MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 8.6.2004 and order dated 10.6.2004, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gurgaon, in Sessions case No. 89 of 2002/2003. Appellant Mohinder Singh @ Bittoo was charged with and tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. He was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that Parkash Chand, complainant, has lodged a complaint that he was employed as a Mali in the office of S.C.E.R.T., Gurgaon. He reported that about 1½ years ago his daughter Laxmi was married with Mohinder accused. On 24.12.2001 his daughter came to his house on the death of her grand-father. The complainant wanted that Laxmi should stay till tehravi, however, accused Mohinder was angry as he did not want that Laxmi should stay for thirteen days at her parental house. Mohinder accused used to visit the house of the complainant after every 1-2 days and used to put pressure to take her back with him. On 22.1.2002, after tehravi rasam, the complainant's son Naveen had taken Laxmi to her matrimonial home but Mohinder accused in the presence of Naveen threatened Laxmi and stated as to why she had come now. Naveen narrated this incident to his father. Thereafter, on 24.1.2002 at about 11.30/12.00 noon, the complainant and his nephew Mithun went to the matrimonial home of Laxmi to know about her welfare. She told them that accused used to maltreat her. She was harassed. The complainant tried to convince Mohinder. He became angry. He brought a sword and gave blows on the neck and hands of Laxmi. She fell down on the ground after sustaining injuries on her neck and other parts of the body. Her body was drenched in the pool of blood. The complainant raised alarm. The matter was reported to the police. SI Ram Dutt visited the spot. Photographer took the photographs. The dead-body was sent for post-mortem examination. The accused was interrogated. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completion of all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of the case. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of the prosecution. The accused also examined witnesses in his defence. He was convicted and sentenced, as noticed above. Hence, the present appeal.