STATE OF BIHAR Vs. SURESH CHANDRA BAHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Death Reference under Sec. 366 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and the three appeals have been heard together as they arise out of a common judgment and are being disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) The Death Reference No. 1 of 1990 (R), relates to the sentence of death imposed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi upon the appellants Suresh Chandra Bahri, Gurubachan Singh and Rajpal Sharma under Sections 302,302/120B of the Code, who have also been convicted under Sec. 201 of the Code and sentenced to undergo rigirous imprisonment for three years each. Along with these appellants three others namely, Mrs. Santosh Bahri, Jogendradeo Arya and Md. Sohail have also been tried, but they have been acquitted of the charges by the trial Court. Prosecution Case 3. One Naresh Chandra Bahri died in the year 1967 leaving behind his widow Mrs. Santosh Bahri (since acquitted) and a son appellant Suresh Chandra Bahri. Urshia Bahri, allegedly murdered, was married to Suresh Bahri some time in the year 1971. Out of the wedlock, one daughter and one son named Richa and Sourabh, who are also said to have been Murdered, were born. During the year 1983 these two issues were aged 12 and 10 years respectively and they were reading at Delhi in lather Agenel School, South Extension. Sourabh was a student of Class IV, whereas, Richa was reading in Class VI, Jogendradeo Arya (since acquitted) is brother of Mrs. Santosh Bahri. 4. The parents of Urshia have settled down at Atlante, in United States of America. Informant Binit Singh Sarang (P.W. 6) is full brother of Urshia and he was employed as an Engineer in Libia, a foreign country. Urshia used to write letters to her parents from time to time, but when some time in the year 1983 they did not receive any letter from her and there was a long communication gap they suspected some thing wrong. Meanwhile, when Suresh sent two letters (Exhibits 26/6 and 23/7) to them intimating that henceforth his wife Urshia would not be writing any letter to them, as she was engaged in urgent works and in her place he (Suresh) would be writing letters to them, their suspicion further aggravated and accordingly, they asked their son Binit Singh Sarang (P.W. 69). who was then living in Libia to proceed to India to find out the whereabouts of Urshia. 5. On 16th of Jan., 1984 the informant (P.W. 69) came to India and visited the house of his brother-in-law Suresh at Delhi, but to his utter surprise, his house was found to be locked. On, enquiry, some of the tenants who were living in that house informed that Mrs. Santosh mother of Suresh, would be reaching Delhi by 21st of January. Binit, thereafter, visited the business premises of his brother-in-law Suresh at Nehru Palace, New Delhi and there he met one Dhar, an employee of his (Suresh), who informed him that his master (Suresh) was at Ranchi. Meanwhile, Mrs. Santosh, mother of Suresh returned to Delhi and when P.W. 69 met her at her residence to enquire about his sister and her children, he was informed by her that they had gone to Ranchi. 6. On 25-1-1984 P.W. 69 came down to Ranchi, met appellant Gurubachan Singh, owner of Singh Furniture Works, Main Road. Ranchi as his (Gurubachan's) Ranchi telephone number was found recorded in the Delhi business place of Suresh, being bis contact address of Ranchi and he enquired from him about the whereabouts of his sister and others, upon which, at the first instance, Gurubachan Singh showed his ignorance about them (Urshia and Suresh), but subsequently, went to the firm house of Suresh at Dulli with the informant. At that place also, neither the sister of the informant, nor her children, nor brother-in-law Suresh could he traced. The caretaker of the firm house named Gopi Mistri (P.W. 29) informed him (P.W. 69) that he had not seen Urshia for the last five to six months and further disclosed that Suresh had came to Dulli firm along with one unknown person and his two children on 16th Dec., 1983 and during that period Gurubachan had also visited the firm. 7. On getting this information, the informant again went to the house of Suresh at Station Road, Ranchi but there also he did not find his brother-in-law, sister and their two children. At that place, he met one Murari (P.W. 1) who used to keep the keys of the house of Suresh, who told him that he had seen his sister (Urshia) at Ranchi, in the house of Suresh on Oct. 11, 1983 and in the morning of 12th Oct., Suresh had informed him (P.W. 1) that Urshia had left Ranchi for Delhi by the morning flight, but Suresh remained at Ranchi till the end of October. P.W. 1 further told him (informant) that thereafter he had not seen Urshia and her two children at Ranchi. 8. The prosecution case further is, that the informant, in course of enquiry, met one B.N. Mishra (P.W. 2) and further learnt that Urshia was known to Mishra as he had negotiated with her for purchase of her Ranchi house on behalf of a buyer, as she was very actively involved in negotiating with regard to sale of house No. 936, situated at Station Road and the buyer was to her satisfaction. P.W. 2 further informed him that the sale would have been completed, but for the sudden disappearance of Urshia, it could not be done and also told him (informant) that on 11th of Oct., 1983, in his absence, Urshia had tried to contact him and on getting this information, when he went to meet her at her Station Road residence, he found Suresh alone sitting in the varendah and no electric light was burning in the house although electric light was burning in the other neighbouring houses and that when he entered into the varendah of Suresh, the latter caught hold of his wrist and forced him to go out and when P.W. 2 expressed his willingness to meet Urshia, Suresh told him that she had gone to the house of Gurubachan Singh to attend a party and thereafter, would be proceeding to Delhi by the next morning flight. 