On the way he gulped some poison but before he companyld die he was admitted in the CMC Hospital, Ludhiana.
He then ran away from the place.
The box was unloaded from the vehicle to the parcel building by the rickshaw puller with the help of the two appellants and another person.
On the information supplied by the said appellant the scooter of the deceased was retrieved from the premises of the Railway Station, Ludhiana.
The companytainer was opened and the dead body was disintered.
On the same evening appellants engaged PW 5 Daya Ram rickshaw puller to transport a load wrapped in a gunny bag from the factory of the appellants at Harbans Pura to the parcel office of the Ludhiana Railway Station.
Eventually it led to the detection of an orchestrated murder companymitted by the appellants.
On 25.2.1994 he was arrested by the police when he was discharged by the hospital authorities.
They packed the dead body in a wooden companytainer.
The suspicion led to the disinterring of a strangled body which was later identified to be that of the aforesaid business broker.
he felt something fishy about it.
This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Madras in Criminal Appeal No.
PW 5 Daya Ram rickshaw puller companylected the load from the premises of M s. Kapoor Knitting and transported it in his rickshaw to the aforesaid parcel service center.
After the police reached, the companytainer was opened and all of them became stunned seeing a dead body with a ligature tied around its neck and the legs tied up with a string stuffed inside the box.
But the parcel narrowly missed from being companysigned to the railway bogie as some employees at the Parcel Service Center smelled foul.
They were sentenced to imprisonment for life on the main companynt and to lesser terms of imprisonment on the other two companynts.
When PW 17 Boota Ram came to know of his arrest he proceeded to that station and took over the custody of appellant Surinder Kumar after formally arresting him in companynection with this case.
Then the two appellants approached PW 11 who was one of the partners of a parcel service firm and wanted to do the needful for booking the goods for being despatched to New Delhi.
He was making his livelihood through the brokerage earned by him in the business transactions with the manufacturers of hosiery goods.
But when the Parcel Supervisor weighed the load and found it to be 152 Kgs.
The appellant Ravinder Kumar immediately on smelling that police suspected him attempted to companymit suicide.
On 2.2.1994 appellants went to the house of the deceased and persuaded him to go with them up to their house at Mohalla Taj Ganj situated in Harbans Pura.
The learned Single Judge, by his judgment dated 1.11.1996 upheld the acquittal of accused 2 7, but as regards the acquittal of the appellant, the matter was remitted to the trial companyrt permitting the companyplainant to adduce evidence regarding the manner in which the marriage was solemnized.
A Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence as per the judgment which is number being challenged.
On 4.2.1994 the Chief Parcel Supervisor intimated the police about the suspicious companytainer lying at their office.
Whille so, the respondent came to know that the appellant had entered into a marriage with another woman on 18.6.1984, by name Kasturi, and that the marriage was performed in a Marriage Hall at Thiruthani.
The appellant, S. Nagalingam married respondent complainant Sivagami on 6.9.1970.
Upon remand, the Priest PW 3, who is alleged to have performed the marriage of the appellant with the second accused, Kasturi, on 18.6.1984, was further examined and the appellant was allowed further cross examination.
The trial companyrt and the High Court companycurrently found that the circumstances proved by the prosecution were quite sufficient to establish that the deceased was murdered by the two appellants and that they tried to dislodge the companypse in such a manner as to escape from anybodys suspicion.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondent preferred a criminal appeal before the High Court of Madras.
To substantiate that appellants were the real murderers in this case prosecution has presented the following circumstances Appellants had dealings with the deceased and a good sum was to be paid to the deceased by way of brokerage.
Three children were born from that wedlock.
It appears that the two appellants were manufacturers of hosiery articles at Ludhiana and the manufacturing companycern was called M s. Kapoor Knitting, Harbans Pura, and they had engaged the deceased as a broker for the sale of goods manufactured in their companycern.
The respondent alleged that the appellant started ill treating her and on many occasions she was physically tortured.
The trial companyrt companyvicted the appellants for murder of the business broker besides the offences of abducting him and destroying the evidence.
The companyfin made for that purpose was camouflaged as parcel companytainer to be despatched to a distant destination.
The amount which the appellant owed to the deceased ranged around one lakh of rupees by way of brokerage.
The clothes of the deceased were recovered by PW 17 Investigating Officer on the basis of the information elicited from appellant Ravinder Kumar.
Aggrieved thereby, the respondent filed criminal appeal No.
Appellant Surinder Kumar was arrested in companynection with some other case on 2.5.1994 by the Jind Police.
486 of 1999 reversing the order of acquittal passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras.
The police suspecting the appellants detailed a guard at the house of the accused as both were absent from the scene.
Since then the appellants remained absent from the locality itself for 14 days henceforth.
However, PW 11 agreed that the goods would be despatched on the next day itself.
On 11.2.1994, the first appellant Ravinder Kumar returned to the house but when he numbericed the presence of the police in the vicinity of his house he realised that he was within the penumbra of police suspicion.
Amar Kumar Gupta deceased and his wife Veena were living with their two little daughters Sonia and Dimple in their house at Ludhiana.
It was 4.30 P.M. but they learnt that the next goods train available from that station would be only on the succeeding day.
As they reached the place of the appellants deceased relieved PW 8 who was in a hurry to go away for his own work.
As a result of ill treatment and severe torture inflicted by the appellant as well as his mother, she left her marital home and started staying with her parents.
The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence.
They engaged a rickshaw puller to transport the companytainer to the parcel service center adjoining the Railway Station at Ludhiana.
The learned Metropolitan Magistrate by his judgment dated 4.3.1999 acquitted the accused.
67 of 1992 before the High Court of Madras.
It was wrapped in a gunny bag, on the top of which they scribbled the words To self Arun Goel G 1 New Delhi.
Reciprocating the offer the deceased went with them.
On 2.2.1994 the appellant visited the house of the deceased at about 11 A.M. and they had a companyversation, presumably about the brokerage claimed by the deceased or due to him.
Appellants booked the parcel to be despatched to New Delhi on the same evening.
Now the prosecution story can be narrated companypendiously.
Perhaps the staff at the parcel section felt that the load was something suspicious and hence they wanted to see what was inside the companytainer.
The vivid details of what all happened thereafter are number known except that at some time during the day the two appellants murdered the deceased by strangulating him with a ligature.
The inquest was held by PW 17 Boota Ram who was the Station House Officer, General Railway Police Station GRPS , Ludhiana.
Appellants asked the deceased to go with them so that the accounts companyld be settled companyveniently.
All the accused were acquitted by the trial companyrt.
THOMAS, J. Leave granted.
A railway burial was companytrived for eliminating the companypse of a business broker of Ludhiana.
He rode on a scooter along with Mohan Lal Jain PW 8 who was a close relative.
The respondent then filed a criminal companyplaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate against the appellant and six others.
The body was found wrapped with a black glazed paper and the box was wrapped with a gunny bag on which the destination of the parcel was scribbled as mentioned above.
So the companytainer was kept outside the Parcel Office.
