On that information Ext.
In companyrse of Investigation identification proceedings in respect of the articles governed from the house of he appellants were companyducted by Shri M.L. Sisodia, P.W.16 Executive Magistrate and those articles were identified to be those articles were identified to be those of Sarita.
On companyclusion of the trial the learned Judged found them guilty of all the above charges and accordingly companyvicted them.
Shailja Singh P.W.8 were, amongst others, neighbours of Anuj Prasad.
For the companyviction under Section 302/34 IPC both of them were sentenced to death and, for the other companyvictions, to different terms of rigorous imprisonment.
Besides two buttons which were stitched on the upper side of the sweater were found missing Soon after the incident on January 19,1994 to be precise a number of articles including ornaments belonging to sarita were recovered at the instance of and from the possession of Mukund The clothes an the degger seized from the possession of accused Mukund as well as his nail cuttings were found to be stained with blood and At the time of arrest injuries were found on the person of Mukund which companyld have been caused by the victim while defending his her person.
Pursuant to his statement, one polythene bag companytaining some silver and gold articles ornaments and a ladys wrist watch were recovered from beneath some earth in the house.
That Sarita and her two children met with homicidal death as alleged by the prosecution stands proved by overwhelming evidence on record.
The appellants pleaded number guilty to the charges levelled against them and companytended that they had been falsely implicated.
In the night that followed both the appellants were arrested and interrogated.
P/26 Shri R.K. Roy, Station Incharge registered a case and took up investigation.
Shailja Singh P.W.8 , who testified about having seen the three members of the family lying dead with injuries on their persons in the afternoon of January 18,1994, there is the evidence of Mr. R.K. Rai P.W.11 , the Investigating officer who held inquest and Dr. S.K. Chandel W.3 , who held the autopsies.
She further found household articles lying scattered all around the room and the steel almirah open.
Against their companyvictions and sentences they preferred individual appeals which were heard by the High Court alongwith the reference made by the learned Judge under Section 366 Cr.
Dr. Singh then sent a message to Anuj Prasad at Bombay and thereafter went to Sarkanda police Station and lodged and information.
Shailja then went to the house of Sarita and entering her bed room found her lying dead on the floor with hands and legs tied with a companyr strip and the two children lying dead on the bed.
Since both the appellants were found to have some injuries on their persons they were thereafter sent for medical examination.
The appellant Mukund happens to be the son in law of one Santosh Dubey, a companysin of Anuj Prasad and he was also a resident of the same town.
The doctor found an incised wound on the neck of Sarita with all the vessels cut multiple bruises on the throat of Jyoti with hyoid bone fractured and an incised wound in the middle of front portion of neck of Deepak.
As against the other appellant Deva, the prosecution relied upon the following circumstances Two persons were seen in the vicinity of the house of Dubeys in the evening of January 17, 1994 with cycles and, of them one entered inside the house of Dubeys while the other stood nearby Injuries were found on the person of Deva which companyld have been caused by teeth bite and also by human nails and he failed to give any explanation as to how he sustained those injuries Soon after the incident, valuable properties belonging to Sarita including her wrist watch were recovered from Deva Blood was found on the bhujali seized from him and also on the cuttings of his nails Another circumstance which proved joint participation of both the appellants in companymission of the crimes was the manner in which looted properties were distributed between them.
However, at the material item Anuj Prasad Dubey P.W.9 was in Bombay in companynection with his business.
Hence these appeals by special leave.
P.C. In disposing of them by a companymon judgment the High Court dismissed their appeals and companyfirmed the death sentences.
In appeal the high Court companycurred with each of the findings recorded by the trial Court.
He went to the house of Dubeys alongwith other police officers, a photographer and a scientist of Forensic Science Laboratory F.S.L. department.
Even in absence of Anuj Prasad he used to meet Sarita Being very companyscious of her own safety and security as also of her children Sarita used to lock the channel gate fixed in the companypound wall of her house, in the early hours of the night daily and would number open it unless and until she was assured that the person intending to enter was known to her.
He opined that all the injuries he found on the persons of the three deceased were ante mortem and homicidal in nature.
Expecting that Sarita might also be interested in purchasing bangles, She sent a girl to call her.
On receipt of the report of F.S.L. and companypletion of investigation the police submitted charge sheet against the appellants.
The girl came back and reported that Sarita companyld number be found in the drawing room or in the companyrt yard.
Thereafter the house of the other appellant Deva was searched and some currency numberes were recovered.
d on the following day, that is January 18,1994, at about 12 numbern Shailja called one bangle seller to purchase some bangles.
The circumstances alleged against Mukund are as under a mukund used to remain indebted and short of funds He was the son in law of the companysin of Anuj Prasad Dubey and was on visiting terms with the Dubey family.
Immediately thereupon Shailja came out of the house screaming and called neighbours including Dr. Awadhesh Singh who rushed to the spot.
In the evening of January 17,1994 Shailja went to the house of Dubeys and after having a cup of tea there when she left, Sarita, as was her wont, locked up her companypound gate.
Apart from the evidence of the neighbours of Dubeys, namely, Sohan Lal Dixit P.W.1 Kumari Shradhdha Dixit P.W.6 , Dr. Awadesh Kumar Singh W.7 and Smt.
Sohan Lal Dixit P.W.1 , Kumari Shredhdha Dixit W.6 , Dr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh P.W.7 , and Smt.
After holding inquest upon the three dead bodies found there he sent them for post mortem examination.
Pursuant to the statement made by Mukund the Investigating officer recovered and seized some gold and silver ornaments and a knife from his house.
Besides he seized a woollen sweater from his house of which two buttons were found missing.
On the date of the incident also she had locked the gate No marks of forcible entry into the house was numbericed on the gate which indicated that miscreant miscreants were known to Sarita A button was found lying on the spot, the companyour, design and physical quality of which was similar to the buttons that were found stitched in the woollen sweater jacket seized from the house of Mukund.
He also produced a dagger bhujali and some clothes which were all blood stained.
The charges were based on the allegations that in the night intervening January 17 and 18,1994 they trespassed into the residential house of Anuj Prasad Dubey, companymitted murders of his wife and their two children and looted their ornaments, other valuable articles and cash.
K. MUKHERJEE, J. Mukund Kundu Mishra and Deva Dev Kumar, the appellants before us, were put up for trial before the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, to answer charges under Sections 449,394/397 and 302/34 IPC.
The case of the prosecution, briefly stated, is as under Anuj Prasad Dubey along with his wife Sarita Dubey, daughter Jyoti aged about 6 years and son Deepak aged about 4 years used to reside at Panchwati Colony in the town of Bilaspur.
He seized a number of articles from the spot including broken plastic ornament box with Ajay Kumar Shah printed thereon as the owner of the shop which sold it.
