DEVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra (as Additional Sessions Judge for Simla Sessions Division) in Sessions Case No. 21 of 1986 under sections 302/201/ 404 of the Indian Penal Code initiated vide F.I.R. No. 4 of 1986. By this judgment, the trial Court convicted the appellant under section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of the payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. No separate punishment has been awarded under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code being part of the principal offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has, however, been acquitted of the charge under section 404 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has a grievance against his conviction and sentence and, therefore, he assails the same by this appeal

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that the deceased Shri Satya Bhan was employed as a "Khalsi" with Shri Kulbhushan (PW 1), Inspector of Works, Northern Railway, Simla. Accused -appellant Devinder Singh had also worked as a casual labourer in this department for sometime in the year 1979 -80. The appellant knew the deceased very well and they were on visiting terms. The marriage of the younger brother of Satya Bhan was fixed somewhere in the month of May, 1986. The deceased got a sum of Rs. 800 or so towards his salary on 19 -4 -1986. In addition to this, the deceased received an amount of Rs. 2,200 on 22 -4 -1986 from a Society formed by the railway employees at Simla. On 24 -4 -1986, the deceased left his duty at the Railway Station, Simla, after taking permission from the Inspector Shri Kulbhushan at about 4 or 4.30 p.m. The appellant was also present at the Railway Station, Simla, when the deceased had obtained this permission for leaving the duty. Thereafter, both the deceased and the appellant were noticed at the Railway Station Simla, by Shri Dut Ram (PW 17) who was employed as a Mate in the same office. The deceased had taken leave for 25 -4 -1986 and he was to have his compensatory rest and proper weekly rest on 26 -4 -1986. The deceased was to resume his duty at Simla on 28 -4 -1986.

(3.) The further version of the prosecution is that on 24 -4 -1986, the deceased left with the appellant to village Gawas -village of the appellant. It is also the case of the prosecution that the deceased wanted to purchase some gold in connection with the marriage of his younger brother and the appellant had taken him to his village with the purpose of purchasing gold. The deceased was seen in the company of Devinder Singh in Rohru Bazar on 25 -4 -1986 by Jawahar Singh (PW 3) and Parkash Chand (PW 4). He was also noticed on 26 -4 -1986 in the company of the appellant at his house in village Gawas by PWs Jawahar Singh, Parkash Chand, Par tap Singh (PW 11), Surjan Singh (PW 12) and Sukhchain Singh (PW 18). The further case of the prosecution is that the appellant had informed all these witnesses that the deceased was his friend from Delhi and had come to see the hills. The appellant and the deceased also visited the house of Shrimati Surju Devi at about the same time with a view to purchase gold but no gold was available with Shrimati Surju Devi.