SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS are aggrieved by the judgment of Sessions Court, whereby they have been. convicted of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months each and out of total amount of fine, if realized, an amount of Rs. 15,000/- has been ordered to be paid by way of compensation to the widow of the deceased.

(2.) WE may first notice the prosecution version. Deceased Prakash Chand was employed as a Pharmacist in Veterinary Hospital Durag Kalan in Palampur Tehsil. He was resident of Tikka Hanglow, Tehsil palampur. He used to commute dally between his native place and the place of work. He would go on foot up to a place called nagri and from there, board a bus for his place of work. Similarly, on way back home in the evening, he would travel up to Nagri by bus and from there walk back to his house. As usual, he left his house for the dispensary on 31st July, 2000. He did not return home in the evening. His wife shakuntla Devi (PW5) thought that he might have stayed back in connection with some urgent official work. Next morning, i. e. on 1-8-2000. her husband's brother Nek Raj went to her house and informed her that her husband's dead body was lying at a place called "jhamordian Di Bowri". About two years prior to the occurrence, appellants suraj Kumar and Surinder Kumar alias goka, both brothers, had an altercation with the father of the deceased and the deceased had advised his father to lodge a report with the Police. The aforesaid two appellants threatened the deceased that in case report was lodged, relations would further worsen and they also threatened that his dead body would be found between Nagri and Paror. Parma Ram, father of appellant Santosh kumar, also had a grouse against the deceased because he had the feeling that the deceased was responsible for throwing of debris by a bull-dozer into his land at the time of construction of a link road. One of the appellants had the suspicion that a case against him for felling a chil tree had been got registered by the deceased. All the four appellants allegedly hatched a conspiracy to kill the deceased. Such conspiracy was hatched on 31-7-2000 itself and that very day, the plan was executed. In fact, the appellants wanted Baldev Kumar PW28 (the approver) also to become a party to the killing of the deceased. Initially he agreed but then backed out and agreed to only stand as a guard when the crime was being perpetrated by the appellants.

(3.) POLICE arrested the appellants, Baldev kumar (PW28) and one Mohinder Singh, after the case was registered on the basis of report lodged by Shakuntla Devi (PW5 ). During the course of investigation, no incriminating evidence was found against the said Mohinder Singh and, therefore, he was not challaned as an accused.