9. In course of an enquiry, by the informant about his sister and her children, Murari Sharma (P.W. 1) also informed him that there was a rumour that his sister Urshia had been murdered and on getting this information on 25-1-1984, the informant lodged an information with Chutia police with regard to his missing sister and her two children. On 26th of Jan., 1984, the informant left for Delhi by air and immediately after reaching there, he rushed to the house of Suresh at C. 70 South Extension II, met his mother and enquired from her about her sister and her children, but she showed her complete ignorance about them. 10. The prosecution case also is, that on a further enquiry from different courses, the informant came to know that Suresh had left for Ranchi on Sept. 30, 1983 along with his sister Urshia and thereafter, she was not seen at Delhi. It further transpired that Suresh along with his mother Mrs. Santosh and two children Richa and Sourabh left Delhi by an Ambassador Car No. DLF 3179 in Dec. 1983 under mysterious circumstances and thereafter, he was again seen in Delhi sometime in the month of Jan., 1984. When he enquired about Urshia from his brother-in-law, the latter told him that she was at Ranchi and that as soon as Suresh learnt about arrival of the informant he went in hiding. 11. Prosecution case also is, that the informant in course of his further enquiry again visited the house of Suresh along with some of his relations and met Mrs. Santosh who told him that Suresh might have done something to his wife, but for that he would alone be responsible. Thereafter, the informant (P.W. 69) submitted another written report on 28-1-1981 with Defence Colony Police Station which was registered as the said P.S. ease No. 78 of 1984 (Ext. 13/2). On 31-1-1984 the informant accompanied by several police officials came to Ranchi, where he also learnt from Murari (P.W. 1) that Urshia had been murdered in the evening of 11th of Oct., 1983 by Suresh, Gurubachan and two others of whom one was a tall and lean person, in one of the rooms of house No. 936, belonging to Suresh and the dead body of Urshia was concealed in a septic tank of the house from where in the month of Jan., 1984 both Suresh and Gurubachan took out the dead body, carried the same on a truck No. B.H.N. 5879 and threw it in Madhukam Dam, wrapped by a blanket and tied with a rope. The informant again submitted a report to that effect at Chutia P.S. on 1-2-1984. 12. With regard to the murder of two children namely, Richa and Saurabh, who were studying in Father Agenel School, it is stated that on 5-12-1983 Suresh had filed two applications (Exts. 40 and 40/1) before the Principal of the school for withdrawing both the children till Feb. next and after withdrawing them, on 8-12-1983 he (Suresh) along with his two children, mother Mrs. Santosh, appellant Rajpal and a maid servant left Delhi for Ranchi by an Ambassador Car, bearing registration No. DUE 3179 but dropped his mother and the maid servant at Basti and then proceeded ahead. On the way, they stayed in hotels at Varanasi and Daltonganj on different dates and ultimately, arrived at Dulli firm on 16-12-1983 in the afternoon, where they stayed for two days. During that period Gurubachaij also visited them who had also earlier visited the place about a fortnight before arrival of Suresh and Rajpal along with the two children to make arrangements of some cots etc. for them and that in the night between 17/18 of Dec., 1983, Suresh and Rajpal had also committed the murder of Richa and Sourabh and left for Varanasi with their dead bodies in the early morning of 18th in the said Ambassador Car and on way to their return journey, threw the bodies to removed the evidence of this murder. 13. On 20-12-1983 at 8-30 A.M. dead body of a naked male child aged 12. 13 years, packed in a gunny bag, was found floating near the bank of river Varuna, close to a bridge known as Purana Pul of village Puratepur near Varanasi. The dead body was noticed by one Hiralal (P.W. 36) and accordingly, he submitted a written report to that effect to the Officer Incharge (P.W. 46) of Sarnath P.S. (Ext. 11) whereupon, case No. 109 of 1983 was registered. 14. P.W. 46 visited that place on the same day and found injuries on the neck of the dead child and accordingly, prepared an inquest report and seized the gunny bag (Ext. 5/8). In course of investigation, he received another information that one Gadda, one quilt (Rajai) and one bed-sheet were lying at the place of dumping of refuses on the Panchkoshi-Varanasi Road and accordingly, visited that place also and seized the same (Ext. 5/19). While he was drawing up a recovery memo with regard to the said articles, he further learnt from a passerby that in a field, south of Ashapur road crossing, near a nursery of Forest Department, two chadars were lying. On getting this information, P.W. 46 went there and seized the same (Ext. 5/10). P.W. 46 got a few snaps of that dead body by a photographer ((P.W. 48) and published the same in Newspapers to collect information about the identity of the dead child, but when nothing could be traced in that regard, the case was closed. According to the prosecution, in course of further investigation by the C.B.I., after that agency took over the case the identity of the dead child was established, to be of Saurabh. 