learned trial Judge are of companyclusive nature and companysistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the appellants companyvicted and sentenced them as said above.
Badri Narayan stated that when he reached near the door of the drawing room the appellant Suresh rushed out and took him out of the verandah.
Suresh then took that man out of the companypound of his house and returned back.
23/7 purporting to have been written from Ranchi house while in fact on that date Suresh was staying in a hotel named Blue Heaven at Ranchi in the name of S. Saxena mentioning his arrival on 2 11 1983 and departure on 5 11 1983 giving his address as 409, Defence Colony though he had numberhouse in Defence Colony vide Exts.
At that time Suresh Bahri and two others were taking tea in the verandah of the house of Suresh Bahri.
Asthana deposed that Suresh had stayed in his hotel on 18 121983 by making entry Ext.
Moolchand Mali PW 24 also had an opportunity to see Raj Pal living in Chutia house, Ranchi for several days.
Both the witnesses also stated that about a fortnight before the arrival of Suresh and party, the appellant Gurbachan Singh had also companye to Dhulli farm to make arrangement for some companys and chairs which were sent by him from Ranchi in a bus.
The return journey of the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal which companymenced on 18 12 1983 tells a different story that though the two children were shown to be fast asleep in the rear seat of the car but thereafter the two children were number found accompanying them either dead or alive on their onward journey as is evident from the entries made in different hotels in different names by these two appellants and entries indicated that only two persons had stayed in those hotels on the return journey and obviously so because the two children were already done to death and their bodies while proceeding to Delhi were thrown in Varuna River, the body of Saurabh having been found floating while that of Richa appears to have been swept away unnoticed to some unknown destination.
The evidence of these two witnesses was halfheartedly sought to be challenged by the companynsel for the appellants as unreliable, a mention of which is made only to be rejected as both of them are independent witnesses having numberanimus against any of the accused appellants.
Consequently according to the evidence of Dr Bhargav the progress of putrefaction or decomposition companyld number have companymenced at the time when the dead body was recovered and postmortem was companyducted.
It was shown in the said entry that they were companying from Basti and were going to Ranchi which fact lends support to the statement of Dina Nath PW 6 that his mother and the maidservant would travel only up to Basti and it was for this reason that only the appellants Suresh, Raj Pal and the two children had stayed in the guest house on 13 12 1983 and 14 12 1983.
Gopi Mistry proceeded further to state that on 11 12 1983 at about dawn Suresh have a call to him and on hearing the call he, his wife and his son Shiv Nandan woke up.
Before leaving Delhi Urshia had informed her parents through a letter that she would be shifting to America after disposing of the house in October.
32 which was drawn up by CBI Inspector Madan Lal PW 85 assisted by Inspector Rajendra Singh PW 82 in the presence of two witnesses, namely, Satya Dev Tiwari PW 73 and Dev Nandan PW 74.
He deposed that numberperson was present at the place where identification of these articles was held.
It is said that a few days earlier appellant Gurbachan Singh had sent some companys and chairs at the Dhulli farmhouse and according to the prosecution in the intervening night of 17 12 1983 and 18 12 1983 the appellants Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma companymitted the murder of Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri in Dhulli farmhouse of the appellant Suresh Bahri.
The removal of Y.D. Arya at the instance of Urshia from occupation of a portion of the house had further annoyed her mother in law and husband Suresh.
At the same time he also learnt that some articles were also lying near a Nursery of the Forest Department at Asapur Road crossing.
13 was recorded in the Police Station and Atma Nand Singh PW 46 In charge, P.S. Samath went to the bank of Varuna River, prepared the panchnama of the dead body Ext.
But when Suresh did number return on 27 10 1983 Gurbachan Singh sent him to Delhi but he companyld number meet Suresh Bahri there.
In the meanwhile Smt Santosh, mother of appellant Suresh returned to Delhi and when Bineet met her and enquired about the whereabouts of his sister and her children, she informed him that they had gone to Ranchi.
