LUXMI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against the judgment and order, dated 02.09.2013/05.09.2013, whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' for the sake convenience), who was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 120 -Bof the Indian Penal Code, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ - and in default of payment of fine, she was further ordered to undergo imprisonment for one month under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. She was also sentenced to undergo punishment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment of one month under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. She was also ordered to undergo imprisonment of two years under Section 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, in a nut -shell, is that Biru Ram Khatri (deceased) alongwith his children was residing at a place known as Rajhana in a rented accommodation owned by PW -2 Geeta Ram. On 21.01.2012, accused lodged a complaint qua missing of her husband. Thereafter, on 24.01.2012, PW -8 Rahul lodged a complaint that accused in connivance with Basant and Som Raj, juvenile in conflict with law, had committed murder of Biru Ram. On the basis of this information, FIR Ex. PW -11/G was registered. The police visited the spot and the matter was investigated. The children of the accused disclosed that deceased Biru Ram had quarreled with accused and he left the house. Biru Ram consumed liquor and again quarreled with the accused in the evening. Thereafter, the accused called Basant Kanwar and Som Raj, who were residing in a rented accommodation in the same house occupied by the accused. The accused alongwith aforesaid persons took away Biru Ram and thereafter the deceased was strangulated by pressing his neck with dupatta of the accused. The dead body was packed in a plastic sack and was buried in Kufri forest. Accused made a disclosure statement Ex. PW 1/A before PW -1 Sh. P.K. Taak, Magistrate and other witnesses and thereafter led the police party for recovery of the dead body. The dead body was taken into possession by the police and was sent for post mortem examination. Spot map was prepared. The articles were also taken into possession from the spot. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. Som Raj had also made disclosure statement Ex. PW 2/A and got recovered a spade. Post mortem report Ex. PW 10/B was obtained and the case property was sent to FSL for chemical analysis and FSL reports Ex. PW 6/A and Ex. PW 7/A were obtained. Statement of PW -13 Varinder minor son of the deceased was also recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. The matter was investigated and after completion of all the codal formalities, the challan was put up in the Court.

(3.) MR . B.M. Chauhan, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant/accused.