15. The motive behind the occurrence as assigned by the prosecution is, that after Urshia's marriage with Suresh her mother-in-law Mrs. Santosh started harassing her in various ways, but her husband Suresh never bothered to help his wife from being tortured. The harassment meted out to her was informed by her to her relations, parents including his brother i.e. the informant either orally or through letters. It is further alleged that Suresh was addicted to excessive drinking, smoking and had fallen in bad company and at the same time, his maternal uncle Y.D. Arya (since acquitted) had been interfering in the family matters and business and on account of all these, there was virtually no income from the business; so much so, Suresh had to lose all his properties and business assets at Calcutta. Urshia never liked this constant interference of Y.D. Arya in the family affairs and at her instance, Arya had to vacate that part of her Delhi house, where Arya was living. It is also stated that Suresh at one stage had involved his wife Urshia in his business and financial matters, which was not liked by bis mother Mrs. Santosh and thereafter, there was a breach in the relationship between the husband and wife. It is further stated that, Mrs. Santosh mother-in-law of Urshia had no love and, affection for Urshia, her grand daughter and son i.e. Richa and Saurabh and that, she had never kept those children with her. Urshia ultimately, for the betterment of life of her two children, wanted to dispose of their Ranchi house property and retain the sale proceeds with her to settle at America which was also not liked by her husband, mother-in-law, Y.D. Arya and others and, ultimately, they entered into a conspiracy to do away her life (Urshia) and her two children and pursuant to that, they systematically committed the murders of Urshia and her two children .on two different dates at Ranchi and Dulli firm house of Suresh with the help of Rajpal, Gurubachan and others. 16. Chutia police on the basis of the written report of the informant (PW. 69) dated 1-2-84, registered a case, bearing lower Bazar (Chutia) P.S. case No. 77 of 1984 against appellant Suresh, Gurubachan, and Md. Sohail, the driver of a truck by which the dead body of Urshia was carried, under Sections 364/302/201 etc. of the Code. The Officer-in-charge of Chutia police station. Rajeshwar Singh (P.W. 59), took up investigation and ultimately submitted a charge-sheet against them with regard to the murder of Urshia showing Suresh as an absconder. But even after sub-mission of charge sheet, further investigation was continuing, in course of which Mrs. Santosh was arrested. While further investigation was going on, Central Bureau of Investigation in pursuance of a notification issued by Govt, of India, dated 38th June. 1984 (Ext. 39) in exercise of power under Sec. 5(3) read with Sec. 6/of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act with the consent of the State Government extended the jurisdiction of Delhi Police with regard to that case for whole of State of Bihar for investigation and in pursuance of that., the case was withdrawn from Chutia Police, a formal F.I.R. was drawn up (Ext. 13/7) and registered as R.C.-2 (84). In course of investigation of C.B.I. Suresh Bahri was arrested on 31st July, 1984 at Delhi and from his alleged statements as well as from other materials collected during the investigation, it was found that Suresh along with his wife had come to Ranchi on 1st Oct., 1983 with an intention to sell house No, 936 of Ranchi. Appellant Rajpal Sharma was earlier sent to Ranchi in the month of Sept., 1983 and one Laxmi Narayan (P.W. 21) had agreed to purchase the aforesaid house with the help of a broker P.W. 2 Badri Narayan Mishra, but before the execution of the sale document, Urshia was murdered on 11th Oct., 1983 in the evening in the house No. 936, her head was separated from the body and one of the conspirators, Gurubachan, a co-accused Ramsagar, now approver (P.W. 3) with the help of appellant Rajpal wrapped the dead body with a blanket, tied the same by means of a rope and in order to conceal it, dumped in the septic tank of the house. Subsequently, on 13-10-1983 the head of Urshia was thrown in a forest on Ranchi-Patratu Road. 17. In Jan., 1984 it is alleged, appellant Gurubachan took out the headless dead body from the septic tank, removed it by a truck No. B.H.N. 5879, by a driver, one Md. Sohail (since acquitted) and threw the same at Madhukam dump ground, known as Khad Gadha. Rajpal Sharma was arrested on 8-8-1984 and on the basis of the disclosures made by him that he had thrown the head in a bush at Ranchi, Patratu Road, disclosure memo No. 32 was prepared, Rajpal pointed out the place where the head was thrown and from there a skull, polythene bag and some hairs were recovered on 12-8-1984. On the basis of the disclosure made by Rajpal that he had thrown the dead body of Urshia in Madhukam Dump, the Officer-in-charge of Chutia P.S. on being pointed out where the trunk portion of her dead body was concealed, got that place dug, but no dead body was found, but pieces of sari and rope were found and he seized the same under seizure list (Ext. 5/12) which was subsequently put on Test Identification parade on 6-3-1984 and identified by Murari and Badri Narayan Mishra (P.Ws. 1 and 2) respectively to be of Urshia. 18. Approver Ram Sagar Sharma was arrested on 3-12-1984 and was under police remand from 4-12-1984 to 17-12-1984. On 17.12.84, he filed a petition for recording his confessional statement (Ext. 3) and his confessional statement was recorded under the provisions of Sec. 164 Crimial P.C. by a Magistrate Mr. Bhuneshwar Nath (P.W. 6) on 191-12-84 and 20-12-S4. On 7-1-85 the Investigating Officer of C.B.I. filed an application that said Ram Sagar may be granted pardon and his statement be recorded under Sec. 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A similar petition (Ext. 1) for grant of pardon was filed by Ram Sagar Sharma (P.W. 3) on 8-1-85 on the ground that he wanted to become a prosecution witness in order to disclose the truth. On 9-1-1985. pardon was granted and his (Ram Sagar's) statement was recorded under Sec. 