STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Vs. DARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision arises out of a charge levelled by the police against the respondents under Sections 302/34, RPC read with Section 201 of the RPC for the murder of one Kanta Devi. The facts giving rise to these proceedings are as under:-

(2.) That on 8-6-1993 Amar Chand Sharma, A.S.I. Police Post Parole on some information learnt that at about 7 p.m. on 7-6-1993 some Prakashoo Devi, Swaranlatta alias Jalli and Darshan Singh alias Bagha had mercilessly beaten Kanta Devi with fists and kicks and she succumbed to the injuries. In this regard he went on spot and found that Kanta Devi was dead and her dead body had already been destroyed by the accused by putting it to the flames. On registration of the case investigation was conducted and the respondents were challaned for the offences mentioned above. The trial court upon the perusal of the material placed before him by the Investigating officer and after hearing the prosecution and the defence, came to the conclusion that prima facie offence under Section 304, Part II read with Section 34, RPC was made out against the accused and they were charged accordingly. However, the accused Darshan Singh, Attar Singh, Trilok Singh and Vakil Singh were charged for an offence under Section 2O1, RPC as well.

(3.) The prosecution being aggrieved of the said order of charge filed the present revision petition on the ground that the deceased was beaten with brickbats and her chest was struck with brickbat blows as a result of which she vomited some material out of stomach and the same caused her instantaneous death. Her daughter namely Asho who is a child witness and an eye witness to the occurrence disclosed to the police that the accused did away with the life of the deceased intentionally and destroyed the evidence as well which fact is apparent from the circumstances of the case that they did not even inform her maternal people about her death and put her to flames during the dead of night between 3 a.m. to 4 a.m. The same creates a strong circumstance against the accused that they killed the deceased intentionally and their action was quite venomous that they even did not get the autopsy of her dead body to be conducted and instead put her to flames leaving no evidence to show that she was killed by them, so much so that the material which she vomited from her stomach was also destroyed.