SATBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Criminal Appeal No. 139-DB of 1997 appellant Satbir calls in question the orders passed by Mr. P. L. Goyal, Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat dated 29-11-1996 and 2-12-1996 convicting him under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- or in default thereof to further undergo R.I. for a period of one year.

(2.) The prosecution version was unfolded by Ramkesh PW-4. He reported the matter with regard to Brahme missing from his house since 2-1-1995. He made a statement before Man Singh SI/S.H.O. P.W. 9 at Police Station, Rai on 21-1-1995 at 10-50 a.m. He stated that he was residing in village Manauli Tonki and was doing labour work. They were six brothers. Birbal was the eldest and Brahme aged 45 years was younger to him and he also did labour work. Satbir son of Sameran, Jat by caste, resident of Puthi district Meerut had been residing with his family in his village for the last four months and was also doing labour work. On 2-1-1995 at about 10 a.m., his brother Brahme had accompanied Satbir to U.P. for purchase of buffalo. His brother had accompanied Satbir after taking Rs. 12,000/- from his house. On 3-1-1995 Satbir came back to their village but his elder brother Brahme was not with him. When he enquired about his brother, then Satbir told him that he had gone to purchase a buffalo and would come back by morning. On 3-1-1995 at night Satbir had disappeared along with his family members from the village. They had made a search of their brother Brahme till date and enquired from all the relatives but all in vain. He stated that he had a suspicion that Satbir being in league with some other persons had killed his brother or had hidden him out of greed for Rs. 12,000/-.

(3.) Before we might proceed any further with this matter, it required to be mentioned that appellant-Satbir was tried with co-accused Virender Singh who has since been given the benefit of doubt and acquitted of the murder charge framed against him.