CHHINDER PAL KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who is daughter of deceased Hardev Kaur and sister of deceased Jaspal Singh, Darshan Singh and Hardeep Singh and, thus, a "victim" as defined under Section 2 (wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has preferred the present appeal for challenging the judgment dated 3.2.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby respondents No.2 to 4 were acquitted of the charges under Sections 302/120 -B IPC.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on the intervening night of 30.9.2010 and 1.10.2010, Jaspal Singh, Darshan Singh, Hardeep Singh and their mother Hardev Kaur were done to death when they were sleeping in the courtyard of their house. There were bluish marks on the neck of all the four deceased and it appeared that either some poison had been administered to them or they were strangulated. The cause of death was later on found to be asphyxia as a result of throttling. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on going through the impugned judgment of acquittal, this Court finds that in order to establish the guilt of respondents No.2 to 4, the prosecution relied upon the testimonies of Malkiat Singh, Harbans Singh and Gian Singh. PW2 Malkiat Singh testified that Jaspal Singh, Hardeep Singh, Darshan Singh and Hardev Kaur were murdered and their dead bodies subjected to post -mortem.

(3.) HOWEVER , when the dead bodies were transported from the mortuary to the village, he did not notice any ink mark on the fingers and thumbs of the dead bodies. He also did not suspect the involvement of respondents No.2 to 4 in the commission of the murder. PW3 Harbans Singh testified that on 30.9.2010, the four deceased went to sleep in the courtyard of their house. On the next morning, he learnt about the murders. PW4 Gian Singh, who was to depose regarding the extra judicial confession said to have been made by respondentUggar Singh regarding his involvement and that of his father Surjit Singh and the maternal uncle of Amarjit Singh in committing the murder of four persons, deposed that Uggar Singh never disclosed any such fact. Apart from them, the prosecution also examined PW1 Sunil Kumar to prove that he had sold blank papers and ink pad to Randhir Singh and Balwinder Singh -accused but in his testimony before the trial Court, he stated that the aforesaid accused never purchased any article of stationery including paper and ink pad from him. It is clear from the above that none of the aforementioned four witnesses of the prosecution supported its case. They were got declared hostile and cross -examined by the Public Prosecutor. Despite the same, the prosecution could not elicit anything which could show that these witnesses had deposed falsely. Apart from the aforementioned evidence, the prosecution had relied upon the testimonies of Jagtar Singh and Veerpal Kaur.