CHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Sessions Judge of Mathura convicted Charan Singh appellant herein, of killing Sarjiti, a girl aged 10 or 12, in her house in village Anta-ki-Garhi, police station Sadabad, in the district of Mathura, on November 20, 1957 in the morning, and sentenced him to death. There was another charge under S. 380, Indian Penal Code, against the appellant for committing theft of certain ornaments, but of this charge the learned Sessions Judge acquitted him. There was the usual reference to the High Court of Allahabad for confirmation of the sentence. The appellant also filed an appeal. These two were heard together and by its judgment dated July 29, 1958 the High Court dismissed the appeal, accepted the reference and affirmed the conviction and sentence. From this judgment the appellant moved by way of special leave and on December 15, 1958 this Court granted special leave to the appellant. The present appeal has been filed in pursuance of such leave.

(2.) Sarjiti was the daughter of one Atar Singh by his first wife. Atar Singh lived in village Anta-ki-Garhi, police station Sadabad. After the death of his first wife, he married Ram Siri, sister of his first wife. Atar Singh has two children by his second wife, one of the children being three years old and the other one year old only. The appellant is a resident of the same village and lived close to Atar Singh. The prosecution case was that the appellant was employed by Atar Singh for some time, when the latter was carrying on the business of manufacturing "ghungras" (small bell-like jingling, trinkets worn round the ankles), Atar Singh, however, discontinued that business and the appellant lost his employment. The prosecution case further was that a day before the murder of Sarjiti, the appellant went to the house of Atar Singh in the 1atter's absence and cut jokes with Ramsiri :

(3.) The defence of the appellant was that he had been falsely implicated out of enmity. It was suggested on his behalf that Mukhia, one of the prosecution witnesses, had illicit connection with Ram Siri: Sarjiti objected to such illicit connection and it was suggested that Mukhia and Ram Siri might have killed Sarjiti and then attempted to foist the murder on the appellant. This was one line of defence. The other line of defence was that there was a quarrel between Atar Singh and some of the villagers on one side and the appellant on the other over the tethering of bullocks in front of the appellant's house. Some of the villagers gave slaps to the appellant and in the evening Puran, a nephew of Mukhia, told the appellant that he was called by Puran's grand-father The appellant refused to go, but seeing some constables sitting at the house of Mukhia, the appellant left the village and went to Mathura on a cycle and on November 20, 1957 he was in Mathura where he filed a petition in the box kept for that purpose in the house of the Superintendent of Police and also filed a complaint before the Sub-divisional Magistrate. On behalf of the appellant one Bhagwan Singh (defence witness No. 1) was examined and this witness said that he wrote the petition which was put in the box of the Superintendent of Police. The petition which was marked as an exhibit was dated November 20, 1957, but an endorsement thereon showed that it was found in the box on November 22, 1957. The appellant suggested that when he came to know of the case against him, he surrendered on November 23, 1957. The appellant denied that he had entered into the house of Atar Singh on November 20, 1957 or that he had killed Sarjiti or that the blood-stained shirt and chopper belonged to him.