VIKRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common judgment shall also dispose of the connected matters being (i) Cri. Appeal No. 400-DB of 1998 (A. Surender Singh v. State of Haryana), (ii) Cri. Appeal No. 505-SB of 1998 (Yadvinder Singh v. State of Haryana), (iii) Cri. Appeal No. 520-SB of 1998 (Manjit Kaur v. State of Haryana) and (iv) Cri. Revision No. 1142 of 1998 (Phool Kishan Kundu versus Vikram Singh and others), as all these cases arise out of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed in Sessions case (No. 27 of 1996) by learned Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra on 5-6-1998. Vide the said judgment, accused-appellants Vikram Singh and Surender Singh have been held guilty of offences under Sections 449/ 34, 376(g), 302/34 and 392, IPC read with Section 397, IPC whereas accused appellants Yadvinder Singh and Manjit Kaur, brother-in-law and sister of accused Surender Singh, have been convicted under Section 411, IPC. Appellants Vikram Singh and Surender Singh have been found to have committed : (a) house trespass by entering into the dwelling house of Smt. Usha Kundu for commission of murder, (b) gang rape on the person of the deceased, (c) murder by intentionally causing death of Prof. Smt. Usha Kundu, aged 5 2 years, in the premises of the Kurukshetra University, and (d) robbery as a result of causing death with deadly weapon during commission of theft of household articles, jewelleries and other valuables in furtherance of the common intention, and, thus, they have beer. each sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for one month on the first count; ten years' RI with a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for one month on the second count; imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment, of fine, to undergo further RI for one month on the third count; and RI for seven years with a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for one month on the fourth count. However, other two appellants Yadvinder Singh and Manjit Kaur, who were only held guilty of offence under Section 411, IPC have been sentenced to RI for one and half years each.

(2.) The prosecution case is based on a statement (Ex. PQ) of Phool Kishan Kundu (PW 25) made on 20-2-1996 at 6.15p.m. to Inspector Rattan Singh (PW 32). Pursuant to the said statement, an FIR (Ex, PQ/2) was registered at 6.25 p.m. on that day initially under Section 460, IPC. A special report pursuant thereto was sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate the same day at 9.25 p.m. PW 25 narrated that he was running a stationery shop in the University market. His elder brother Dr. C.L. Kundu was the Vice Chancellor of Shimla University, and his wife, deceased Usha Kundu, was Professor in Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra University. On 16-2-1996, the deceased told him that she would be visiting her son Sanjay Kundu, an IPS Officer, on Shivratri day. A day before 20-2-1996, at about 7.00 p.m., he visited the House No. F-2; University Campus, Kurukshetra, of his deceased sister-in-law and found it locked. He gathered an impression that she would have gone out somewhere as she was supposed to return on the next day of the her visit to her son. He went around the house and returned home. On 20-2-1996, he visited the house at 1.30 p.m. being accompanied by Shiba Kishan Kaul, his first cousin (mother's sister's son) but the house was found locked. He again went around the house, however, found the chairs lying in the varandah. He thought that since chairs were lying outside, Smt. Usha Kundu would have returned home after visiting her son. They stayed for about 10-15 minutes in the varandah. Thereafter, they went to the Regional Engineering College, the place of her employment, to enquire about her where- abouts. They were told that it was a holiday. He then made a telephonic call to his brother Dr. C.L. Kundu at Shimla (husband of the deceased) to find out about the deceased. He also made a telephonic call to the residence of Shri Sanjay Kundu at Chandigarh, and then, came to know that he (Shri Sanjay Kundu-son of the deceased) had gone to Bombay with his children. He also made two-three calls to Janju but no one lifted the receiver. Thereafter, he went to his shop. At about 4.30 p.m., he came to know that one D. S. Yadav had opened the lock of the house and found that the dead body of deceased Usha Kundu was lying inside the house. The complainant, therefore, rushed to the spot, and saw that the dead body of Smt. Usha Kundu was lying in the corridor and her articles were scattered. The almirah of the bed room, which contained the valuables like ornaments, cash, important articles and papers etc., was also lying open. The keys of the almirah used to be in custody of deceased Usha Kundu. Raj Kumar, a domestic help of the deceased, had seen her last on 18-2-1996 at 7.30 p.m. As per report, some unknown culprits having forced entry into the house in the intervening night of 18/19-2-1996 murdered the deceased by causing injuries. They had committed robbery and taken away ornaments, cash and other important articles, and then they had locked the house from the outside. The statement was read over to him, which he found to be correct. As the Inspector prima facie found the commission of offence under Section 460, IPC, he recorded a ruqa as such and sent the original copy to the Police Station through HC Sat Pal for registration of an FIR. The FIR was registered by ASI Baldev Singh and copies thereof were sent to the Illaqa Magistrate, SP and DSP through Constable Anil Kumar. The I.O. Rattan Singh started the inquest at 4.30 p.m. on 20-2-1996 and in the inquest report (Ex. PA/1) noted the age of the deceased about 52 years. He also noticed the presence of rigor mortis and the following injuries on the body of the deceased.

(3.) Dr. S. N. Bansal (PW 1) has stated in his evidence that the information furnished by the police (obviously as per inquest) was that the death had resulted from the injuries caused with a sharp edged weapon. Post-mortem staining was present on the back. Rigor mortis was partly present in both the knee joints and toes but was absent in neck, upper limbs and hip joints. Both the hands were partially clinched. The clothes were blood stained at different places. He has noticed the following injuries :-