SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals are maintained against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 15.06.2016/16.06.2016, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 11-ST/7 of 2015, as such, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Succinctly, the facts giving rise to the present appeals, as per the prosecution story, are that accused Sanjay Kumar, being resident of Rohtak, solemnized marriage with co-accused Reena Devi resident of Nahan, District Sirmaur and purchased some property, including two storey building at village Moginand in the name of his wife. Thereafter, both of them started residing in their purchased building. However, during the month of May-June, 2014, accused Reena Devi developed extra marital relations with Naresh alias Rinku (deceased) and eloped with him. She started living with the deceased, but after 3-4 months, their relation soured and accused Reena Devi returned to Moginand. On 21.10.2014, the deceased came to Moginand and went to the house of accused Reena. On the same day, accused Sanjay and Ankush alias Shanky also came to Moginand and on account of extra marital relations of the deceased with accused Reena, an altercation took place between accused Sanjay and Naresh. During the altercation, accused Sanjay and Ankush took the deceased to the lintel of the house and thrashed him with stick and they pushed him down from the lintel. The deceased sustained head and back bone injuries, to which he ultimately succumbed. Thereafter, accused persons with a view to destroy the incriminating evidence against them, lifted the corpse of the deceased and kept it in a room on the ground floor of the house and locked it from outside. The wooden stick used by accused Ankush while assaulting the deceased was cut into two pieces with scythe by accused Sanjay and thereafter the same was concealed underneath a bed in the house. Whereas, SIM card and wallet of the deceased were burnt by accused Sanjay on the bank of the adjacent rivulet. Accused Sanjay and Ankush left village Moginand, leaving behind accused Reena. The dead body remained inside the room for 5-6 days and when it started decomposing, accused Reena reported the matter at Police Line, Nahan. She deposed that some foul smell is coming from one of the rooms of her house, which is locked by her husband. On the basis of information given by accused Reena, a telephonic information was given to the Police Station, Kala Amb. SHO Mohar Singh, accompanied by police personnel came to the spot and found dead body of the deceased inside the room. The dead body was identified by Suresh Kumar, brother of the deceased. On the basis of the statement made by Suresh Kumar, a formal FIR, under Sec. 302, 201, read with Sec. 34 Penal Code was registered and investigation ensued. During the course of investigation, site plan was prepared and the spot was photographed. The accused persons were arrested and while in police custody, each of them made disclosure statements. Accused Reena Devi led the police to the lintel where the deceased was assaulted by co-accused persons. Whereas, accused Ankush led the police to one of the rooms and got effected recoveries of broken stick, with which he assaulted the deceased, and the scythe, with which accused Sanjay cut the stick into two pieces. Accused Sanjay, while in police custody made disclosure statement to the effect that he could identify not only the lintel where the deceased was assaulted, the place, from which, his body was thrown down, the room where his accomplice Ankush had concealed two pieces of the stick, the scythe and also the bank of rivulet where he burnt the SIM card and other belongings of the deceased. During the course of further investigation, spot map of the aforementioned places were also prepared. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as fourteen witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. The accused persons did not lead any defence in their favour.