STATE OF HARYANA Vs. JAGBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted in SLP (Cri) Nos. 1076-1077/1996.

(2.) Questioning legality of judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Criminal Appeal No. 1721 of 1996 has been filed by the State of Haryana. The other two appeals are by the informant. An innocent child of about 4 years was the victim of unnatural death. According to the prosecution, respondents caused his homicidal death after Kidnapping him. The motive for the killing was stated to be intended demand of ransom for his release. The Sessions Judge, Bhiwani found the respondent-accused Jagbir Singh to be guilty of offences punishable under Section 302, IPC. He was also convicted for offence punishable under Sections 364, 201 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC). For the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC he was awarded death sentence and for other offences period of sentence already undergone in custody. Accused Umed Singh was convicted for offences punishable under Section 201, IPC and was directed to suffer RI for 3 years and fine. Both the accused persons preferred appeal before the High Court. The High Court by the impugned judgment found them not guilty.

(3.) According to the prosecution, death of the victim was on 6-9-1991 and passing through a chain of incidents and happenings, finally the First Information Report was lodged on 9-9-1991. In between, a ransom letter meant for somebody else was found in torn condition and that led to suspicion against the accused-respondents. Accused-Jagbir is related to Daya Nand (PW7), a teacher. It appears that on account of several circumstances, the villagers thought that accused-Jagbir was responsible for disappearance of the child. He was given time to produce the child. A ransom note was found to be in the hand writing of accused-Jagbir and he is stated to have pointed out the place where the dead body was buried in his house and also on the basis of his information certain articles were recovered. It was also the version of PW7 that at a point of time, accused-Jagbir was taken to the police with the material indicating his complicity in the alleged incident. But the police did not arrest him and left him off. It was pointed out there was grave doubt about the manner in which the investigation was being conducted, and alleged inaction of police. On completion of investigation charge-sheet was placed and accused faced trial. The case before the trial Court was based on circumstantial evidence. The circumstances which according to the prosecution established guilt of the accused are as follows :