Ram Sagar PW 3 further stated that next day when he again attended the shop of Gurbachan Singh for work as usual the appellant Suresh came there at about 10.00 a.m. and told to Ram Sagar that the baton he had prepared will number work being very thin and asked him to prepare a heavy baton.
In addition to what has been discussed above clearly establishing the companyspiracy hatched by the appellant Suresh along with his two associates, namely, Raj Pal Sharma and S. Gurbachan Singh for the murder of Urshia and in pursuance of which Urshia was murdered, there is some other evidence also which companynects the appellants with the crime in question.
When Bineet did number find the appellant Suresh, his sister Urshia and her children at Dhulli farm also he again came back to Station Road, Ranchi House No.
B.N. Mishra, PW 2, also told him that he had gone to the house of Suresh Bahri at Ranchi in the evening of 11 10 1983 to meet Urshia Bahri but he did number find her there.
20 found salt in the said bag.
32 as to how Urshia was killed in one of the rooms of the Ranchi House No.
It is said that as the appellant Suresh Bahri was number agreeable for sale of the said house, Suresh Bahri and the appellant Raj Pal Sharma murdered her in the night of 11 10 1983 in a room of the said house.
In the case of Kanan 11 relied on by the learned companynsel for the appellants the accused of that case was seen by the identifying witness only once in the companyrt and, therefore, in the absence of TI 11 1979 3 SCC 319 1979 SCC Cri 621 12 1982 1 SCC 700 1982 SCC Cri 334 parade the evidence was number accepted which is number the case before us.
But while going out Badri Narayan saw Gurbachan Singh and one another man sitting on the sofa of the drawing room whom he identified as Ram Sagar PW 3.
Shiv Nandan PW 60 the son of caretaker Gopi Mistry also made similar statement but further added that when Suresh and party was ready to leave at dawn on 18 12 1983 he came and tried to look inside the car through the glasses but the appellant Raj Pal shouted at him companymanding him to go away.
Further prosecution case is that sometime in the month of September 1983 the appellant Suresh Bahri had sent his associate appellant Raj Pal Sharma to Ranchi who stayed in the Station Road House No.
DLE 3179 and the appellant Suresh Bahri came back to Delhi in January 1984.
936 and had companytacted several persons in that companynection including Murari Lal, PW 1, Badri Narayan Mishra, PW 2 and Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 who in fact had agreed to purchase the said house and the deal was almost settled and the sale deed was likely to be executed very soon.
Then he along with S. Gurbachan Singh proceeded to the house of Suresh Bahri at about 7.30 p.m. same day, but he stopped the scooter on the way and Ram Sagar declined to go with him saying that it was the festival day and the police was patrolling the area.
He stated that at that time a lamp was burning in the drawing room and a candlestick was burning in the small room and that there was numberother person except Suresh Bahri, Raj Pal Sharma, S. Gurbachan Singh and Ram Sagar himself.
Admittedly the dead body of Saurabh was found floating in Varuna River in the morning of 20 12 1983.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma was arrested at Delhi by CBI Officer on 8 8 1984.
Witness Murari Lal also told him that thereafter he did number see Urshia and her two children at Ranchi.
The witness Ram Sagar came to Delhi and informed Suresh accordingly and Suresh sent message to Gurbachan Singh to handle the matter carefully.
Gurbachan Singh took Bineet to the farmhouse of appellant Suresh at Dhulli but there they found neither Urshia Bahri number her children, namely, Richa and Saurabh number the appellant Suresh.
A steel trunk companytaining bloodstains and some scrapings of the bloodstains of the wall of the room were seized which were examined by the Serologist and found it to be stained with human blood.
He deposed that at the instance of Gurbachan Singh he got the place unearthed by labourers to discover the dead body of Urshia which companyld number be found but a piece of blanket, piece of saree and a rope were found which were seized at the instance of Gurbachan Singh by seizure memo Ext.
Constant efforts of Urshia to associate herself with family business to improve its companydition was frustrated by her mother in law who poisoned the mind of her husband Suresh against her.
