RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a case of one brother killing another and where father of both, the accused-appellant and deceased is the solitary eye witness, fully supporting the prosecution version. Appellant has also not denied the occurrence but in defence projects it to be a case of grave and sudden provocation. In the very nature of things, therefore, all that needs adjudication is as to whether the father of appellant and the deceased, who, as mentioned above, is the solitary eye witness, is a wholly reliable witness and, if so, whether the appellant has been able to establish that he killed his brother on account of grave and sudden provocation. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, vide his order of conviction and sentence dated March 23, 1995, however, held the appellant guilty of intentionally causing death of his brother Ram Bhaj and, thus, ordered him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- or in default of payment of fine, to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months.

(2.) THE occurrence leading to death of Ram Bhaj took place at about 4 a.m. on April 18, 1994 inside the room of Jagdev, brother of the deceased and appellant at Gohana in the State of Haryana. Hukam Chand, father of the appellant and deceased, who appeared as PW6, in his statement, Ex.PH, which was recorded by ASI Jagpal Singh PW8 on April 18, 1994 at 3.15 p.m., stated that he was doing leather work and had taken a contract of dead animals of village Bhainswal Kalan. He had six sons, out of whom, Ram Bhaj, aged 40 years, was unmarried. One son, namely, Madan was blind. The right eye of Ram Bhaj was not in order. One younger son, namely, Jagdev, aged about 20-21 years, was still unmarried. All these three sons and he were living together whereas Chaman, Jai Bhagwan and Raj Kumar were living separately. They had separate rooms constructed in one plot. His son Raj Kumar had suspicion that Ram Bhaj was having illicit relations with his wife and in this regard Ram Bhaj had assured Raj Kumar that he was not having illicit relations with his wife Saroj. He took Saroj as his daughter. But this suspicion remained in the mind of Raj Kumar. For the last several days he had this grudge in his mind. On the intervening night of April 17-18, 1994 he and Ram Bhaj were sleeping in a room after bolting the door from inside. In the morning at 4 a.m., all of a sudden, Raj Kumar entered the room by opening the door and switched on the light. He got up and saw Raj Kumar armed with a square iron rod. Hardly he had got up from his cot that immediately Raj Kumar gave several iron rod blows lathi-wise on the head of Ram Bhaj while he was sleeping. He tried to catch hold of him and raised an alarm to the effect that Raj Kumar had killed Ram Bhaj. He asked his sons to come but he could not over-power Raj Kumar. When his other sons got up, then Raj Kumar ran away. Ram Bhaj was unconscious as he was lying asleep. When his son Chiman Lal got up, he told him this story and took Ram Bhaj to Hospital at Gohana from where he was referred to Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak. He further stated that Raj Kumar had caused injuries to Ram Bhaj mercilessly and while going, Raj Kumar threatened him that he would kill him. He apprehended that Raj Kumar might kill him, as well. Formal FIR, Ex.PH/2, based upon the statement of Hukam Chand, came to be recorded at Gohana at 5 p.m. on April 18, 1994 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The special report with regard to incident reached the concerned Magistrate at Gohana at 10.30 a.m. on April 19, 1994.

(3.) WHEN examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellant while denying the incriminating material put to him, stated that as a matter of fact when he came from outside, he found that his wife Saroj and deceased Ram Bhaj were in a compromising position. He lost his tamper and inflicted blows of rod on the person of Ram Bhaj on account of sudden and grave provocation. He led evidence in defence and examined Jai Bhagwan, his another brother as DW1. He stated that on the intervening night of April 17-18, 1994 he was present in his house. Raj Kumar had gone to Karnal on that day and he returned at about 4 a.m. on April 18, 1994. When the appellant came there, he found his other brother Ram Bhaj in his own room where his wife was sleeping. The deceased had illicit relations with her and the appellant noticed the same at that time. In heat of passion, the appellant inflicted iron rod on the head of deceased. He and his father were attracted there on hearing the alarm. He had told this thing to the police as well. In his cross-examination he denied the suggestion that the appellant had not gone to Karnal on that day and that he caused injuries to the deceased while he was sleeping with them. Saroj, wife of the appellant, was examined as DW2. She stated that on the intervening night of April 17-18, 1994 appellant had gone to Karnal and in his absence Ram Bhaj had entered her room and attempted to rape her. The appellant came all of a sudden and got enraged. He inflicted iron rods on the head of the deceased and on hearing the alarm her father-in-law Hukam Chand and brother-in-law, Jai Bhagwan, who were sleeping in an other room, also came there. In her cross-examination, she denied the suggestion that the deceased was sleeping along with Hukam Chand and Jai Bhagwan in another room and that the appellant went there and caused injuries to the deceased as he suspected his illicit relations with her.