DAYAL SINGH AND ORS. Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Code of Criminal Procedure), is directed against the judgment and order dated 16 -08 -1991, passed by the then learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Sessions trial No. 19 of 1990, whereby accused/Appellant Dayal Singh has been convicted under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.) and the remaining two accused/Appellants, namely Smt. Mula Devi and Smt. Rajmati are convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and under Section 201 of I.P.C. Each one of the convict has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 (read with Section 34 for accused/Appellants Smt. Mula Devi and Smt. Rajmati) and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 201 of I.P.C.

(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.

(3.) THE Magistrate, on receipt of the charge sheet, after giving necessary copies to the accused, as required under Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure committed the case to the court of Sessions, for trial. Learned trial court, after hearing the parties, on 10 -12 -1990, framed charge of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and the one punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C. against all the three accused namely Dayal Singh, Mula Devi and Rajmati. All the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W.1, Lal Singh (Informant and uncle of the deceased); P.W.2, Baishakhu (an alleged eyewitness); P.W.3, Amar Singh (father of the deceased); P.W.4, Avtar Singh (neighbour of accused and the deceased); P.W.5, Kapur Singh Payal, Patwari (who initially investigated the crime); P.W. 6, Bachchan Singh (who completed the investigation and submitted charge sheet) and P.W.7, Dr. P.P. Raturi (who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Puola Devi). The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the trial court, in reply to which the accused (Appellants) alleged that the evidence adduced against them was false. However, it is admitted under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure by all the three accused that Puola Devi (deceased) was married to Kamal Singh, son of Daval Singh. Accused Dayal Singh in his replies has also stated that at the time of incident he was not in the village. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. After hearing the parties, the trial court found accused Dayal Singh guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. and that of one punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C. It further found accused Mula Devi and Rajmati guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 201 of I.P.C. Each one of the convicts is sentenced by the trial court to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of I.P.C. (in the case of Mula Devi and Rajmati read with Section 34 of I.P.C.) and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 201 of I.P.C. Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 16 -08 -1991, passed by the Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 1990, this appeal was preferred by the three convicts before the Allahabad High Court on 22 -08 -1991, where it was admitted on next day i.e. 23 -08 -1991. The appeal is received by transfer to this Court under Section 35 of the U.P. Re -organization Act, 2000, for its disposal.