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on 30-1-85 and 31-1-85. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on 8-2-1985 against six persons including the three appellants of whom, three were acquitted of the charges by the trial Court as aforesaid. In due course, the trial was taken up with the result, as indicated. 19. At the trial, the appellants denied having committed any offence. The defence, in short, as it appears from the evidence on record and their statements recorded under Sec. 313, Crimial P.C. is that Urshia Bahri and her two children have gone away to United States of America and they are still alive. In other words, according to defence, the prosecution has failed to prove the factum of death of Urshia and her two children. It is further stated that the prosecution has neither proved that Urshia and her two children were murdered, nor is there any evidence to indicate that the appellants or any of them are/is in any way connected with the alleged murder of those persons. 20. The alternative defence is, that even if the prosecution evidence is accepted, the same may at best lead to a suspicion against the appellants which in any event, can not be a proof of their quilt with which they have been charged against and on that basis, the appellants or any of them could not have been held guilty. The identification of the appellants Suresh and Rajpal in Court by some of the witnesses has also been disputed. In short, the defence plea is that merely on suspicion the C.B.I. officials in order to harass and humiliate the appellants manipulated false and fabricated evidence. 21. In all 87 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution to establish that Urshia and her two children Richa and Saurabh were murdered on two different dates, i.e. in the evening of 11th of Oct. and in the night of 17th/19th Dec., 1983 at Ranchi and Dulli Firm of Suresh Bahri respectively, in a conspiracy with other two appellants, Rajpal Sharma, Gurubachan Singh and some others and thereafter, Suresh and Rajpal had absconded for a considerable time for the purpose of (a) shielding their guilt, (b) removing evidence of murder, (c) keeping a watch of police action/investigation respecting the crimes committed and (d) creating papers that the said, two children were missing from Kathmandu in Nepal where Suresh had gone with them for a trip. 21-A. A brief synopsis of witnesses examined is given hereunder. The important aspects of the relevant witnesses having direct bearing both in the facts and circumstances of the case shall be discussed at the appropriate stage(s). P.W. 1 Murari Lal Sharma, having his house and Kirana shop, adjecent to the house of Suresh at Station Road Ranchi is on the point of motive and a purchaser of a piece of land of Ranchi house. He claimed to have gone to see Urshia on 11-10-83 where he noticed the appellants only, of whom, one (Rajpal) was having a blood stained Chhura and further stated on the point of demolition of septic tank of the house in question. P.W. 2 Badri Narayan Mishra stated that Suresh and Urshia wanted to dispose of their Ranchi house and he had acted as a broker and it was finally settled to be sold to Laxmi Narain (P.W. 21) P.W. 3 Ram Sagar Bishwakarma, an employee of Gurubachan is the approver. P.W. 4 Rameshwar Thakur also is an employee of Gurubachan, and according to him, Suresh used to visit his Master's shop and his Master had once asked him to sharpen a Chhura. After doing so, he made it over to Gurubachan but as it was not of his liking, his Master gave it to P.W 3 for the same purpose and further stated that 7 to 8 days after the alleged murder of Urshia, P.W. 3 reported that the wife of Suresh had been murdered and also identified Raj Pal in Court. According to him, on the order of Gurubachan P.W. 3 had prepared a wooden box. P.W. 5 Pyare Lal, a Tantrik stated that Suresh Chandra Bahri had approached him to perform some sort of Puja for killing his wife, for which a sum of Rs. 250.00 was paid to him. P.W. 6 Dinanath, a resident of Delhi stated on the point of motive and further stated that in the morning of 8-12-83 Suresh, his two children, Raj Pal, Mrs. Santosh and a maidservant had left for Ranchi with luggages consisting guilt, Chadar etc. by an Ambassador car No. DLE 3179 P.W. 7 Shambhu Nath Tiwary, owner of a tea stall, in front of Chutia police station, stated that Rajpal had taken tea from his shop for 10 to 12 days and when he asked for its price, he gave out that he is a man of Suresh and he will clear the bill. P.W. 8 Roshan Lal, Manager, Panchsheel Service Station, Andruzganj, New Delhi is on the point that Suresh had brought his car No. DLE 3179 on 21-12-83 for quick servicing and it was done. P.W. 9 Kulwant Singh, Betal shop owner at Masjeed Road, Nila Market, Defence Colony, New Delhi knew Rajpal and Suresh Chandra as they regularly used to visit his shop and according to him, Suresh paid the price of the goods taken oil credit by Rajpal. P.W. 10 Girja Shanker Bajpayee's evidence is that in March, 84 Suresh had stayed in India Hotel, Varanasi. P.W. 13 Prakash Choudhary, Manager of that Hotel proved the entry made by Suresh in register in March, 1984 (Ext. 4/9). P.W. 11 Gopi Krishna Asthana, Manager of Tourist Dak Bungalow, Varanasi stated that on 13-12-33 Suresh, Rajpal and two children stayed there. P.W. 12 Vinoy Kumar Asthana, Manager, Hotel India, Varanasi stated that in the years 1983-81, Suresh had stayed in his hotel in the name of Mahesh Chandra Gupta and proved the entries made by Suresh. P.W. 14 Ashok Kumar Ojha, Assistant Manager of Hotel Ranchi also proved the entry made to show that Suresh had stayed there in the name of