RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant and the deceased, Maina were both residents of a jhuggi cluster in Motia Khan, Pahar Ganj, Delhi. The appellant is alleged to have inflicted multiple stab wounds with a knife on the deceased while she was sitting on a cot outside her jhuggi at 6. 45 p. m. on 12. 09. 1992, while she was cleaning pulses and rice. The appellant is alleged to have been shouting that the deceased had killed his son Deepu and, thus, he would not leave her alive, whereafter the knife wounds were inflicted. The appellant thereafter started running from the spot towards his jhuggi and is alleged to have thrown the knife in a public urinal whereafter he ran away. The deceased was taken to the main road by Rattan Lal, pw 3 and others where an ambulance van was present. A. S. I. Sri Krishan removed her to RML Hospital where she was declared brought dead. The appellant is also stated to have approached the ambulance on account of injuries sustained by him and was simultaneously removed to the hospital. A statement of PW 3 was recorded and thereafter the FIR was registered under Section 302 of the Indian penal Code (for short, 'ipc') and the appellant was arrested. On completion of investigation, the appellant was charged with offences under Section 302 of the IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty and prayed for trial. In terms of the judgment dated 18. 05. 1994 and the order of sentence dated 20. 05. 1994, the appellant was found guilty of offences under section 302 of the IPC as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 302 of the IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The appellant, thus, preferred the present appeal.

(2.) THE undisputed fact is that the son of the appellant died about eight months prior to the incident and it was the belief of the appellant that he was murdered by the deceased. This is stated by the prosecution to be one of the motives for the crime apart from a dispute about water supply through a tap for which the payment was not made by the appellant and, thus, the deceased was alleged to be not permitting the appellant and his family to take water from the tap.

(3.) THE case of the prosecution is based on occular evidence of the complainant PW 3, PW 2 and PW 5. The facts leading to registration of the FIR and its investigation have been explained by the prosecution thus : H. C. Ram bahadur Singh, PW 10 was the duty officer at P. S. Pahar Ganj on 12. 09. 1992 when a call was received from an unknown person at about 7 p. m. and DD No. 20a (Exhibit PW 10/e) was recorded to the effect that a quarrel was going on at motia Khan. The DD was marked to A. S. I. Jia Ram, PW 14, who went to the spot of jhuggi No. 580 and found that a blood-stained saree of Maina was lying there and blood was spread on the ground. Rice and pulses were found scattered and he was informed that the injured had been removed to the RML Hospital. A. S. I. Jia ram went to the Hospital where he met S. I. Rajinder Singh and S. H. O. J. L. Sawhney. S. I. Rajinder Singh produced the MLC of the appellant and the deceased. The statement of Rattan Lal (Exhibit PW 3/a) was recorded and the rukka (Exhibit PW 10/a) was sent for registration of the case through Constable Salim Ahmed whereafter FIR no. 431/1992 was registered (Exhibit PW 10/b ).