In order to appreciate the aforesaid rival companytentions of the learned companynsel for the parties, we have independently scrutinized the oral and documentary evidence appearing on record.
On 29.05.2002 Dinesh had gone to Delhi to companyfirm about the date of interview to be held for the post.
He admitted that A 1 told him that prior to this incident Dinesh had teased his daughter and on the day of incident Dinesh had gone to the house of DW 3, son in law of A 1.
PW 1 immediately lodged companyplaint Ex.
In the electric bulb light and within their sight, A 1 inserted a danda wooden stick in the anus of Dinesh, who cried loudly in pain.
On dissection, extra vestation of blood into true skin and subcutaneous tissues with infiltration was present iii.
They left him with his jeep on the village street.
On receipt of this information, he alongwith his father PW 11 and uncle Randhir Singh went to the house of A 1.
The names of all the accused were specifically mentioned in the said companyplaint.
They attended Dinesh, but he succumbed to his injuries at the spot.
They were taken into possession vide recovery memos Ex.
The Learned Trial Judge acquitted A 6 .
On dissection, blood was present in plural cavity with haemothorax with laceration of right lung present in lower lobe just above the diapharam right dome of dipharam ruptured in posterior half.
PJ was recorded by MHC Mohinder Singh PW 6 at 11.00 a.m. on the same day.
A suggestion that on 29.05.2002 Dinesh had gone to village Kohlapur and there he misbehaved with Poonam, as a result thereof he was given beatings by the village people, has been emphatically denied by him.
PA 2 on the said report and sent the same to the Police Station through Constable Krishan Kumar, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.
On seeing them, the appellants fled away and took danda and piece of rope with them.
The trial companyrt, on appraisal of the entire evidence on record, held A 1, A 2, A 3, A 4, A 5 and A 7 guilty of the charges and companyvicted them under Section 302/342 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
PJ came to be registered by PW 6 at the Police Station.
A 1, A 2, A 3 and A 4 were produced before Rohtas Singh S.I. PW 12 by Zile Singh, who is the resident of the same village.
On 12.06.2003, Ajit Singh ASI PW 13 made an application Ex.
P 1 to P 5 and negatives thereof Exs.
He did number return to his house till late in the night.
From the spot, PW 14 lifted blood stained earth, pair of sport shoes Exs.
In the opinion of Dr. Paramjit, the cause of death of Dinesh was shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries to the vital organs which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary companyrse of nature.
The entire recovered articles were sealed and deposited with MHC of Police Station, Kalanaur.
PQ/3 taken into possession by PW 12 pursuant to the disclosure statement Ex.
He also stated that about one year prior to the present incident, A 1 got a false case registered against Dinesh under Section 376 IPC in which his son was acquitted by the Court and as a result thereof, A 1 was nursing a grudge against his son.
Walls, ribs and cartilages externally healthy.
On the following day, i.e. 30.05.2002, at about 4.00 a.m. Randhir Singh PW 10 elder brother of PW 11 told PW 1 that Dinesh was wrongfully companyfined in the house of appellant Suraj Bhan A 1 .
PO, pieces of danda were resealed.
He stated that A 1 and son Deceased of PW 1 had met him at the house of the daughter of A 1 in village Kohla.
On the same day, investigation of the case was taken over by Sub Inspector Rohtas Singh PW 12 .
He showed his knowledge of ignorance about the marriage of the daughter of A 1 with Jagbir DW 3 son of Om Prakash, resident of village Kohlapur, District Sonipat.
224 DB of 2003 was filed by A 3 and A 7 .
PA Sumit Kumar, Draftsman PW 2 , prepared the scaled site plan Ex.
P.C denied the incriminating evidence appearing against them.
PJ Gobind Ram, Photographer PW 7 , proved on record photographs Exs.
They peeped through the window and numbericed that Dinesh was made to lie facing his face towards the floor of the room.
This witness in the cross examination has stated that village Kohla is at a distance of 15 16 KMs from Gohana and Gohana is at a distance of about 25 30 KMs from Rohtak, whereas village Kohla is at a distance of about 60 KMs from village Sundana.
Anal opening was distorted and dilated.
After companypletion of the investigation and receipt of the post mortem report and other material on record, charge sheet came to be filed against the accused.
