PANNA LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Panna Lal has been convicted under Section 328,I.P.C. and sentenced for 5 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment. He has also been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 7,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment. It is this judgment and order dated 8.9.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No, 3, Moradabad in Sessions Trial No. 612 of 2001 (State v. Panna Lal) which is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) In brief the case of the prosecution is that the appellant was the tenant in a portion of the house of one Man Singh with effect from 22.5.2001. Said Man Singh informed the police of Police Station Katghar on 30.5.2001 by moving a written report that the appellant Panna Lal is a tenant in a room of third floor of his house where he resides with his wife and children, and that the room is locked from outside and is emitting foul smell. It is on this information that the police reached the spot and on noticing that foul smell was coming from the room, they broke open the lock of the room under the tenancy of the appellant in presence of the witnesses and the owner of the house and found the dead body of Smt. Poonam (wife of the appellant) lying beneath the bed and the dead bodies of three children (all minor daughters of the appellant) lying on the floor. After completing the formalities, the police began its investigation during which one Raju Kashyap submitted a written information to the Investigation Officer stating that his maternal uncle (appellant Panna Lal) had come to him in the forenoon and told him that he (Raju Kashyap) had illicit relations with Poonam (wife of the appellant) and therefore she has been done to death day before yesterday and that yesterday all the three daughters have also been murdered, who were bom of her (Poonam) illicit relations with him (Raju Kashyap). During investigation a diary was also recovered which is said to be in the hand writing of Panna Lal which was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate by way of filing an application and the appellant Panna Lal is said to have admitted that the same was in his hand writing. In the post mortem report, since the cause of death could not be ascertained, Viscera was preserved and sent for chemical examination and the report of the chemical examiner disclosed that aluminium phosphide poison was found. After completing the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against Panna Lal. The accused thereafter appeared and charges under Sections 328 and 302,I.P.C. were framed against him. Since the accused pleaded innocence, trial was held.

(3.) The prosecution examined the informant Man Singh, who was the landlord of the appellant, as P.W.1; Murari Singh who was the neighbour of Panna Lal and tenant of Man Singh, as P.W.2; Raju Kashyap, nephew of the appellant Panna Lal, as P.W.3; Dr. Mahendra Singh, who conducted the post mortem on the dead bodies, as P.W.4 and S.I. Kishan Lal Talan, who investigated the case, as P.W.5. The case rests on circumstantial evidence. PW.1 and P.W.2 have given statement of having last seen the appellant with his wife and children. P.W. 3 Raju Kashyap, nephew of the appellant, has in his statement given the motive of the crime which is said to be that the appellant was of the opinion that his wife was having illicit relations with Raju Kashyap and also that the appellant had made extrajudicial confession before the said witness. P.W. 4 Dr. Mahendra Singh proved the post mortem reports.