On the basis of this evidence the prosecution laid the chargesheet against all the accused.
27 and PW.
27, the Sub Inspector of the Police took over the investigation.
The deceased paid the price of the liquor and meat and when he had become tipsy, PW.
8 it was stated that he was brought back to Gaggal village of PW.
8 Tamil Singh and one Jai Onkar were also invited to have drink with them.
He companytacted one Kuldip Singh, a Conductor in Kapila Transport Company from whom he came to know that on November 10, 1974, the deceased and the appellant were seen companysuming liquor at Jassur.
On November 15.
It is highly artificial and appears on its face a make believe story.
On enquiry made by PW.
Equally of PW.
He was thrown out of the truck but finding him number dead put him in the truck and all the accused severed the head with an iron saw and burried the trunk under stones in the outskirts of the village Dhadhu and carried the head with them in the truck.
From the Judgment and Order dated 19/20th July, 1977 of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in Crl.
1974 the parents of the deceased came to the Police Station and identified the clothes of the deceased.
9/A leading to discovery of the hidden head at a place between Guggal and Chaitru.
On November 13, 1974, PW.
On November 27, 1974, the Driver A. 2 was stated to have made a statement under s. 27 of the Evidence Act.
On November 14, 1974 at about 7.00 or 8.00 a.m. PW.
7 and PW.
27 left the village for further investigation.
10 gave this information to PW.
7 did number allow them to take liquor inside the Dhaba.
The deceased came in companytact with the appellant and both went to the Dhaba of PW.
He went and reported to Bidhu Ram, PW.
302 and 201, I.P.C. The two others did number file appeal against their companyvict under s. 201 I.P.C. The entire prosecution case rested on circumstantial evidence.
This statement had been made in the presence of PW.
G. Bhagat, N.K. Sharma and Ms. A. Subhashini N.P. for the Respondent.
On appeal the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh by judgment dated July 20, 1977 acquitted accused 2 and 3 of the offence under s. 302 IPC and companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence of the appellant and set aside the sentence of fine.
The leave having been granted by this Court, this appeal has been filed.
10, the Pradhan of Guggal Gram Panchayat and iii the discovery of saw blade pursu ant to the statement made by the appellant and A. 3 under s. 27 of the Evidence Act.
7 as the one that sold the liquor and PW 8 companysumed it with him and the de ceased.
6 went to the Police Station and lodged the company plaint.
386 of 1978.
The appellant pointed out PW.
10, Bidhu Ram, Pradhan of Guggal Panchayat went to the appel lants village Sahaura and was sent for the appellant.
27 left for further investigation.
6 Karrudi Ram, the Chowkidar of Mauza Bandi, during twilight, had gone to answer natures call at the outskirts of the village Dhadhu and numbericed the blood stains and a torn pant near the stones.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
16 The Serologist found the blood stains disintegrated on all the items.
16/B leading to recover one iron saw without handle and a piece of cloth wrapped to one of its sides was recovered from a bush near Kathman Mor and PW.
The appel lant on companying to him was found to have shaved off his moustaches.
It is further the case of the prosecution that while the deceased or accused were going in the truck, there ensued a quarrel between them over some money matter and the appellant took iron screw driver and gave blows on the head and face of the deceased.
10s village and PW.
Thereafter the appellant and the deceased boarded the Truck No.
Thereafter PW.
10 stated that he companyld number save him but if he would speak the truth he would help himself.
Rakesh Luthra, N.N. Bhatt, L.R. Singh N.P. and lrshad Ahmad for the Appellant.
He recovered the articles on and near the dead body under PW.
Society spoke that he saw the truck driven by A. 2 and A. 3 and got unloaded the bricks at the godown of the said Society at about mid night but the deceased was number seen there.
All of them together companysumed the liquor and ate meat.
The head was hidden at a place between Guggal and Chaitru on the Kachcha road branching off the main road to the village Ichhi.
10, in the shop of one Mangath Ram and in the companypany of one Raghunath, to reveal the truth to him, the appellant was stated to have requested PW.
