Decided on October 16,2020

STATE OF H. P. Respondents


Sureshwar Thakur, J. - (1.)The aggrieved convict/appellant herein, through, the extant appeal strives, to, cast an onslaught, vis-a-vis, the verdict of conviction, made upon him, on 24.06.2019, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., upon, Sessions case number 6-D/VII/2018, qua charges framed under Section 302, and, under Section 201 of the IPC, and, also through his instituting the extant appeal, before this Court, he has strived to beget reversal, of, imposition, upon him, of, sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment for life, and, also payment of fine of Rs.10,000/-, and, in default whereof, he stood sentenced, to, under go rigorous imprisonment, for, a period of five months, for his committing an offence punishable, under, Section 302 of the IPC. He also becomes aggrieved, from the imposition, upon, him of a sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment, for, a period of five years, and, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, and, in default whereof, he further became sentenced, to, undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months, hence, for his committing an offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC. All the afore sentences, as, imposed upon the accused/convict/appellant herein, were, ordered to run concurrently.
(2.)The genesis of the prosecution story, becomes embodied, in a previous statement, made, under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C., by one Rattan Chand, the father-in-law, of, the accused, before the Investigating Officer concerned, statement whereof, is, borne in Ex.PW1/A. In pursuance to the afore statement, a formal FIR, borne in Ex.PW 13/D, became registered with Police Station, Haripur, District Kangra, H.P. Therein, the complainant has made articulation(s) qua his retiring, from, the job, of, a Peon, in, the, Postal Department. Deceased Reena Devi, was, his eldest daughter. About 13 years ago, she was married to accused Balwinder Singh, in accordance with Hindu rites, and, ceremonies. On 26.10.2017, his wife along with his daughter, had gone to Hamirpur, for fetching medicines, for, his deceased daughter, namely, Reena Devi, as, she was suffering from certain tension. On their way, they visited accused Balwinder Singh. He also accompanied them from there to Hamirpur. They all returned home at around 4.30 p.m, and, they had their dinner together. Thereafter accused, and, his daughter Reena Devi, went to sleep, in, their room. During morning, at about 5 a.m., his daughter-in-law, Smt. Sarika Devi, came with the morning tea, and, knocked the door, of, the room, of, his daughter, but there was no response from inside. She gave the cup of tea to him and, went to the kitchen. She again prepared the tea at around 7.00 a.m., for hence awakening, the, accused, and, deceased Reena Devi, yet, she failed to do so despite hers calling them. Consequently, he went to the window, and, therefrom called his daughter, thereupon, the accused came out of the room, and, followed him to the kitchen. The accused had his morning tea, in, the kitchen, and, then called him to his room, and, thereat, the accused confided in him, that, he had given all the tablets carried in a strip, to, Reena Devi. Thereupon, PW-1 Rattan Chand, noticed that water, was, coming out from the nostrils, as well as, the mouth, of, his daughter Reena Devi. Her pulse was not there. He also noticed bluish marks, on her neck, besides he also noticed that his daughter, had vomited near the bed, and, stains thereof, were on the ground, and, on the pillow cover. The strips of medicines were lying on the shelf. One of such strips was totally empty, whereas, from two strips, one tablet, was taken out, from each, of, those strips. These strips were brought by them, from, Hamirpur on 26.10.2017. Accused used to proclaim that in case the condition of Reena Devi would not improve, he would kill her.
(3.)The afore genesis of the prosecution case, as, borne in Ex.PW1/A, exhibit whereof embodies the statement of the complainant PW-1, one Rattan Chand, (a) was also enjoined, to, upon, his stepping into the witness box, hence, become narrated rather with completest concurrence therewith, (b) and, also without any gross improvements, and, embellishments being made therefrom(s). A wholesome reading, of, the testification, rendered before the learned trial Court, by the afore complainant, one Rattan Chand, makes categorical underlinings, vis-a-vis, his thereins making articulations, hence, bearing, the, completest compatibility, vis-a-vis, his previous statement recorded, in writing, and, as, becomes borne in Ex.PW1/A. Even during the course of his being put to the test, of, an acid cross-examination, he did not either contradict, all the afore echoings, as, made by him, in his examination-in-chief, nor he grossly embellished nor improved, upon, his previous statement recorded in writing, hence, embodied in Ex.PW1/A, wherefrom, his deposition, acquires tenacious evidentiary worth, (c) more so when it also acquires, the, completest corroboration, from, the deposition, of, his wife, one Lata Devi, who stepped into the witness box, as, PW-16.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.