DIWAN SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr. P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 08 -04 -1992, passed in Sessions Trial No. 141 of 1988, by the then learned Special Judge { Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, whereby appellants Diwan Singh and Bachuli Devi have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.), and each one of them has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) PROSECUTION story in brief is that the accused {appellants Diwan Singh, Bachuli Devi and their son Nar Singh are residents of Village Soopi, Patti Satbunga, District Nainital. Prem Singh (deceased) was also resident of the same village. He was real brother of appellant Diwan Singh. On 14 -07 -1986, at about 5:30 - 6:00 P.M., Prem Singh returned to his home in the village after finishing his days work. Meanwhile, accused { appellant Diwan Singh and his wife appellant Bachuli Devi also returned from the fields to their home in the village. Appellant Bachuli Devi accused sons of Prem Singh (deceased) that they had stolen wheat flour and potatoes from her house. Prem Singh objected to the allegations and they quarreled for a while. Thereafter, when Prem Singh entered in his house, appellants Diwan Singh, Bachuli Devi and their son Nar Singh followed him in his house and alleged that he has become inimical to them. And, appellant Diwan Singh caught hold of head of Prem Singh and appellant Bachuli Devi administered poison to him by pouring contents of bottle of 'NUVAN' (an insecticide) in his mouth. Meanwhile, their son Nar Singh kept the hands of Prem Singh held together. However, P.W.2, Leela Devi, daughter of the deceased. succeeded in snatching the empty bottle of poison from appellant Bachuli Devi As soon as the accused persons left Prem Singh in his house, he told his wife P.W.1, Parwati Devi that the accused persons have administered poison to him. He requested his wife to take him to the doctor. Parwati Devi (P.W.1) took Prem Singh with her and when they were on way to doctor, Prem Singh complained that he is now unable to walk further and sat on the way. He asked his wife to call the doctor. On this, P.w.1, Parwati Devi went to look for doctor and told about the incident to one Pratap Singh, who asked her to call her 'Chachia father -in -law. When P.'W.1, Parwati Devi returned after informing about the incident she found that Prem Singh had already died. Meanwhile, people started gathering around the place where Prem Singh had died. On the next day i.e. 15 -07 -1986, P.W.1, Parwati got the First Information Report (Ext.A -1) written through P.W.4, Harak Singh. And, submitted the same with Patti Patwari Satbunga (In Uttaranchal hills, in certain areas, Revenue officers are given police powers by the State). P.W.G, Bachchi Singh, Patti Patwari, Satbunga, prepared the check report (Ext. A -8) on 15 -07 -1986 of the First formation Report (Ext. A -1) and registered the crime. He went to the spot on the very day d took the dead body in his possession. He prepared the inquest report (Ext. A -3), Police form No. 13 (Ext. A -4), photo sketch of the dead body (Ext. A -5), Police form No. 33 (Ext. A which is a letter requesting the Chief Medical Officer for postmortem examination of dead body. PW.7, Dr. M.N. Dhondiyal, conducted the autopsy on the dead body on 16 -07 -1986 and prepared postmortem examination report (Ext. A -13). Meanwhile, Investigating Officer prepared site plan (Ext. A -11 ) and, after recording statement of witnesses and concluding the investigation, the Investigating Officer, P.W.6, Bachchi Singh, submitted charge sheet (Ext. A -12) against the accused persons Diwan Singh, Bachuli Devi and their son Nar Singh.

(3.) THE concerned Magistrate after registering the charge sheet summoned the accused persons and after providing necessary copies, as required under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. to the accused persons, committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing the prosecution and the defence, framed charge of offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. against accused/appellant Bachuli Devi and similar charge was framed against accused/appellant Diwan Singh and Nar Singh. All the three accused/appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P;W.1, Parwati Devi, informant, eyewitness and wife of the deceased; PW.2, Leela Devi, eye witness and daughter of the deceased; P.W.3, Paan Singh, witness of the preparation of the inquest report; PWA, Harak Singh, scribe of the F.I.R. (Ext. A -1); P.W. 5, Tribhuwan Singh, Patti Patwari of neighbouring Patti Purvi Aagar, who assisted the Investigating Officer; PW.6, Bachchi Singh, the Investigating Officer and P.W.7, Dr. M.N. Dhoridiyal, who conducted the autopsy and prepared postmortem examination report (Ext. A -13). Apart from this the report of Forensic Science Laboratory (Ext. A -14) received from the Forensic Science Laboratory on viscera preserved from the dead body was also placed on the record. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused persons to which they replied that the evidence is wrong and they have been falsely implicated in the case. No evidence in defence given. The trial court, after hearing the arguments of prosecution and that of the defence, found accused Diwan Singh and Bachuli Devi guilty of the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC., and after hearing on sentence, sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life. However, the trial court did not find charge proved beyond reasonable doubt as against Nar Singh (son of the appellants).