KULDIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in these appeals were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, for offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34, IPC and were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500. They were further convicted for offence punishable under Section 460 read with 34, IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500 and also convicted for an offence under Section 380 read with 34, IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years, in default of payment of fine awarded hereinabove, they were directed to further undergo RI for 3 months on each count. The above substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. However, they were given benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appeals filed by the appellants came to be dismissed by the High Court, hence the appellants are before us in these appeals.

(2.) The prosecution case stated briefly is that one Smt. Sushma Gulati (the deceased) was a resident of B-69, Paschim Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. She was having export business under the name and style of Maharaja Exports. She had a factory at Naraina. She was also constructing another factory in Noida which work was being supervised by one Ramesh Kumar, PW-6 as a Manager. On 24-12-1997 in the evening said Sushma Gulati had left her place of work to her residence at Vasant Vihar where she was staying alone, being a divorcee. On 26-12-1997 at about 8.30 a.m., PW-6 tried to contact said Sushma Gulati over phone but could not get any response, therefore, he visited her house at Vasant Vihar at about 9.45 a.m. when he found the house door open. On entering the house, he found said Shushma Gulati lying dead in the bed-room on the first floor of her house. He also noticed that the said room had been ransacked. He immediately rang up the deceased's lawyer by name Mr. Baldev Krishan. He also telephonically informed the brother of the deceased by name Brig. S. K. Ravikant. On the advice received by them PW-6 contacted the Police Control Room telephonically. Said lawyer Mr. Baldev Krishan and the brother Brig. Ravikant immediately reached the place of incident. The Police also appeared there soon thereafter. On a preliminary examination by the investigator it appeared that the deceased had died due to strangulation. They also found some blood-stains on the pillow, shirt and mattress. They found one tin box of toffees, a pair of spectacles and some left-over tea in a glass tumbler. Said articles were seized. On an examination of the deceased's car they found certain papers including 2 complaints addressed to the Police, Noida. These complaints were made by the deceased in regard to an incident which took place on 23-12-1997 with one Gaurav Tyagi with whom she had an altercation. In the complaint she had stated that said Gaurav Tyagi had assaulted her causing a fracture of her finger. She also stated in the said complaint that said Gaurav Tyagi had threatened to kill her. On post-mortem examination of the body which was done on 28-12-1997 the doctor opined that the death had occurred about 31/2 days prior to the autopsy due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation.

(3.) During the course of investigation the investigating agency came to know that the first appellant herein Kuldip Singh was working with the deceased during November, 1997 but his services were terminated because the deceased had suspected him of having stolen certain articles in the house. The investigating agency also came to know that Kuldip was re-employed by the deceased on 20-12-1997 hence the investigators procured the said appellant for interrogation. On such interrogation having come to know the involvement of other 2 appellants, namely, Ram Singh and Om Prakash they were also apprehended. The prosecution avers that during the course of investigation they came to know that these 3 persons had gone to the house of the deceased on 24-12-1997 with a view to commit theft of the valuables which appellant-Kuldip Singh had known that the deceased possessed and in the course of said theft because the deceased woke up, she was strangulated and the accused had taken jewelleries worn by the deceased and other valuables possessed by her like gold bangles, gold kara, lady's ring of gold, gold monks, a camera, a gold locket etc. It is the prosecution case that the investigating agency during their visit to the house of the deceased had also picked up certain chance finger-prints which on an analysis were found to be that of appellant-Kuldip. The prosecution further alleges that on 1-1-1998 during the course of interrogation of the accused persons, the volunteered to make a disclosure statement therefore the I.O. procured the presence of one Dalip Singh, PW-5 as a Panch witness for recording the said disclosure memo. It is the case of the prosecution that all the three accused persons made disclosure statements that the articles stolen by them from the house of deceased were shared by the 3 appellants and each one of them had concealed the said articles in their respective jhuggis. During the said statement they also offered to recover the same if they were taken to their respective jhuggis. It is on this basis sometime around the afternoon of 1-1-1998 these appellants with PW-5 and other Police officials were taken to their jhuggi area where these appellants took them to their respective jhuggis and recovered the stolen articles which were recovered by the investigating agency. The jewellery was then weighed, packed and sealed in different packets and the said articles were deposited with the Malkhana at Vasant Vihar Police Station. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against these appellants for which they were convicted, as stated above.