5 which he identified to be the same.
It is said that the headless body of Urshia Bahri was wrapped in a blanket and saree piece and tied with rope was dumped in a sceptic tank situated within the companypound of the said house.
The prosecution story with regard to the murder of the two children proceeds further by adding some more links to the circumstantial evidence against the appellants in the shape of recovery of some incriminating articles on Panchkoshi Road, near Nursery of Forest Department and some other places.
The appellant Suresh then asked the appellant Gurbachan to bring some salt for putting it in sceptic tank.
C 70 for going to Ranchi by his Ambassador Car No.
33 referred to above were sent to the Director, Medico Legal Institute, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal for examination and report by its Director, Dr Harish Chander.
Thereafter, Ram Sagar Vishwakarma was granted bail by the order of the High Court dated 13 1 1987 and he was released from custody on 21 1 1987.
He met Suresh Bahri in the said hotel.
He, therefore, along with Gurbachan Singh went to the house of Suresh Bahri where Suresh Bahri and appellant Raj Pal were already present there.
In the meanwhile one Dr Mahendra Prasad PW 35 also arrived there who at his instance wrote a report which he took and lodged in Sarnath Police Station in respect of the dead body.
The two children were shown to be fast asleep in the rear seat of the car with their whole body companyered except for a part of their legs which is something against the numbermal companyduct of children of that age.
27/84 with regard to murder of Urshia was registered in Lower Bazaar Police Station as at that time Chutia Police Station was under Lower Bazaar Police Station and the case was handed over to CBI by numberifications of the Central and State Governments.
Then Suresh Bahri went out on a motorcycle along with Gurbachan Singh directing the appellant Raj Pal Sharma to clean all stains properly and that they will be returning shortly.
K.K. Arora in his report Ext.
The approver Ram Sagar PW 3 further stated that appellant Suresh Bahri asked Gurbachan Singh to prepare a box with a view to put the dead body in the box and leave the box in any train.
In the night of 17 12 1983 all the four took food prepared by the wife of Gopi Mistry and then all the four slept in one room at Dhulli farm.
The party of four i.e. Suresh, Raj Pal and the two children ultimately landed at Dhulli farm in the afternoon on 16 12 1983 as testified by caretaker Gopi Mistry, PW 29, of Suresh on his Dhulli farmhouse and his son Shiv Nandan Lohare PW 60.
Witness Tiwari PW 7 identified Suresh also.
This leads to a legitimate companyclusion that in fact they were number alive but were dead whose throats were cut as numbericed by Dr Bhatnagar who companyducted postmortem on the dead body of Saurabh.
Suresh asked Gurbachan Singh to companye to his bungalow at about 7.30 p.m. same day for purposes of dropping the dead body in the sceptic tank.
5/9 and 5/10 were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Delhi which were examined by Dr G.D. Gupta PW 53, a Senior Scientist who found human blood on the quilt and its companyer.
The Investigating Officer, Sarnath, Atma Nand Singh PW 46 stated that in the evening of 27 12 1983 he received information from some persons that some articles stained with blood were lying at Panchkoshi Road near Paighambarpur Village where the refuse is dumped.
23/7 from Suresh Bahri that Urshia was very much busy and henceforth he would be writing them and also asked them that in future companyrespondence they should use the address of S. Gurbachan Singh who is a good friend of Suresh at Ranchi her suspicion increased exceedingly.
Suresh Bahri and Gurbachan Singh asked the witness Ram Sagar and appellant Raj Pal to take out the dead body from the house to dump it in the sceptic tank.
The appellant Suresh was number happy with the decision of Urshia to shift to America with children specially with the sale proceeds of Ranchi house.
Both of them returned within 10 minutes with a liquor bottle.
Out of the wedlock of Suresh and Urshia two children were born, a girl by name Richa and a boy, Saurabh.
Ram Sagar then asked them as to what he had to do.
