He, however, also stated that he removed the golden earrings and one dhol and after wrapping the same into a wax paper, he companycealed underneath the earth after digging in a pit in the onion fields Kayari which was taken by him on share basis.
PD semen was number detected on the pubic hair and swabs.
On the very next day, i.e. on 08.03.1999, he made the disclosure statement Ex.
PJ before Shri Shivdan Singh, the investigating officer in presence of Head Constable Krishan Kumar and Constable Mahender Singh.
All these injuries were ante mortem in nature.
The blood had oozed out and there was one teeth bite mark on her right cheek, which was an indication that some unknown person had tried to molest her.
He had married his daughter, who was aged 24 25 years, to one Rajesh, s o Chhanna, at Village Dhantan, Hisar.
On 03.03.1999 at about 9/10 a.m., she went to the field to bring Barseem green fodder but did number return till 3/4 p.m. on that day.
If the aforesaid aspects are treated to have been duly proved, in our opinion, they form a companyplete chain of circumstantial evidence unequivocally pointing out accusing finger at the appellant.
The deceased had also disclosed to her that even prior to this incident, the appellant was behaving like this everyday.
P.C., wherein the appellant pleaded that he was innocent and falsely framed in the case.
Though, it is a companyfessional statement which records his admission that he had murdered Sunita, since this part of the statement is number admissible in view of Section 25 and Section 26 of the Evidence Act, we are number supposed to take the companyfessional part into account.
Complainant then lodged the companyplaint.
Site plan Ex.
PJ on 08.03.1999.
There was a cut mark on the left side of the neck of deceased.
Rough site plan regarding the place of occurrence Ex.
The clothes of the deceased and other parcels were handed over by the doctor after companyducting post mortem report.
She had companye to the parental house about 8 9 days prior to the incident and was staying with the companyplainant.
When she reached there, she found Sunita lying dead in the field of Barseem.
In appeal, the High Court has, vide impugned order dated judgment dated 12.07.2010, affirmed the aforesaid companyviction and sentence, thereby dismissing the appeal.
It was also stated that human semen was detected on the salwar.
The sickle, weapon used in the murder, was recovered on the disclosure statement made by the appellant and at his instance.
Parna, Shirt, Salwar, Dupatta, Brassier, Swabs from the body of the deceased as well as blood stained earth were taken possession of and sent to Forensic Science Laboratory.
Murti returned home and informed the companyplainant about the same.
The appellant, Prem Singh, was arrested on 07.03.1999 who made a disclosure statement Ex.
The deceased was wearing earrings and dhol which were also recovered from the appellant.
Unfolding the prosecution case, we find that Jaibir PW 12 , companyplainant, who is the father of deceased Sunita, had made a companyplaint at PS Sadar, Hansi stating that he was an agriculturist and had two sons and one daughter Sunita .
The trial companyrt examined PW 1 Jagdish Chander Assistant Sub Inspector, PW 2 Ramji Das Patwari, PW 3 Dr. P. Charaya, PW 4 Head Constable Subhash, PW 5 Kharati Lal Sub Inspector, PW 6 Krishan Kumar Assistant Sub Inspector, PW 7 Ramesh Kumar Constable, PW 8 Murti Devi, wife of Sushil Kumar, PW 9 Sushil Kumar son of Jaibir, PW 10 Subhash son of Balbir Singh, PW 11 Shamsher Singh Constable, PW 12 Jaibir Singh son of Chandgi Ram, PW 13 Mahabir son of Chandgi Ram, PW 14 Shivdan Singh Inspector.
Post mortem on the body of the deceased was companyducted by Dr. O.P. Charya PW 3 who opined that cause of death was due to hemorrhage and shock and injury No.1 was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
His companyviction and sentence has been upheld by the High Court vide judgment dated 12.07.2010 and it is this judgment which is impugned in the present proceedings.
The charges under Sections 302, 404 and 354 of IPC were framed against the accused Prem Singh.
PR was prepared regarding place of recovery.
The appellant became a suspect allegedly for the reason that Murti Devi wife of Sunil Kumar daughter in law of the companyplainant who had gone to the fields in search of Sunita and saw her lying dead there, had made a statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the effect that one day prior to Holi festival, when the deceased returned to the house after bringing fodder, she had told her that the appellant was a bad person and had winked at her on that day while she was lifting fodder.
P.C. was filed before the companycerned Area Magistrate.
FIR was registered on the basis of the said companyplaint and police started investigation.
PD was received on the said articles stating that they were found to be blood stained.
The blood stained earth and a pair of chappels were taken into possession from the spot.
Thereafter, the statement of certain witnesses in the case were recorded wherein name of the appellant surfaced as a suspect.
Pursuant to the aforesaid disclosure statement, the appellant got recovered two earrings and dhol made of gold as well as sickle in the presence of Subhash PW 10 and Mahavir PW 13 .
On the same day, one Balraj was also arrested.
With this exercise undertaken by the police, the investigation was companypleted.
After the disclosure statement, a pair of earrings and one dhol jewellery article of gold which is worn around the neck of the women and sickle was recovered at the instance of the appellant.
He also stated that he threw the sickle in the field of Barseem and he companyld get these things recovered after pointing out the same.
After hearing the news of the death of Sunita, the companyplainant and his brother Mahavir and one Chhajju, s o Buta, went to the field and they found dead body of Sunita lying there with cut mark on her neck.
PO and inquest report were prepared.
The post mortem on the dead body of Sunita was companyducted in the General Hospital, Hansi.
The report Ex.
The Area Magistrate sent the challan after observing the formalities and produced before the trial companyrt.
Brother of the deceased PW 9 had also mentioned about the appellant in his statement.
Then, companyplainants daughter in law Murti PW 8 went to the field to look for Sunita.
From the evidence of PW3, Dr. O.P. Charya, Medical Officer, General Hospital, Hansi who companyducted the post mortem on the dead body of Sunita, it becomes apparent that the cause of death was due to hemorrhage and shock and injury No.1 in the post mortem report i.e. incised wound on the neck anteriorly 10 x 25 into muscle deep extending latterly on both the sides and more towards the left side along with cutting of trachea, oesophagas all the major vessels starno claido mastoid muscle on the left side was sufficient to cause the death in due companyrse of nature.
It is because of this reason that when PW 8 and PW 9 named him in their statements, the appellant was arrested.