Ramchandra. P.W. 15 Tapan Kumar Nandi, Manager, Blue Hotel Ranchi stated that Suresh had stayed in his hotel in the name of S. Suxena, proved the relevant entry and also stated that Suresh along with C.B.I. official had come to his hotel and when the said register was produced, he confirmed this fact. P.W. 13 Madhusudan Ram, the then Chief Reservation Supervisor at Ranchi Railway Station proved the reservation slip dated 10-10-83, wherein two berth an the names of Suresh and Urshia for 12-10-83. In Hatia-Chandigarh Express for Delhi were shown in the waiting list, but the reservation chart of 12-10-83 did not show that they had travelled by that train. P.W. 17 Shyamal Kumar Chatterjee, Manager, Palace Hotel Kandru, Ranchi identified Suresh, who had stayed in his hotel on 21-1-84 in the name of Ranjeet Singh. P.W. 18 Sardar Ranjit Singh, proprietor, Amber Hotel, Ranchi stated that Suresh had stayed in his hotel ,on 5-1-84 in the name of S. Chandra. P.W. 10 Sardar Gurubux Singh, proprietor, Punjab Rest House Daltonganj is on the point that on 15-12-83 Suresh, one unknown person and two children had staged in his rest house, the entries of which were made by a female child, but the register was signed by both-the children. P.W. 20 Manik Lal Majoomrlar, Manager, Wald roof Chinese Rastaurant, Main Road, Ranchi stated that his restaurant is in front of furniture shop of Gurubachan, wherefrom, the later had telephoned to Delhi. P.W. 21 Laxmi Narayan claimed that the negotiation for sale of Ranchi house was settled with him on 10-10-83 in presence of P.W. 2 Badri Narain Mishra and at that time Urshia told him that she would be taking' away the money to America. The witness along with family had seen the house when Urshia asked him to come on the following day with Income-tax clearance certificate, as she was to leave Ranchi. On 12-10-83 when he went to her with the said certificate, she was not there and her husband told him that she had gone away to Delhi by Air. P.W. 22 Man-tosh Roy, proprietor New Roy Hotel, Jhalda stated that Rajpal came to his hotel with C.B.I. officials and Rajpal showed the relevant entry made in the register and also pointed out the well, where he had thrown Chhura and Batali used in the crime. P.W. 23 Harendra Rai, Manager, Standard Hotel Gorakhpur stated that Suresh had stayed in his hotel on two dates, made entries in the name of Mahesh Chandra Gupta and identified Suresh in Court. P.W. 24 Mulchand Mali, Gardener of Suresh at his Ranchi house is on the point of motive and further stated that he had also accompanied Suresh to Tantrik Pyarelal Ojha (PW. 5) and also stated that there was strained relationship between his master, his mother on one hand and Urshia on the other. According to him, Rajpal had come to Ranchi house of Suresh and stayed there. P.W. 25 Jagdish Trivedi, Manager, U.C.O. Bank Ranchi stated that he had handed over file cheque issued by Suresh with the statement of Accountant respecting his saving accounts from Oct., 83 to 11 June, 84 to C.B.I.P.W. 26 Anwar Ali, Manager of a Newspaper 'Dainik Jagran' published from Varanasi stated that in the edition of 31-12-83 a photograph of a dead unknown boy was published in that paper and also handed over a copy of it to C.B.I.P..W. 27 Dr. Bharat Kumar Bhargav of Shiv Prasad Gupta Hospital, Varanasi had held post-mortem on 21-12-83 over that dead child, recovered from Varuna river. P.W. 28 Baban Ojha, an Upper Division clerk, Central Coal Ltd. is on the point that in the rest house of C.M.P.D.L Ranchi, in his presence, Deonand (P.W. 7) and C.B.I. officials, Rajpal disclosed (Ext. (39/2) that he had committed the murder of Urshia and her two children with dagger and batali, threw the same in a well of a hotel premises of Jhalda and thereafter, Rajpal took them to that place where he had thrown the said weapons, but nothing was found even after draining out of the water. P.W. 29 Gopi Mistry and his son P.W. 60, Employees of Suresh stated that Suresh and Rajpal had stayed for two days at Dulli firm along with the former's children. P.W. 30 Deo Krishna Prasad, an Inspector in telephone department proved the trunk call ticket showing that on 7-12-83 there was a telephonic talk from Ranchi telephone No. 22196 to Delhi No. 648756. P.W. 31 John, an employee Gurubachan stated that on the order of his Master, he had gone to the house of Suresh for removing earth from a septic tank and when he along with others removed it up to four feet, they spotted a dead body tied in Kambal and as soon as P.W. 3 Ram Sagar told them that it was of Urshia, they declined to do any further work in presence of Gurubachan. P.W. 32 Ram Subhawan, an employee at Delhi office of Suresh is declared hostile. P.W. 33 Principal, Fatrer Agnel School, New Delhi is on the point that his students (Richa and Saurabh) were withdrawn from the school in the first week of Dec., 83, identified their photographs and) proved the relevant documents. P.W. 34 Mrs. S. George, class teacher of Richa Bahri also identified their photographs and proved the note book of Richa (Ext. 2/49) P.W. 35 Dr. Mahendra Prasad had written the first information on the statement of Hira Lal (P.W. 36) addressed to Sarnath Police Station after the recovery of the dead body from river Varuna on 20-12-83. P.W. 37 Tara Prasad is witness to the recovery of a dead child and identified his photograph. P.W. 38 Bhim Chandra Gupta, an employee of Hotel India, Varanasi is a witness to memo prepared by C.B.I. relating to the place where Suresh and Rajpal threw the dead body as also the place where they had thrown the cloths. P.W. 39 Ramji is witness to the recovery of Chadar. Gadda and Rajai and was also present where the dead body was recovered from a river and identified the photograph. P.W. 40 Bacha Lal is tendered. P.W. 41 Satwendra Kaur