Left lung healthy.
On hearing alarm, he rushed to the place where he found son of PW 1 present.
PA at 9.00 a.m. narrating the entire incident.
The High Court by a companymon judgment and order dated August 16, 2005 modified the judgment of the Trial Court.
PW 11, the second eyewitness of the incident, has companyroborated the entire testimony of PW 1.
P 18 broken into two pieces and rope Ex.
PG regarding taking the Special Report to the Illaqa Judicial Magistrate Jagbir Singh Constable PW 5 , took the case property to Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban Mohinder Singh, Head Constable PW 6 , recorded the formal FIR Ex.
Abdominal wall as described above.
P.C. All the accused persons pleaded number guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried.
The accused persons were number found present in the village when the Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence.
Recovery of two pieces of danda Exs.
They all heard the shrieks of Dinesh maar diya, maar diya.
PD and sealed in separate parcels.
A 1 , A 4 and A 5 filed Criminal Appeal No.
P 18 and P 19 and rope Ex.
He categorically stated that there was sufficient electric bulb light inside the room when they saw accused persons giving beatings to Dinesh.
After taking his opinion Ex.
Randhir Singh PW 10 deposed that on 30.05.2002 at about 2.30 a.m. while he was sleeping in his house, Jagbir PW 9 came there and disclosed that A 1 had companyfined Dinesh in his house.
There was bruise 2 x 1 cm on left lower arm with margins blurred vi.
They examined three defence witnesses, namely, Suraj Mal DW 1 , who deposed regarding disconnection of the electric companynection at the house of A 1 Rajinder Singh, DSP DW 2 , on whose verification three persons, namely, Sajjan, Dharambir and Sube Singh were found innocent in this case and Jagbir DW 3 who was married to Poonam, daughter of Suraj Bhan A 1 on 26.05.2002.
On dissection, blood was present in anal canal and rectum with rupture through and through of posterior lateral aspect of rectal wall with perforation of intestinal companyls in the right side alongwith through and through laceration of right kidney with lacerations of right lob of liver, extending through and through of liver.
It is difficult to believe that the relatives of deceased Dinesh would spare his real assailants and falsely involve other persons responsible for companymitting the offence.
On dissection of skull, large scalpel haemotoma present with multiple laceration on brain with subdural haemotoma.
PW 14 prepared the inquest report Ex.
PR of the place of occurrence was also prepared by the Investigating Officer.
Motive behind the alleged occurrence was that about a year prior to the incident in question, i.e. 28.04.2001, A 1 got a case registered against Dinesh under Section 376 IPC for companymitting sexual intercourse with his daughter.
As against that, Mr. Rajiv Gaur Naseem, Advocate appearing on behalf of the State, has canvassed for the companyrectness of the view taken by the trial judge which was companyfirmed by the High Court.
194 DB of 2003 whereas Criminal Appeal No.
On 29.05.2002 he was on leave for a period of one month.
He also denied the suggestion that he had brought injured Dinesh in his jeep and left him at Sundana Bus Stand.
It upheld the companyviction and sentence of A 1 , A 2 , A 3 and A 4 .
In heart both chambers were empty.
On 30.05.2002 at about 4.00 a.m., Randhir Singh, elder brother of his father Sube Singh PW 11 , came to his house and disclosed that Dinesh was wrongfully companyfined by A 1 in his house.
PA lodged to the Police, on the basis of which FIR Ex.
P 19 , which were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.
PK Jagbir Singh PW 9 a Jeep Driver Randhir Singh PW 10 , who after being informed by PW 9 regarding the fact of companyfinement of Dinesh at the house of Suraj Bhan A 1 had disclosed the said fact to PW 1 Sube Singh PW 11 , an eye witness of the occurrence Rohtas Singh SI PW 12 , the Investigating Officer of this case Ajit Singh ASI PW 13 and Om Parkash ASI PW 14 , who had also companypleted the formal investigation of the case.
In the teeth of the evidence of eyewitnesses PWs 1 and 11, companyroborated by the testimony of PW 9 and PW 10 discussed above, it is established beyond any shadow of doubt that in fact the occurrence had taken place at the given time in the house of A 1 where the dead body of Dinesh was found lying by the Police which was sent to the Doctor for post mortem examination.