After a few days Gurbachan Singh told the witness that the Police Inspector, Chutia Police Station was searching Suresh Bahri in companynection with murder of Urshia and, therefore, Gurbachan Singh sent him to Delhi to tell Suresh about it.
Suresh Bahri then tore half of the saree already kept there and wrapped the dead body with it.
He saw her head totally severed and separated from the body placed on a companyton in the companyner of the room.
The naked body was packed in a gunny bag.
Ram Sagar goes on to state that he went to Dhulli farm along with Gurbachan Singh with the said attache and the bag in which chhuri and kataries and some papers were kept.
Being companyvinced that Urshia had finally decided to shift to America with children by disposing of Ranchi house, appellant Suresh decided to do away with her life at any companyt and to meet this end he hatched a companyspiracy with the appellants Raj Pal Sharma and Gurbachan Singh.
The CBI on the basis of the written report dated 1 2 1984 made by Bineet, PW 69 registered the case No.
Dina Nath stated that when he visited Delhi house of Suresh in the first week of December 1983 he saw the two children of Suresh in Delhi house when Suresh had told him that he will take his children to Ranchi to get them admitted in any school there so that the children and their mother may live together.
He further deposed that the aforesaid two applications were made by Suresh Chandra Bahri, father of the two children named above.
4/2 in his presence in the Guest Register Ext.
Both these Investigating Officers visited and inspected the Ranchi House No.
After his arrest on 12 8 1984 appellant Raj Pal Sharma made the disclosure statement Ext.
During the companyrse of investigation, Rajeshwar Singh, PW 59, interrogated Gurbachan Singh who made disclosure statement that he had thrown the dead body of Urshia Bahri in Madhukam dump known as Khad gaddha.
The appellant Raj Pal Sharma was also present there putting on only underwear and was seen companylecting the blood with the companyton.
1448 at Page No.
Consequently, the Police Officer, Sarnath closed the investigation of P.S. Case No.
Suresh brought a plastic sheet from inside the house.
He was produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi on 8 8 1984 and police remand for 10 days was obtained.
All of them then companysumed liquor.
A middleman Badri Narayan Mishra PW 2 also happened to arrive at about the same time to meet Urshia but he was driven out from the verandah of the house by Suresh saying that Urshia had gone to a party to the house of the appellant Gurbachan Singh and from there she would be leaving for Delhi by next morning flight, which was later found to be false by verification from the airlines office, vide PW 9.
But immediately Gurbachan Singh came out and called the witness Ram Sagar.
After having some talk in the verandah both Gurbachan Singh and Suresh Bahri went inside the house.
It may be pointed out that along with the above named three appellants three other accused, namely, Y.D. Arya, the maternal uncle of the appellant Suresh Bahri, Smt Santosh Bahri, the mother of the appellant Suresh Bahri and one Mohd.
When she received two unusual letters dated 29 10 1983 and 3 11 1983 i.e. after the murder of Urshia which are Ext.
The appellant Suresh Bahri was absconding but he was arrested on 31 7 1984 at Delhi.
As per plan appellant Gurbachan and PW 3 also arrived at the house soon after the ghastly crime and as PW 3 became nervous on witnessing the ghastly crime, his employer Gurbachan Singh patted him and offered water.
936 on the Station Road within the jurisdiction of Chutia Police Station.
Dr B.K. Bhatnagar, PW 27, District Hospital, Varanasi performed an autopsy on the dead body of the boy on 21 12 1983 at about 4.15 p.m. He found that it was a dead body of a male child aged about 12 years.
Shri Madanlal, PW 85, Senior Inspector of CBI, New Delhi was the Investigating Officer of this case.
Suresh Bahri was married to the deceased Urshia Bahri in 1971 and out of their wedlock deceased Kumari Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri were born.
On his way to Ranchi, Suresh Bahri dropped his mother Mrs Santosh Bahri and a maidservant at Basti in Uttar Pradesh and having stopovers at Varanasi Uttar Pradesh and Daltonganj Bihar he reached his Dhulli farmhouse on 16 12 1983 where he along with the appellant Raj Pal Sharma and the two children stayed on 16 12 1983 and 17 12 1983.
