CHARANJIT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Faridkot, in Sessions Case No.16 of 2000, decided on 4.3.2004. By the impugned judgement, the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur has been convicted under Sections 363, 364-A, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. By a separate order dated 4.3.2004, the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, it was ordered that she would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. She was also ordered to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, it was ordered that she would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Additionally, she was required to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, it was ordered that she would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. Lastly, she was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, it was ordered that she would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.

(2.) The prosecution version of the incident is based on the complaint made by Makhan Singh PW3, resident of village Meenia, to ASI Paramjit Singh PW18, on 2.1.2001. A perusal of the statement of the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 would reveal, that he was married to Sarabjit Kaur in 1992. From the wedlock of Makhan Singh and Sarabjit Kaur, they had two children, first a daughter Rupinder Kaur aged about 8 years, and the second, a son Jaskaran Singh aged about 5 years. Both the children of the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 were students of Hargobind Public School, Loppo. While Rupinder Kaur, the complainant's daughter, was stated to be studying in the second class, his son Jaskaran Singh was stated to be studying in the nursery class. According to the complainant, in the morning (of the day when the complaint was made) on 2.1.2001, his son Jaskaran Singh had gone to Gurudwara Tibi Sahib to pay obeisance in connection with Gurpurab. Whereas, Makhan Singh, his wife Sarabjit Kaur and their daughter Rupinder Kaur had remained home. Later on, his daughter Rupinder Kaur had also gone with some children living in the neighbourhood, to the same Gurudwara. After paying obeisance, the complainant's daughter Rupinder Kaur is stated to have returned home at about 11.00 AM, but his son Jaskaran Singh did not return home till 11.30 AM. Resultantly, the complainant's wife Sarabjit Kaur went out to make a search for her son Jaskaran Singh. The complainant himself made a search for his son in the neighbourhood, as also, at the Gurudwara, but could not find him. According to the complainant, he also arranged to make an announcement from the speaker of the Gurudwara. Despite the aforesaid announcement, his son could not be traced. Yet again, the respectables of the village collected together to search for Jaskaran Singh, but Jaskaran Singh could not be traced anywhere. At about 5.00 PM in the evening of 2.1.2001, the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 found a letter in the small door leading to his house, wherein it was alleged that his son Jaskaran Singh had been abducted. In the letter, 12 tolas of gold was demanded as ransom for his return. Whilst making his statement, the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 also handed over the aforesaid letter of ransom to the police. On the basis of the aforesaid complain, First Information Report bearing No.2 was registered at Police Station, Badhni Kalan in Police District Moga, on 2.1.2001 at 8.00 PM. The special report thereof was received by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga on 3.1.2001 at 4.00 AM.

(3.) The complainant received another letter of ransom, wherein the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 was informed, that he should reach Amritsar on 6.1.2001 at 12.00 Noon with Rs.1,00,000/-. The aforesaid ransom letter was also delivered by the complainant Makhan Singh PW3 to the police. Since the letters of ransom were received from the side of the house of the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur, the needle of suspicion pointed towards her. On 16.4.2001, SI Gurcharan Singh PW6 joined the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur in the investigation and interrogated her, but since nothing fruitful emerged out of her interrogation, she was let off on 17.4.2001. During the course of investigation, SI Gurcharan Singh PW6 produced the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga and took her specimen handwriting. Other specimen of her handwriting were also collected. ASI Shamsher Singh who was vested with the investigation of the case for sometime, sent the specimen handwritings of the accused/appellant Charanjit Kaur to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh, so that the same could be compared with the ransom letters received by the complainant Makhan Singh PW3. The Deputy Director of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh after comparing the specimen handwritings of the accused with the ransom letters, opined that the specimen handwritings and the letters in question were in the hand of one and the same person.