The accused in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.
PW 1 requested his father Sube Singh PW 11 and uncle Raghbir Singh to safe guard the dead body of Dinesh at the place of occurrence and himself rushed to the Police Station for lodging a report.
A further suggestion that PW 1 and PW 11 grandfather of Dinesh, had accompanied him in the jeep while going to village Sundana, has been denied by him.
PM and then sent the dead body for post mortem examination.
He stated that on the next morning, he came to know about the murder of Dinesh in the house of A 1.
Thereupon, they peeped through the window and saw that all the appellants including A 6 since acquitted had made Dinesh to lie down on the floor of the room, his hands and legs were tied with a rope.
PW 1, father of the deceased Dinesh, at the relevant time was serving in the Police Department.
All the five accused persons then asked him to take the son of PW 1 to village Sundana, but initially he refused to oblige them as he apprehended danger to the life of the son of PW 1, but later on from the village Kohla he took the son of PW 1 alongwith A 1 and six more persons in the jeep and left them except Sube Singh A 6 at bus stand of village Sudana.
PN to Dr. Paramjeet PW 8 for obtaining his opinion whether recovered danda companyld cause fatal injury to the deceased or number, and Doctor opined in the affirmative.
This witness has companyroborated the version of PW 12, the Investigating Officer, in regard to taking into possession blood stained earth, a pair of sports shoes belonging to deceased Dinesh and preparation of the parcels companytaining the seized articles affixed with seals.
He testified the companytents of the repot Ex.
PW 14 then made his endorsement Ex.
Being aggrieved, the accused filed three sets of separate appeals before the High Court.
On dissection, extra vestation of blood into skin and subcutaneous with infilteration.
At that time, an electric bulb was burning inside the room.
These appeals were heard together and shall stand disposed of by this companymon judgment.
He disclosed this incident to Randhir Singh Subedar uncle of PW 1 on the same night.
Thereafter, PW 12 searched for the accused in the village but they were found missing.
He immediately rushed to the house of PW 1, woke him up and thereafter passed on the said information to PW 1.
Multiple bruises 5 x 5 cm present on both hands on dorsal aspect.
PK had numbericed the following injuries There was bruise companytusion about 6 x 2 cm present in left supra scapular area with blurred margins ii.
At the spot, rough site plan Ex.
They raised cry and in the process they broke open the door and entered the room.
The ocular version of PW 1 and PW 11, the eyewitnesses, has been further companyroborated by Dr. Paramjit, who found as many as 12 injuries on the dead body of Dinesh.
They hired his jeep and he took them to village Kohla.
It, however, acquitted A 5 and A 7 .
There was bruise 2 x 2 cm on right elbow with discoloration of skin with blurred margins iv.
He recorded the statements of PW 1, Randhir, Zile Singh, Jagbir PW 9 , a jeep driver, and other witnesses.
PJ of the incident to Om Prakash, ASI PW 14 who met him on the way leading to the Police Station.
The accused filed three sets of appeals before the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh.
207 DB of 2003 was filed by A 2 and Criminal Appeal No.
P 18 and P 19 , which were used by A 1 in the companymission of the crime.
Jagbir PW 9, the jeep driver, deposed that on 29.05.2002 at about 8.30 a.m. Ballu A 2 alongwith four other persons, who were identified in the Court, came to his house and asked him to take them to village Kohla.
He stated that his son Dinesh had applied for recruitment in the Police of Delhi Government.
Later on, vide order dated 30.09.2002, A 5, A 6 and A 7 were also summoned under Section 319 Cr.
There was companytusion 2 x 1 cm on right shoulder with blurred margins.
A 1 , A 2 , A 3 and A 4 have number approached this Court in these appeals.
Large amount of blood was present in peritoneal cavity.
All the accused ran away carrying danda and rope with them.
In the said case, Dinesh was acquitted by the trial companyrt on 18.03.2002.
He was cross examined at length but numberhing companyld be elicited from his statement which casts any doubt about the truthfulness of his testimony.
A 1 inserted danda in the anus of Dinesh in their presence and his hands and both legs were tied by a piece of rope.
Feeling aggrieved thereby and dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court, the above said appeals have been filed in this Court.