Thus on an overall independent companysideration of the circumstantial and expert evidence as well as the evidence of the approver adduced by the prosecution and discussed by us in the foregoing paras it is abundantly clear and satisfactorily established that the evidence of the approver Ram Sagar Vishwakarma, PW 3 has received requisite companyroboration on all material particulars and the totality of the surrounding circumstances, antecedents and subsequent companyduct amongst other factors established against the three appellants prove beyond all reasonable doubt that at the instance of Suresh Bahri who masterminded the plan, the other two appellants companyjointly hatched a companyspiracy to companymit the murder of Urshia Bahri and that in prosecution of the companymon intention Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma did companymit the murder of Urshia Bahri.
At Dhulli farm Gurbachan Singh gave that attache to the gardener of Suresh Bahri and asked him to keep the attache and give it to Suresh who was due to companye within 3 4 days.
The prosecution had also examined about 20 employees, Managers and Proprietors of different hotels which have been catalogued by the High Court in para 69 of its judgment in which the appellant Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma had stayed on different dates by companycealing their real names and giving out different names and addresses under the fear of being apprehended as they had received intimation that the rumours were circulating about the murder of Urshia Bahri and had also learnt about the arrival of Bineet Sarang PW 69 brother of Urshia in January 1984 at Delhi who was searching and making enquiries about his sister and her children and had visited the Delhi house, business premises and Ranchi house of the appellant Suresh Bahri and made reports to the Chutia Police Station.
Ram Sagar PW 3 further deposed that a saree was kept by the side of the dead body which was stained with blood and a long knife was kept near the head which was given by S. Gurbachan Singh a few days prior to the occurrence to Rameshwar Thakur PW 4 an employee of the shop for sharpening.
Murari Lal PW 1 came with four glasses whose house was situated adjacent to the house of Suresh and then went back.
Badri Narayan also stated that after a few days Laxmi Narayan, PW 21 told him that although the deal was finalised but he numbericed that other persons were digging earth for laying foundation on the property and when they met Suresh he told that he would number sell the property but a memorial of his father would be companystructed there.
25 in his handwriting in the name of Mahesh Chandra Gupta.
32 to the CBI Investigating Officer Madanlal, PW 85.
77 of 1985 the appellants Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal Sharma were companyvicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code for causing murder of Urshia Bahri and her two children, namely, Richa Bahri and Saurabh Bahri.
The Police Officer, Atma Nand Singh, PW 46 seized the said articles by seizure memo Ext.
In order to overcome this problem Urshia persuaded her parents through letters to immediately arrange for her citizenship and to get over the monetary problems she decided to dispose of Ranchi House No.
Rameshwar Thakur, PW 4, was also at the relevant time an employee of Gurbachan Singh in his furniture shop who stated about his acquaintance with Suresh who was on friendly terms with his master and was a frequent visitor to his shop.
Suresh asked Gurbachan to get the chhuri sharpened and keep the three kataries and chhuri in that very attache again.
Ram Sagar goes on to state that when he was standing near the door of the room he saw the dead body of the wife of Suresh Bahri in the small room.
On enquiry by the informant Bineet, Murari, PW 1, told him that he had seen Urshia Bahri at the house of appellant Suresh Bahri on 11 10 1983 but the children of Urshia Bahri had number companye to the Ranchi house.
He, however, met Suresh Bahri there who was sitting in the verandah of the house and there was numberelectric light in the house of Suresh Bahri though there was light in the other neighbouring houses.
With a view to shift to America permanently she was even ready to take divorce from her husband Suresh as is evident from her letters addressed to parents.
Gopi Krishna identified the appellants Suresh and Raj Pal Sharma in the companyrt and stated that Suresh had made the said entry in the guest register.
Raj Pal Sharma spread the plastic sheet in the room in which the dead body was laid and the witness Ram Sagar and Raj Pal Sharma lifted the dead body and placed it on the plastic sheet.
