LAWS(ALL)-2003-7-102

MAHENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE

Decided On July 22, 2003
MAHENDRA SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 16-11-1981 passed Sri Jaswant Singh the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor in ST No. 86 of 1980, State v. Mahendra and others, thereby convicting appellant Mahendra Singh under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for life. He was acquitted of the charge under Section 120-B IPC. Co-accused Bhagwat and Om Prakash alias Lala were also acquitted of the said charge.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution story was that on 13-8-1977 sometime in the afternoon the appellant went to the house of Smt. Dhanno wife of Thani, resident of village Pundari Kalan, Police Station Nangal, District Bijnor. The appellant told Smt. Dhanno that since he had won a case, he is distributing 'prasad'. Smt. Dhanno asked him to keep the 'prasad' in the kitchen since she then was busy in some work. He left the said prasad in her kitchen. It was alleged that the 'prasad' was smeared with some poisonous substance probably by co-accused Om Prakash @ Lala and Bhagwat with the intention of causing the death of Smt. Dhanno and her husband. The motive behind the mixing of poison in the so called 'prasad' was that Smt. Dhanno and her husband were issueless and on their death their property, 50 bighas of land, would have devolved upon co-accused Bhagwat and his brothers Preetam and Vikram. After the appellant left the house of Smt. Dhanno, Smt. Somwati wife of Preetam Singh came to the house of Smt. Dhanoo and asked her to give something to eat to her children. She was accompanied at that time by her children namely Khajan Singh aged 7 years, Bitto aged 3 years and Km. Chanchal aged two years. Smt. Dhanno asked the children to eat 'prasad' which was kept in the kitchen by the appellant. The children of Smt. Somwati took the 'prasad' and came to their house with the mother. The prasad was consumed by them. Soon thereafter, they started vomiting. Though a local Vaidya of the village gave some medicine to these children but their condition continued to deteriorate. In the night intervening 13/14-8-1977 at about 1. 00 a. m. Km. Chanchal died and in the morning her funeral took place. The remaining two children were brought by their father Preetam Singh to the District Hospital, Bijnor where it was informed by the Doctor that these children had consumed some poison. The same day Bitto also died in the hospital while Khajan Singh recovered. He told his father, in the presence of some witnesses, that one Shambhu Singh, resident of the same village had given them 'prasad' to eat. On this information Preetam Singh lodged a report at Police Station Kotwali City, Bijnor on 14-8-1977 at 3. 30 p. m. On the basis this report a case under Section 302/328 IPC was registered against accused Shambhu Singh. The papers of this case were sent to Thana Nangal. A case was registered at P. S. Nangal on the basis of these papers. The case was investigated and it was found that Shambhu Singh was falsely implecated. The police submitted a final report. During the investigation the names of all the aforesaid three accused came to light according to police and the accused were arrested. S. I. Harish Chandra interrogated Smt. Dhanno on 15-8-1977 and also recorded the statements of other witnesses. Statement of Smt. Dhanno was also recorded by the Munsif Magistrate, Bijnor under Section 164 Cr. P. C. in which she narrated the prosecution case dealt with above. When the appellant was interrogated by the Investigating Officer he admitted his guilt and volunteered for the recovery of the remaining poison which he had concealed in the chhaper of the house of co-accused Lala. He led the investigator to the house of Lala and took out a 'pudia' from the Chhapper of the said co-accused in the presence of witnesses Chandra Pal and Balbir. The police prepared the recovery memo and sealed the recovered powder.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by this judgment the convicted accused Mahendra Singh has preferred this appeal. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA we have been taken through the evidence on record.