STATE OF H.P. Vs. HEMA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal is filed against the judgment passed by learned Presiding Officer Fast Track Court Mandi HP in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 2007 titled State of HP Vs. Hema Devi decided on 27.3.2008.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as alleged by prosecution are that on dated 18.4.2006 at about 5.30 PM at village Shilli -Dogari accused Hema Devi strangulated deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi wife of Dila Ram with a plastic rope and committed her murder intentionally. It is further alleged by prosecution that on dated 18.4.2006 a telephonic message was received from Dila Ram Vice President that a quarrel picked up between his two wives Hima Devi @ Phithi deceased and Hema Devi accused at village Shilli -Dogari in the residential house of accused. It is further alleged by prosecution that rapat No. 21 was recorded in daily diary Ext PW12/A. It is further alleged by prosecution that after recording rapat in daily diary ASI Prem Lal along with HHC Mohan Singh and HC Ranjeet Singh proceeded to spot. It is further alleged by prosecution that after reaching at the spot at about 5.30 PM statement of PW1 Narvada Devi Ext PW1/A under Section 154 Cr PC was recorded and same was sent to police station Gohar through constable Dev Raj for registration of case. It is further alleged by prosecution that on the basis of statement recorded under Section 154 Cr PC Ext PW1/A FIR No. 50 of 2006 Ext PW13/B was registered. It is further alleged by prosecution that PW18 ASI Prem Lal took photographs of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi through photographer Sh Gian Chand. It is further alleged by prosecution that photographs took at the spot are Ext PW11/A to Ext PW11/14 and its negatives are Ext PW11/15 to Ext PW11/28. It is further alleged by prosecution that ASI Prem Lal inspected the dead body of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi and found ligature marks around the neck of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi. It is further alleged by prosecution that after taking photographs of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi ASI Prem Lal filled up form 23 -35(1)(A) and form 25 -35(1) (B) which are Ext PW18/A to Ext PW18/B. It is further alleged by prosecution that thereafter PW18 ASI Prem Lal wrote an application Ext PW10/A to Medical Officer Zonal Hospital Mandi for conducting post mortem of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi and obtained post mortem report Ext PW10/B. It is further alleged by prosecution that two pieces of rope Ext P1 and Ext P2 were took into possession vide memo Ext PW2/A which was handed over to police by PW2 Dila Ram in the presence of witnesses Narvada Devi and Uttam Singh. It is further alleged by prosecution that weapon of offence Ext P1 and Ext P2 were sent to Zonal Hospital Mandi through HC Muni Lal. It is further alleged by prosecution that site plan Ext PW18/C was prepared. It is further alleged by prosecution that disclosure statement Ext PW3/A was given by accused Hema Devi in the presence of Narvada Devi and Ajay Kumar. It is further alleged by prosecution that site plan Ext PW18/J was prepared. It is further alleged by prosecution that one piece of wood stained with blood was taken into possession from the room of accused. It is further alleged by prosecution that tatima Ext PW4/A and jamabandi Ext PW4/B of the place of incident also got prepared from Patwari Halqua. It is further alleged by prosecution that two pieces of ropes Ext P1 and Ext P2 and a packet containing blood stained wooden piece Ext P3 were deposited with MHC along with viscera of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi. It is further alleged by prosecution that on dated 19.4.2006 at about 11.45 AM statement of PW1 Narvada Devi under Section 154 Cr PC was recorded. It is further alleged by prosecution that on dated 20.4.2006 PW13 HC Inder Singh sent viscera of deceased Hima Devi @ Phithi and one parcel sealed with seal impression 'ZH' to Forensic Science Laboratory Junga through HHC Madan Singh vide road certificate No. 11/2006. It is further alleged by prosecution that after analysis of viscera and other related case property, reports of FSL Junga Ext PY and Ext. PZ were received. Accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial. Charge was framed against the accused under Section 302 IPC on dated 10.1.2007.

(3.) PROSECUTION also produced following piece of documentary evidence in support of its case: -