stated that Harmendra, younger brother of her husband, was married to Jain alias Sarna Narula (P.W. 66) sister of Urshia and further stated that in the month of November-December when she had enquired from Mrs. Santosh as to when Urshia would come from Ranchi, she told that she was still at Ranchi and asked to send her children there from Delhi and also identified the photograph of Saurabh. P.W. 42 Sushila Sarang, own sister of Urshia's mother having a house in Defence Colony, New Delhi supported the foregoing witnesses in material particulars. P.W. 43 S. Nandi, proprietor, Eastern Beauty Lodge, Safdarganj Enclave, New Delhi identified Suresh saying that he had stayed in his hotel in March, 84 in the name of Mahesh Gupta. P.W. 44 Akhlesh Kumar, Manager Hotel Amobodi, Civil Line, Azamgarh (U.P.) also identified Suresh and stated that he had stayed in his hotel in the said name in March and April, 1984. P.W. 45 Darshan Dingra proprietor, Park Hotel, Gorakhpur stated that in his hotel also Suresh had stayed in that name. He identified him and proved the relevant entry made by Suresh. P.W. 48 Atma Nand Singh, a Sub-Inspector of police, Sarnath P.S. had investigated in the P.S. case No. 100/89 P.W. 47 M.U. Khan, Manager Delux Hotel, Lucknow stated that Suresh had stayed in his hotel as Brajesh Dhawan, proved his writing and identified him in Court. P.W. 48 Ashok Kapur, a photographer had taken snaps of an unidentified dead body of a boy, recovered from Varuna river. P.W. 49 Mithlesh Kumar, Dy. S.P. in C.B.I'., New Delhi after arrest of Rajpal on 8-7-84, produced him before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, took him on police remand and then produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Ranchi. P.W. 50 P.P. Srivastava, Sr. Scientific Assistant in Forensic Science Laboratory, C.B.I. had visited the house of Suresh at Ranchi on 10-8-84, got some blood stains scraped from a wall of a room and also some dark brown stain from a steel trunk which on an examination was found to be blood (material Ext. 19)-P.W. 51 K.K. Afiora, Sr. Scientific Officer of the said Laboratory at Delhi was assigned with the duty of examining different exhibits of the criminal cases and had received one sealed parcel from Director, Central Forensic Science Laboratory in R.C. case No. 2/84 containing empty bag which ion an examination was found to have contained salt (Ext. 20). P.W. 52 Dr. V.K. Goel, Sr. Scientific Officer, attached to that Laboratory, had received parcels containing one bed sheet, one Gadda and another gadda (Exts. 1/A to 1/C) wherein human blood was found except the gunny bag (Ext. 20/A) P.W. 53 Dr. G.D. Gupta, Sr. Scientific Officer had received three parcels containing wrapped materials (Ext. 14) i.e. one small thread, blood stained taken from a box (material Ext. 14/A); quilt and a quilt cover. P.W. 56 is Dr. P.K. Bhatnagar, Head, Serology Division-cum-Asstt. Chemical Examiner, C.B.I. who had received clippings of blood stains from the above exhibits, from Dr. V.K. Goel, examined the same and found human blood of B group (Ext. 20/4) P.W. 54 Kailash Prasad, in whose presence on 11-10-84 a gunny bag and blood stained taken from a trunk were seized from Ranchi house of Suresh P.W. 55 Murtaza Hussain, proprietor of Lucknow hotel stated that two persons had stayed in his hotel on 19-12-83 and 1-1-84 and the C.B.I. seized the relevant register, but he failed to identify any of the appellants in Court. P.W. 57 C.M. Patel incharge of Serology division stated that in Dec., 84 scraps of some blood stains, blood stained threads, dipping of quilt and blood stains taken from some trunk were received, examined and found to contain human blood, but the group could not be ascertained for want of any reaction (Ext. 20/5 to 20/6). P.W. 58 Jyoti Lal Prajapati, of Jhalda stated that Rajpal was brought by C.B.I. officials and he was asked to bring a pumping set to drain out the water of a well, but nothing particular was found in it. P.W. 59 Rajeshwar Singh, is investigating Officer of Chutia P.S. case No. 100/84. P.W. 61 Sushi). Kumar Tripathi, an employee of Shiv Prasad Gupta Hospital, Varanasi produced the post mortem report. P.W. 62 Fulchand, a constable in the Defence Colony police station, Delhi proved the first information report of the case lodged there (Ext. 13/2). P.W. 63 V.D. Sharma, an Asstt. in C.B.I. office, New Delhi stated that Investigating Officer, Madan Lal Sharma and Rajendra took specimen signatures/writings of Suresh and Y.D. Arya respectively in his presence and further stated that the said Investigating Officer in presence of P.W. 64, an A.S.I., C.B.I., New Delhi had also taken the specimen signature of Rajpal on 13-8-84. P.W. 65 S.C. Mittal, Sr. Scientific Officer, had examined the disputed writings of Rajpal, Suresh and acquitted accused Y.D. Arya with their admitted writings and found that all the admitted writings tallied with their specimen signature/writings. P.W. 66 Scirna Narula sister of Urshia stated that there was unhappy relationship between Urshia on the one hand and Suresh, his mother and Y.D. Arya on the other and Arya (acquitted accused) had to vacate the Delhi house of Suresh at the instance of his sister and further stated that Urshia wanted the sale proceeds of their Ranchi house for the welfare of her children. P.W. 67 B.K. Lamba, a Sub-Inspector of police, Lalitpur police station, in Nepal, stated that Suresh had come to his police station on 10th June, 1984, lodged an information that his children were missing and also produced a copy of it. P.W. 68 Kiran Kumar Kapali, a receptionist in Kosy hotel, Kathmandu is on the point that Suresh had stayed in his hotel on two occasions in April, 84 and May, 84 and later on, asked him to arrange for one private room saying that he had no money to stay in hotel