MEHAR CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have challenged the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala convicting them for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 20,000/ - for each of the appellants and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two years each. They were also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three years each and fine of Rs. 5000/ - for offence under Section 452 read with Section 34 IPC. All sentences to run concurrently. The prosecution case, in brief, is that all four accused -appellants were arraigned for offences under Sections 452 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC on the allegations that on 9.12.2004 at around 8.30 PM Dayalu deceased with his wife Kamlesh Kumari was at his home at village Bussal and were taking dinner in their kitchen. The accused were inimical to Dayalu. They entered the kitchen armed with deadly weapons, caught hold Dayalu and dragged him out to the compound of the house where Mehar Chand and Reshma caught hold of him while Sharwan Kumar assaulted Dayalu with a darat (sickle) and Ajay Kumar hit the deceased with an axe. As a result, Dayalu died on the spot from the injuries which he sustained in the attack. Kamlesh Kumari raised a hue and cry when the Pardhan of the Gram Panchayat reached the spot who immediately informed the police about the incident. The statement of PW1 Kamlesh Kumari Ext. PW1/A was recorded, on the basis of which FIR Ext. PW12/A was registered. All the four accused were arrested. Accused Sharwan Kumar is alleged to have made a disclosure statement Ext. PW3/E on the basis of which darat used in the offence was recovered. Ajay Kumar also made a disclosure statement Ext. PW3/H under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The police took into possession the clothes of all four accused as also the deceased. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses in support of its case, while one defence witness DW1 Purshotam Chand was examined by the accused. On the conclusion of the evidence, the learned trial Court convicted all the accused and sentenced them, as noticed by us supra.

(2.) THE learned trial Court relied upon the statement of PW1 Kamlesh Kumari who states that deceased was her husband. On 9.12.2004 her father -in -law and mother -in -law were not at home and had gone to attend some function and she and her deceased husband were in the kitchen. She states that Reshma and Mehar Chand accused dragged her husband from the kitchen, as a result his chappal fell in the Ukhli. Ajay was armed with an axe and Sharwan @ Sonu was armed with a darat. They attacked her husband and cut his neck. She states that there was some land dispute between the deceased and the accused. At the time when the deceased was being beaten up and attacked, the accused were abusing him. She states that when the deceased was dragged the gate broke. Mehar Chand and Reshma caught, dragged the deceased and held him during the attack. Her husband died as a result of this assault. She proved on record her statement Ext. PW1/A which was recorded by the police. She says that at 3 -4 A.M. she had made an additional statement to the police during night. She identified axe Ext. P2, darat Ext. P3 as the same weapons which were used by the appellants. She also states that two ladies from the neighbourhood had witnessed the occurrence who had come to attend some marriage function. She was cross examined by the defence. She denied that her husband was addicted to liquor and admits that no case was pending between her husband and the appellants about land. She admits that she was asked by the police to affix her signatures on a register at 3 -4 A.M. when Pardhan, Numberdar etc. were present. She also admits that she was made to sign on 3 -4 papers of the register. Out of these documents, some were written and some were blank. She states that police reached at around 11.30 P.M. when statements of Pardhan and Numberdar namely Mehar Chand and Piar Chand were recorded. She denied that she had not seen Ajay and Sonu killing her husband with axe and darat and that a false case has been registered against the accused.

(3.) SOMA Devi was given up on 19.4.2006 having been won over by the accused. PW3 Mehar Chand Pardhan of Gram Panchayat Bussal states that on 9.12.2004 at around 9.15 P.M. he was in his house. Mehar Chand, Reshma, Sharwan and Ajay Kumar came to him and Mehar Chand told that his sons Sharwan and Ajay had committed murder of their uncle Dayalu and the dead body was lying in the Courtyard. He says that this occurrence took place on account of dispute over some land. Both accused Sharwan @ Sonu and Ajay Kumar stated that they had committed the murder with Kulhari and darat. He telephoned the police at around 11 P.M. and says that the Deputy Commissioner also reached there. Inquest reports Ext. PW3/A and Ext. PW3/B were prepared which bear his signatures. He says that the deceased was lying in the Courtyard in the pool of blood. He then denies the suggestion that Mehar Chand had told him that all of them have committed the murder. He then states that Mehar Chand had stated that his two sons had committed the murder. The extract of the suggestion is: - -