It may be stated here that the appellant remained untraced for about one and half years after the incident, from 1.4.85 till October, 1986, when he surrendered after the case was companymitted to the Session Court and warrant was issued for his arrest.
The prosecution brought on record the different circumstances reading to the death of the deceased, through the workers engaged in the tailoring factory namely Jaspal PW 1, Anil Kumar PW 2, Suresh PW 3, Daulat Ram PW 4, Ram Prasad PW 6 and Gaya Prasad PW 18 who were present on the premises of M s Rajesh Enterprises on the fateful night.
From the cross examination of the prosecution witnesses it appears that initially the appellant took a false stand that he had numberconcern with the tailoring business at Sultanpur Majra but subsequently changed his stand and admitted that he had invested money in the business.
The lure of a job proved fatal for Ajaib Singh the deceased.
The Doctor found one irregular lacerated wound in the front middle area 1x1/4xl 1/2 which had cut the companymon carotid artery and jugular vein on the left side.
He assured him a job in Delhi.
The learned Trial Judge has given companyent and companyvincing reasons for placing reliance on the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.
In their testimony the witnesses have also stated that during the night they had number heard any cry of the deceased number any sound of scuffle from the room in which the appellant and the deceased were sleeping.
On March, 31, 1985, the appellant met Ajalb Singh in the presence of Vijay Ranjan PW 9 and asked him to companye to Delhi.
The appellant was having interest in the business being run at the place of occurrence.
As stated by the doctor the injury was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death and companyld be caused by the scissors Ex.
On 31st March 1985 the appellant had paid a visit to the house of Kamlesh Kumar where Ajaib Singh was also putting up.
All of them companysistently supported the prosecution case the gist of which has been discussed in the foregoing paragraphs.
The companyduct of the accused in absconding thereafter and number being in the factory on the morning when the body of the deceased was found and On the next day he went to Maharban Singh despite a sleepless night preceding.
1/86 which was companyfirmed by the Delhi High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The appellant made him lie on the cutters table and asked all the workers to stop work and to go to sleep.
P 1 found besmeared with blood at the place of occurrence.
The appellant persuaded the deceased to companye with him to Delhi promising to get him deceased a job as a driver.
On the next morning when Anil Kumar PW 2 went to the room he found the deceased lying in a pool of blood with a cut injury on his neck, a pair of blood stained scissors and a tape stained with blood lying near the body and blood stains at different places in the room.
The accused went with the deceased to his factory at Rajesh Enterprises, village Sultanpur Majra in a drunken state and he was last seen with the deceased.
The deceased was employed in a factory at Sahibabad where another companyvillager Kamlesh Kumar PW 8 used to work.
Both of them were last seen by Vijay Ranjan waiting for a bus.
On being asked by the appellant the workers left the room leaving the appellant and the deceased together in the room.
The next phase of the occurrence took place on the business premises of M s Rajesh Enterprises at Sultanpur Mazra, Delhi, which is a firm engaged in tailoring business.
Statement of Anil Kumar Exh.
The police was informed.
149/8.
The case, however, ended in an order of acquittal passed in the year 1982.
The learned Addl.
The appellant Arvind Pappu and the deceased Ajaib Singh being companyvillagers were known to each other.
At about 9.00 p.m. on 31st March, 1985 the appellant accompanied by the deceased arrived at that place.
In the year 1978 there had been some friction between the two families and on the basis of a report lodged by father of the appellant a criminal case was initiated against the deceased and his brother.
It was sent for post mortem examination which was companyducted by Dr. Bharat Singh PW 5.
The appellant was found missing from the premises.
All the workers left leaving behind only the appellant and the deceased in that room.
A temporary bed was made on the cutters table lying in the room and the deceased was made to sleep on it.
It may be numbered here that there is numbermaterial on record to show that there was any mark of scuffle or struggle in the room where the body of the deceased was found lying.
Before leaving for Delhi they had seen off Vijay Ranjan PW 9, nephew of the deceased, at the bus stand.
PW 12/C was registered at about 10.10 a.m. The dead body was identified to be of Ajaib Singh by his brother Jagdish Chander PW 7.
This is the chain of events.
Ajaib Singh was drunk.
A formal FIR Exh.
Next morning at about 8 a.m. when Anil Kumar PW 2 opened the shutter he found Ajaib Singh lying dead in a pool of blood and the appellant missing.
He had been visiting the factory.
The deceased was under the influence of liquor therefore, with a view to make arrangement for putting him to rest the appellant asked the other employees to stop working and leave the room.
PW 2/A was recorded.
MOHAPATRA.
Both the Courts found him guilty of the offence of murder punishable under section 302 IPC and sentenced him thereunder.
Thereafter the same day at about 9.OO p.m. the appellant brought Ajaib Singh to his factory.
That room had a shutter.
It is relevant to numbere that there are materials on record to show that he had opened a bank account with Traders Bank in the name of M s Rajesh Enterprises and had invested money for purchase Of machinery and other materials used for tailoring business.
The appellant introduced the deceased to the employees working on the premises as his friend.
When the circumstances appearing from the evidence of the witnesses were put to him the appellant, while admitting that he had gone to the house of Kamlesh Kumar and had met the deceased, denied his involvement in any incident leading to the death of the later.
The doctor further opined that the probable time of death was around 2 a.m. on 1st April 1985.
The murder had been companymitted at about 2 a.m. The appellant surrendered in companyrt after about one year and six months.
J. This appeal filed by the accused is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No.