and the witness arranged a rented room for him at the rate of Rs. 900.00 per month and also identified him in Court. P.W. 69 Bineet Singh Sarang, brother of Urshia is the informant. PW. 70 Satish Chandra Agrawal, an employee of State Bank of India, Gaziabad stated that 20 travellers cheque issued from his Delhi Branch were encashed at his branch P.W. 71 Laxman Das Ahuja, another employee of that Bank of main Branch, New Delhi stated that the said traveller cheques were issued from his Branch. P.W. 72 Subhash Kumar Munga, Branch Manager in Union Bank of India stated that the account of M/s. Bahri & Co. used to be operated by Mrs. Santosh Bahri. P.W. 73 Satya-deo Tiwary and P.W. 74 Deonandan are on the point that on 12-8-84 Rajpal in the presence of C.B.I, officials at C.M.P.D.I. Guest house, Ranchi had disclosed that he had committed the murder of Urshia and had thrown her head in Pithoria Jungal which was recorded by C.B.I., signed by them and the said Rajpal also took them to that place and brought out a skull from a bush, where the portion of skull, a polythin bag, pieces of cloths and hairs were also found and seized. P.W. 74 is Deonandan, in whose presence Rajpal also gave out that he had concealed the weapon used for murder in a well at Jhalda and he went to Raj Hotel Jhalda along with C.B.I., where the said appellant pointed out the place, but nothing was found even after the water was drained out and from another place of Jhalda some cloths i.e. Razai, cover of it, produced by the son of the owner of a Hotel (since dead) given by Suresh were seized. P.W. 75 Tara Sahu, an employee of Gurubachan Singh stated that on the order of his Master, a cheque was encashed in United Commercial Bank and the amount was given to Suresh. The witness also identified his signature as well as of Suresh on the cheque (Ext. 2/81). P.W. 76 Sri Bhuneshwar Ram a Judicial Magistrate, on the orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Ranchi had recorded the statements of P.W. 2 B. N-Mishra and P.W. 3 Ram Sagar (approver) under Sec. 164 Cr. P.C. on 2-3-84 and 19-12-84 respectively. P.W. 77 Mahendra Pramanik, another employee of Gurubachan has been declared hostile. P.W. 78 Dilip Kumar Banerjee, of Jhalda also stated that C.B.I. official came along with Rajpal and identified him (Rajpal) in Court and further said that on any enquiry by C.B.I. he told them that Suresh had kept the cloths in his house which he identified in Court. P.W. 79 is Rutas Sarang, mother of Urshia. She stated about the motive, strained relationship between her daughter and son-in-law and his mother and according to her Urshia, for those matters wanted to settle in America for the welfare of her children. P.W. 80 Dr. C.S. Jain, a Medical Officer of Medical Legal Institute, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal proved the report (Ext. 20/8) of Professor Harish Chandra with regard to the skull sent for examination. P.W. 81 Noor Shah is an owner of a truck No. B.H.M. 5879 of which, acquitted accused Md. Suhail was the driver at the relevant time. P.W. 82 is Rajendra Singh, Assistant Investigating Officer, P.W. 83 Atulya, the then Deputy Collector had held T.I. Parade on 6-3-1984 of the articles that were found in the house of Suresh. P.W. 84, a receptionist, Natraj hotel, Jamshedpur proved the entry in hotel register in the name of Suresh, who had stayed there from 5-11-1983 to 11-11-1983 and also identified him in Court. P.W. 85 Madan Lal is Chief Investigating Officer. P.W. 86 Yas Pal Monga, proprietor of Hotel Scart Lark, Gaziabad proved entry No. 1092 of hotel register relating to the customers, who had stayed in there from 25-7-1984 to 28-7-1984. P.W. 87 Ajoy Gupta of hotel Smart at Gaziabad proved entry No. 456, recorded by a customer in the name of Mahesh Gupta who stayed from 9-5-1984 to 12.5.1984 and 30.6.1984 to 3.7.1984. 22. I have given a summary of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the relevant details of which shall be discussed and considered, when I shall deal with the various facts and circumstances, relied upon by the prosecution to establish the murders of three human beings. In order to appreciate the same it would be necessary to categorise the evidence in a greater detail, as the alleged murders had been committed, according to prosecution, on two dates at two different places, though the persons, who are said to have been murdered are of the same family. The subsequent conduct of the assassins, particularly of the period, when two of them were said to have been absconding and did certain acts also deserve consideration, keeping all these in view. I would like to place the broad points emerging out of the evidence of the witnesses and the documents produced by the prosecution which are interlinked with each other, the summary of which is given below. (1) Attitude and cruel behaviours of Mrs. Santosh, Y.D. Arya (both since acquitted) and Suresh towards her (Urshia) and her two children, (2) letters of Urshia to her parents in America informing them about it with a request to make arrangement to obtain citizenship for her stay there with her children and if for that purpose, divorce was necessary, she was ready to do that, (3) Motive, (4) Negotiations by Urshia for disposing of their house property at Ranchi for arranging finance to shift to America with her children for their betterment, (5) Conspiracy between the appellants to do away with the lives of Urshia and her two children, (6) preparation to commit murders, (7) Removal of their dead bodies, (8) Attempts to cause disappearance of the evidence of murders, (9) Misleading Urshia's parents by appellant Suresh about the whereabouts of her after her murder, (10) Disclosures made by appellants Rajpal and Suresh leading to recovery of certain incriminating informations, articles