ROSHAN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Roshan Lal by the impugned judgment dated 19.8.2010 has been convicted for murder of Sonia in the intervening night between of 22nd and 23rd July, 2007 at Dashera Grounds. By order on sentence dated 21.8.2010 for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC in short) the appellant Roshan Lal has been sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000. In default of payment of fine, the appellant Roshan Lal is to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Dead body of an unknown person was found on 23rd July, 2007 at about 8.30 a.m. in Dashera Ground near PVR Vikas Puri, West Delhi by the PCR 626 Ct. Bir Sen. DD Entry No. 11A, PW 6/A was recorded in P.S. Vikas Puri on 23.7.2007 at 8.30 p.m. The dead body could not be identified, therefore, on 24th July, 2007 hue and cry notice was published (PW Ex. 20/H). Subsequently after investigations, on 3rd August, 2007 the appellant Roshan Lal was arrested, charge-sheeted and by the impugned judgment stands convicted.

(2.) Homicidal death suffered by the deceased is proved in view of the postmortem report Ex. PW 8/A which was proved by Dr. Komal Singh (PW 8) and Dr. Shefali (PW 14). PW 8 has opined that cause of death was asphyxia due to ligature strangulation over the neck associated with hyoid injury caused by blunt impact. The postmortem report also records that the deceased was pregnant at the time of her death. The following external and internal injuries were noticed at the time of postmortem:

(3.) The FSL report Ex. PW 20/S and 20/T does not indicate presence of semen or semen stains on the deceased's clothes. The FSL report specifically records that semen could not be found on cotton wool swab. PW 8 Dr. Komal Singh had also submitted a report PW 20/B dated 9th May, 2008 that the cause of death was already given in the postmortem report Ex. PW 8/A and after the FSL report (Ex. PW 20/S and T) (viz. the vaginal swab) had been received and showed absence of semen, there was nothing further to add. Under the circumstances the cause of death remained the same. No charge under Section 376 IPC had been framed against the appellant.