DIGAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Criminal Reference, under Sec. 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for brevity), the correctness of the judgment and sentence of death recorded by the learned Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 11 of 2020, as per the judgment dtd. 24/11/2021, is considered along with the Criminal Appeal preferred by the condemned prisoner, who has been sentenced to death having been convicted under Ss. 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Penal Code" for brevity).

(2.) As per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anokhilal vs. State of M.P., (2019) 20 SCC 196, we have appointed Mr. Arvind Vashisth, the designated Senior Counsel as an Amicus Curiae to argue the case on behalf of the condemned prisoner-appellant.

(3.) Shown of unnecessary details, the case of the prosecution is that on 7/10/2019, one Mr. Baljeet Singh gave information to the Station House Officer, Chorgaliya, through former village pradhan that the condemned prisoner Digar Singh Koranga has committed the murder of his mother by severing her head from the rest of the body by means of sharp cutting weapon. On receiving such information, Mr. Sanjay Joshi, the then S.H.O. Chorgaliya, along with police team reached the village in question, and found the deceased Jomati Devi, mother of the condemned prisoner, lying dead with her head severed from the body. Thereafter, father of the condemned prisoner described the entire matter before the S.H.O., and stated that the incident took place on 7/10/2019 at about 09:00 AM. The S.H.O., after receiving the report from the said informant, started investigating the case. In the course of investigation, he registered the criminal case bearing FIR No. 62 of 2019, prepared the inquest report, examined the witnesses, sent the dead body for post-mortem examination, seized material objects and relevant documents, and after receipt of the post-mortem report and other reports, he submitted the charge-sheet against the condemned prisoner-appellant under Ss. 302 and 307 of the Penal Code. At the stage of charge, the appellant denied to have committed the offence. Hence, the charges were framed for the aforesaid provisions of the Penal Code.