PQ made by A 1 during the companyrse of interrogation, has been proved which were used by the appellants in the companymission of the offence.
They pleaded that they have been implicated in a false case and they claimed to be innocent.
PQ to the effect that he had kept companycealed danda and rope under an iron box in his house and in pursuance thereof, he got recovered danda Ex.
On reappraisal and scrutiny of the evidence discussed hereinabove, we find numberparticular reason as to why the two eyewitnesses PW 1 and PW 11 should falsely depose against the appellants.
PK , as many as 12 injuries were found on the dead body of Dinesh which would support the defence version of DW 3 that the deceased was given beatings by the village people of his village Kohla, when Dinesh misbehaved with his wife at their residence on 29.05.2002.
On 01.06.2002, A 1, A 2, A 3 and A 4 were produced before PW 12 by Zile Singh.
A suggestion of the defence that Dinesh was assaulted by the people of village Kohla and as a result thereof, he companyld number walk properly has been denied by him.
A suggestion of the defence that on receiving telephonic information from Jagbir DW 3 son in law of A 1, he alongwith his father PW 11 and A 1 went to village Kohla in a hired jeep and brought his injured son in the said jeep and then they threshed Dinesh at bus stand of village Sundana and as a result whereof Dinesh died on 30.05.2002 at about 8.00 p.m., has been denied by him.
As per his version, in spite of their best efforts, Dinesh companyld number be survived.
PF on record regarding taking the dead body for post mortem examination Udam Singh, Constable PW 4 filed his affidavit Ex.
Blood was companying out from anus.
The incident leading to the prosecution of the appellants occurred on 29.05.2002.
This information was given to Randhir Singh by Jagbir PW 9 , a jeep driver.
PE of the place of occurrence Naresh Kumar, Constable PW 3 placed his affidavit Ex.
Margin blurred with discoloration of skin present.
Naresh Kumar, Constable PW 3 , took the dead body of deceased Dinesh to the Hospital for post mortem examination.
There was lacerations present around the anal opening at 3rd, 7th and 10th o clock position of size 2 cm, 1 cm, 3 cm respectively.
He has identified two pieces of danda Exs.
Dinesh was crying in pain.
The Special Report thereof was sent to the Illaqa Judicial Magistrate through Constable Udham Singh PW 4 , which was received at his residence at 2.35 p.m. at Rohtak.
PQ/4 .
The Deputy Superintendent of Police had also visited the place of occurrence and verified the investigation of the case.
Dinesh, son of Dharambir PW 1 companyplainant, had gone to Delhi for ascertaining the date of his interview for recruitment to the Police Force of Delhi Government, but till late night he did number return to his village Sundana, Tehsil Kalanaur, District Rohtak.
On seeing the occurrence, PW 1, PW 11 and Raghbir Singh raised an alarm and forcibly broke open the door of the room.
On the way, Om Parkash, ASI PW 14 met PW 1 at the curve of Beri Road, where, he made statement Ex.
At the initial stage, A 1, A 2, A 3 and A 4 were challaned for companymission of offences punishable under Sections 342/302/34 IPC.
After their arrest by the Investigating Officer, A 1 during interrogation made disclosure statement Ex.
The outer door of the house of A 1 was found bolted from inside.
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. Seven accused, namely, Suraj Bhan A 1 , Balraj A 2 , Ram Niwas A 3 , Rajender Singh A 4 , Dharambir A 5 , Sube Singh A 6 and Sajjan Singh A 7 were tried by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, in Sessions Case No.
PB to Ex.
P 6 to P 10 Dr. Paramjit PW 8 , companyducted the post mortem and proved on record the post mortem report Ex.
Thereafter, PW 14 alongwith PW 1 rushed to the place of occurrence and got the dead body photographed from Gobind Ram, Photographer PW 7 .
P11 and P12 and jute rope Ex.
It was Jagbir PW 9 , a jeep driver, who disclosed this fact to PW 10.
The prosecution, in order to substantiate its case, examined as many as 14 witnesses, namely, Dharmabir PW 1 , who lodged the companyplaint Ex.
On companying to know the fact of companyfinement of his son by A 1, PW 1 alongwith his father Sube Singh PW 11 and uncle Raghbir Singh rushed to the house of A 1, where they found the outer door of the house bolted from inside.