as also about the manner in which the murders were committed and details of the hotels where Suresh had stayed on different dates either alone or with appellant Rajpal in different names, (11) Confessional statement of approver (P.W. 3) disclosing the circumstances/preparations leading to the murder of Urshia, (12) Recovery of the skull and pieces of sari, allegedly of Urshia, blanket etc. from a jungle on Ranchi-Patratu Road, (13) Recovery of some blood stained clothes from a hotel at Jhalda in the State of West Bengal, (14) Withdrawal of the two children named Saurabh and Richa from a Delhi school in the first week of Dec., 1989 without disclosing any reason with a motive to bring them to Dulli Firm in the garb of pleasure trip in a car to commit their murder, (15) Committing the murder of two children in the nights of 17/18tih Dec., 1983, (16) Throwing of the dead bodies of the two children on way back to Delhi before reaching Varanasi, (17) Recovery of one of the dead bodies i.e. of Saurabh from river Varuna near Varanasi, (18) Evidence of the Managers/employees of different hotels with entries in the respective registers where Suresh and Rajpal had stayed on different dates while bringing the children to Ranchi, after committing the murders of the children and for the purpose of absconding, (19) Orders of the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court in connection with the anticipatory bail applications of Mrs. Santosh Bahri, and (2) Giving false information to Nepal Police in the month of June, 1984 that his two children were missing while he was staying in a rented house in Nepal during the period of his (Suresh) trip there. MOTIVE 23. As stated earlier, the prosecution has assigned a specific motive for committing the murders. At the outset it may be said that it is not always necessary for the prosecution to provide a motive in the crime alleged, but where motive assigned has a direct bearing on the main case, it obviously becomes necessary to consider that aspect of the matter. The instant case is one of those, where motive assigned is an important factor as here a father is said to be instrumental in killing his wife and two minor children in a conspiracy with other appellants. This is all the more necessary because in the normal course, it is not expected that a wealthy father without any rhyme and reason would commit the ghastly murders of his wife and two innocent children. It is further necessary as the appellants had taken a stand that the story of murder as set out by the prosecution is not correct rather, the truth is that, the persons allegedly murdered have gone away to a foreign country to settle there which has not been properly investigated by the C.B.I. 24. Ordinarily, I would have taken up this point at a later stage, but for the reasons given hereunder, it is necessary to take it up first as the same is directly linked with the case of murders particularly of Urshia. According to prosecution, due to constant interference by Y.D. Arya, the maternal uncle in law of Urshia, in the business, properties and other family affairs against her wishes, she was very much mentally disturbed, but she was helpless in doing any thing as Y.D. Arya had much say in the family and when she started objecting to his interference and succeeded in turning him out of the house, she was mentally and physically tortured by her mother-in-law and others in connivance with her husband and having found that her children were neglected by them and her status in the family was like a maid-servant. She decided to shift to America to her parents to settle there for betterment of her children till her daughter Richa attained the marriageable age and for that purpose she wanted to dispose of their Ranchi house to arrange finance which was not liked by her husband and other family members and when the deal was completed and the sale deed was to be executed on the following day, she was murdered in the evening of 11th of Oct. and then her two children, so as to silence them, as they were firstly, not liked by the mother of Suresh, who had supreme say in the family and secondly, appellant Suresh had an apprehension that his issues might be a problem for him in future for shielding the murder of their mother (Urshia). 25. The prosecution has not only adduced oral evidence, but has also examined documentary evidence, i.e. several letters of Urshia and two letters of appellant Suresh to his in-laws in America after the alleged murder of his wife (Ext. 23 series) as also the information lodged with Nepal police (Exts. 11, 13/12 and 35) intimating about the so-called missing of his children i.e. Saurabh and Richa from a rented house, he had taken at Kathmandu (Nepal). Besides these documents, the prosecution has also examined P.W. 1 Murari Lal, a neighbour of appellant Suresh at Ranchi, P.W. 24 Mulohand, Gardener of Suresh, P.W. 66 Surina Narola her (Urshia's) sister, P.W. 69 her brother (informant) and P.W. 79 RotaS Sarang, mother of Urshia. The letters have been proved by Urshia's brother P.W. 69 and mother P.W. 79. They being her close relations are obviously competent to identify their writings particularly P.W. 79, who had received several letters written by them. The letter of Urshia dated 14-6-1979 shows that the relationship between her, mother-in-law and husband was strained. It further shows her husband was always siding with his mother, who was very cruel to Urshia and her children. It is thus, very much necessary to take up her letters written to her parents in America. It appears that in one her letters written in the year 1979, she informed them that she was being treated like a maid-servant in the family inasmuch as her mother-in-law had absolutely no care for her children, the Roman version of which is as under :