GOBIND SINGH AND ANR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 8.6.2002 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge(Adhoc), Amritsar, whereby in case FIR No. 40 dated 26.2.1999 Under Section 302/34 and 460/34 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar, the accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 and 460/34 IPC, for having committed the murder of Padma, wife of complainant Satpal Singh. Under Section 302/34 IPC, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of six months while under Section 460/34 IPC, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Both the sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that on the intervening night of 25/26.2.1999, complainant Satpal Singh along with his wife Padma were at their house while their son had gone to Pakistan in connection with business purposes. Since complainant's wife Padma used to sleep late after prayer in the night in a separate room. At about 11 PM, he heard cries of his wife and when he wake up, he found the electric light of all the rooms and kitchen were on. In the kitchen, he saw accused Gobind Singh, who at one point of time had worked with him as a domestic servant, and accused More Singh who used to come to his house with said Gobind Singh. At that time, accused Mor Singh had pressed with his hand the mouth of Padma while accused Gobind Singh was strangulating her with the shawl put around her neck. He also saw in the hands of Gobind Singh a bag of green colour in which he had placed about Rs. 3/2 3/4 lacs, which he could not deposit in the bank on 25.2.1999 on account of strike. Both the accused then ran away with the bag and Satpal Singh tried to chase and catch hold of them but in vain. He further found that the accused had taken away a diamond ring of Padma. Thereafter, Satpal Singh informed on telephone about this incident to his relations upon which they also reached his house. Police was also informed on telephone by him pursuant to which SHO Baldev Singh reached his house where he recorded his statement Exhibit PA, which vide endorsement Exhibit PA/1 was sent to the police station where FIR, Exhibit PA/2 came to be registered. An inquest report on the dead body of Padma was prepared vide Exhibit PE. SI Pritpal Singh, a finger print expert, was called at the place of occurrence who developed finger prints from the bottle and glass which were found lying at the place of occurrence. The said bottle and glass were sealed in different parcels with the seal 'BS' vide seizure memo. Exhibit PK, besides taking into possession other articles vide separate recovery memos. A rough site plan vide Exhibit PR of the place of occurrence was also prepared. Post-mortem examination on the dead-body was conducted. During this period, upon receipt of a wireless message, the police along with complainant Satpal Singh reached Kashmir Avenue where both the accused-appellants had been taken into custody by ASI Harbhajan Singh and upon being identified by Satpal Singh, the search of accused Gobind Singh was carried out and a bag containing Rs. 2,83,145/- was recovered from his possession which Satpal Singh identified and thereafter it was seized vide memo. Exhibit PB. Then upon search of accused More Singh, one gold ring fitted with diamonds was recovered from right pocket of his pant which was also seixed vide memo. PC. On application, Exhibit PJ, finger prints of both the accused-appellants were taken in the presence of Executive Magistrate and after being sealed, were sent to Finger Print Bureau, Phillaur, and the finger prints developed from over the glass were found to be that of accused Gobind Singh.

(3.) Upon completion of investigation of the case, accused-appellant was challaned. After being produced in Court, they were charge-sheeted under Section 460 and 302/34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.