GULAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case entirely rests on the circumstantial evidence. Both the courts below have convicted the appellant under S. 302, 394/120-B, 201 and 404 indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life, 10 years, 7 years and 3 years respectively. All sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Mr U. R. Lalit, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that in the first instance the whole case is of suspicious nature and even if the circumstances which are relied upon by the High court are accepted to have been proved still the chain is not complete and therefore it is highly unsafe to convict the appellant merely on suspicion. The prosecution case is as follows:-

(3.) The deceased Shyam Sunder was a partner in a firm which dealt in cloth business. He wanted to open a shop in the canteen in the Army Ordnance company at Jhansi. On 15/10/1973 at 7. 00 p. m. he left his shop for seeing lt. Col. S. S. Judge (Public Witness 14. The deceased wanted to buy some sweets for presentation to Lt. Col. Judge (Public Witness 14. On the way he got two-seater vehicle driven by Public Witness 5. He picked up another passenger who is said to be the accused and they went to the shop and thereafter the deceased was found to be missing. This happened on 15/10/1973 and the dead body was found on 18/10/1973. A case was registered and inquest was held and the Doctor Public Witness 15 conducted post- mortem on 19-10-1973. He found the body in a decomposed stage and he noticed some incised wounds on dead body and he opined that the death was due to the injuries. Public Witness 18 informed the police saying that he suspected the accused as he has made a confession before him which was relied upon by the prosecution as extra judicial confession in this case. The Police Officer arrested the accused on 23/10/1973 at 3.30 p. m. and a ring was recovered from the accused. On an interrogation, it is alleged that the accused made the statement in the presence of punch witness and some more articles were recovered at the instance of the accused. Some of the articles were identified as those that belonged to the deceased.