TEKA @ TEK CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the following facts:-

(2.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined inter alia. PW-1 Dr. P. K. Paliwal, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body on January 29, 1991 and had found that it was a mere skeleton with no clothes and there were several cut injuries on it, which were sufficient to cause death and the death could have occurred a week before the date of post-mortem; PW-4 Giani Ram, the complainant and the son of the deceased, who stated to the version given in the F. I. R. PW-5 Puran in whose house the accused and the deceased had consumed liquor on January 22, 1991, but did not support the prosecution; PW-6 Sub Inspector Bharat Singh, who had recorded the F. I. R. and had partly investigated the case; PW-7 Om Parkash, Lambardar, a witness to the extra-judicial confession; and PW-8 Inspector Jai Parkash, the main Investigating Officer. PW Ramesh, who was a witness of having last seen the accused and the deceased together was, however, given up as having been won over by the accused.

(3.) The prosecution case was then put to the accused and his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He denied the allegations levelled against him or that he had made any extra-judicial confession before Om Parkash.