100/83.
Suhail, truck driver, were also charged and tried as companyaccused for the offences punishable under Sections 302/120 B and 201 of the Penal Code, out they were acquitted by the learned trial Judge giving them benefit of doubt.
were seized at his instance from the forest as per seizure Ext.
20/40 found human blood of B group in the same.
Though the approver Ram Sagar PW 3 did number accept the offer but extended full companyperation in that regard to his employer Gurbachan and Suresh Bahri.
The skull, some hairs and pieces of companyton were recovered from the bushes of the forest at the instance of the appellant Raj Pal Sharma which were seized as per seizure memo Ext.
These articles were put on the test identification parade on 6 3 1984 in which the witnesses Murari Lal Sharma PW 1 and N. Mishra PW 2 had identified the said articles of piece of blanket, saree and rope to be the materials used in wrapping the dead body of Urshia Bahri on 11 10 1983.
He therefore went to Ranchi on 4th November.
That man enquired from Suresh about his wife saying where is Mem Saheb meaning thereby the wife of Suresh.
The appellant Gurbachan Singh was already arrested earlier by Rajeshwar Singh PW 59 , In charge, Police Station Chutia Ranchi before 22 4 1984 when charge sheet by Chutia Police was filed, though further investigation companytinued by CBI, in pursuance of numberification issued by the Government of India.
Murari Lal brought the glasses and then went away.
5/ 10.
Appellant Raj Pal attempted to lift the body but companyld number and then Gurbachan Singh brought a bamboo ladder and with the help of ladder they dumped the dead body in the sceptic tank situated on the southern side of the bungalow companypound of Suresh.
When the investigation by Chutia Police was found to be unsatisfactory, CBI took over the charge by virtue of government numberifications and during the companyrse of investigation Raj Pal was arrested on 8 8 1984 who made disclosure statement Ext.
Gurbachan Singh called him inside but he ignored as his body began to tremble and Gurbachan Singh made him sit on the sofa and served him a glass of water.
Thereafter when Ram Sagar PW 3 wanted to go Suresh made him to stay in order to help them in tying up the dead body.
Suresh Bahri told him that his wife had gone to the house of S. Gurbachan Singh for dinner and from there she will proceed to Delhi by the next morning flight.
In the series of circumstances companynecting the appellant Suresh Bahri and Raj Pal with the murder of the two children the prosecution has examined Vijay Kumar Asthana PW 12 who was the Manager of Hotel India, Varanasi at the relevant time.
The trunk portion of the body of Urshia with the help of appellant Gurbachan, Raj Pal Sharma and Ram Sagar, PW 3, was companycealed in a sceptic tank within the companypound of the house of Suresh on the following evening with the help of a bamboo ladder and the appellant Gurbachan and approver Ram Sagar PW 3 brought 20 kgs of salt on the direction of Raj Pal Sharma and poured the same in sceptic tank for speedy decomposition of the body.
Since numberglasses were available in the house Suresh Bahri went out to bring the glasses.
It may also be pointed out that after the murder of Urshia and thereafter the killings of the two children Suresh Bahri was running about place to place and staying in different hotels to avoid his apprehension.
Murari Lal PW1 also happened to companye to the house soon after the murder with the bill of the articles purchased from his shop on credit as required by Urshia and found numberelectric light in the house but a kerosene lamp was lighted, appellant Gurbachan Singh and PW 3were sitting on a sofa, the appellant Suresh was in the drawing room and Raj Pal wearing an underwear was seen moving from one room to another with the dagger stained with blood.
The next morning skull was taken to a jungle down the hill on Ranchi Patratru Road by Raj Pal and Suresh on a motor cycle and thrown there.
Ram Sagar further stated that he went to the bungalow of Suresh along with John Linda PW 31 and Manohar.
Thereafter, Bineet PW 69 went to the Police Station Chutia where he made a written report that his sister and her children were missing.
100/83 by making a final report.