The narrative of prosecution case runs thus The de ceased Joginder Singh, resident of Jogipura.
the Pradhan of the village and two others.
10 and another are Panch witnesses and found the saw blade companytained with blood stains and a piece of cloth of torn pant.
All of them went to the spot, numbericed the dead body.
8 and the other left the place.
9 and another and the severed head was recovered under Memo Ex.
After he was identified by PW.
16/C. The clothes of the appellant were also claimed to have been recovered from his house under Ex.
10 whether he companyld save him if he would tell the truth.
10 and was kept in his companypany and PW.
Thereon all the accused were arrested.
Admittedly PW.
8 suggest ed to take the deceased to Pathankot or to keep him at Dhaba Beli where at he companyld make necessary arrangements for their stay but the appellant insisted upon taking the deceased to Kangra.
10 and PW.
As stated earlier the appellant number stands companyvicted and sentenced for the offences under ss.
The truck was loaded with the bricks and the appel lant and the deceased sat on the bricks in the body of the truck and went towards Kangra side.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMY, J. The appellant, K.C. Sharma, alongwith two others was charged for the offence punishable under ss.
10 kept a watch during the night.
HPK 4179 driven by A. 2, Madho Ram, Driver and A. 3, Bihari Lal, Cleaner.
9/B. This was in the presence of PW.
26, the A,S.I. recorded and issued the First Information Report and proceeded to the spot.
All the sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
27 on the next day, namely, November 25, 1974.
16/H which was stained with blood and the same were recovered in the presence of PW.
1974, pursuant to statement made by the appellant and A. 3 under Ex.
Thereupon the appellant was stated to have made extra judicial companyfession giving out the details of companysuming liquor with the deceased their going together on the truck, the quarrel that ensued between them his hitting the deceased with the screw driver, throwing thedead body, thinking that he died, on the road realising that he was number dead, lifting him and putting him in the body of the truck and all the accused cutting the head of the deceased with the saw blade and burrying the trunk under the stones and hiding the head at different place and thereby they had companymitted the crime.
8, the companypanion who had liquor with the deceased and the appellant ii the extra judicial companyfession made to PW.
As regards the appellant, the circumstances relied on the prosecution are three, namely, i the appellant and the deceased were last seen together by PW.
46 of 1976.
27 took the appellant to Jassur for identification purposes.
Thereupon PW.
On November 16, 1974, PW.
On November 30.,
11, Panch nama and companyducted inquest and sent the dead body for post mortem.
302 and 201 read with s. 34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death and companycealing the dead body of Joginder Singh.
On further probe the hand of the deceased was seen projecting from the stones and he numbericed the dead body.
They were recovered under Ex.
The Doctor verified and found it to be companyrect and the doctor companyelated the trunk of the dead body and the head belonging to the de ceased.
Kangra on November, 10, 1974.
Consequently the deceased was half dead.
while going to Pathankot with some currency numberes in his possession went on his way to Jassur Village to meet his friend one Bala Pahalwan.
A. No.
The head was sent to the Doctor for post mortem examination.
27 had enquired as to why he had removed his moustoches upon which the appellant was claimed to have replied that he had removed his moustaches due to demise of his maternal uncle.
10 and another.
7, the owner of the Dhaba and the latter identified the appellant as one seen in the companypany of the deceased and having companysumed liquor.
12, the Octroi Clerk at Nagpur states that the truck driven by A. 2 went towards Baijnath.
7, the owner of the liquor shop Dhaba and PW.
Burfiram, Chowkidar at Ichhi Marketing Co op.
8 when they professed that they have seen the appellant and the deceased together companysuming the liquor.
The Doctor companyducted autopsy.
7, Joginder Singh Paul to have some drink, but PW.
On enquiry the latter was said to be absent in the village.
For that reason the law insists on recording the statement by a Judicial Magistrate after administering all necessary warnings to the accused that it would be used as evidence against him.
Thereafter the appellant was taken back to PW.
Both of them sat in the back side of the Dhaba to have drink.
