- (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 27.5.2008 in Criminal appeal No. 585 of 1999 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, by way of which, it affirmed the judgment and order dated 17.11.1999 of the trial court, convicting the Appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Indian Penal Code'), and awarding him life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of such fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as follows: A. The Appellant went to the Police Station: Qadian on 14.3.1997, and made a statement before S.L. Kashmir Singh to the effect that he had two wives, namely, Palwinder Kaur and Amarpreet Kaur, who were living in separate houses. One Lakhwinder Kaur, maternal grand mother of his second wife Amarpreet Kaur, was also staying with his second wife Amarpreet Kaur. He had gone on 13.3.1997 to meet his second wife Amarpreet Kaur and her grand mother, at their house at about 6.30 P.M., and had found them both present there, however, when he revisited them on 14.3.1997, at about 7.30 A.M., alongwith his servant Mukhtiar Singh, he found that, both Amarpreet Kaur and her grand mother Lakhwinder Kaur, were lying dead on one cot. There were marks indicative of strangulation on their necks, and as it was evident that they had been killed by some unknown persons, the previous night, action must be taken according to law. In view of the complaint submitted by the Appellant, subsequently, investigation ensued. B. During the course of investigation, the dead bodies of the victims were recovered by the Investigating Officer and sent for postmortem examination. Dr. Gurmit Singh, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Batala, (PW.-2), conducted post-mortem of the dead body of Amarpreet Kaur and found the following injuries: 1. Reddish abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the anterior and lateral aspect of right side of neck. 2. Reddish abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the right side of the neck, 2 cm below injury No. 1. 3. Reddish abrasion 2 cm x 1/2 cm on the right side of the next, 1 cm below injury No. 2. 4. Reddish abrasion 2 cm x 1/2 cm on the front and right side of the chest just below the clevical. 5. Two contusions of 4 cm x 3/4th cm, 2 cm x 1 cm, extending from injuries Nos. 2 and 3 and going towards the mid of neck anteriorly. 6. Contusion of 2 cm x 1 cm on the left side of the neck laying obliquely and upwards 7. Reddish abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the left side of the neck, just below the angle of mandible. He also conducted post-mortem of the dead body of Lakhwinder Kaur and found the following injuries: 1. Reddish abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm just below the angle of mandible on the right side. 2. Reddish contusion 6 cm x 1 cm extending from injury No. 1 to the middle of neck, placed obliquely and downwards. 3. Reddish contusion of 5 cm x 1 cm on the left side of the neck, extending from the middle of the neck, to angle of mandible placed obliquely and going upwards. 4. Two reddish abrasions of 1 cm x 1/2 cm in size each on the left side of the neck, one at the end of mandible and the other 2 cm below. 5. Reddish abrasion of 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the chin. 6. Bluish contusion on the left eye lid with blood in the eye socket. The cornea was ruptured. In the opinion of the doctor, both persons had died of "Asphyxia due to strangulation". C. Dr. Sukhdeep Singh, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital. Batala, (PW.-3), examined the Appellant on 22.3.1997 and found the following injuries on his person: 1. Semi healed abrasion (scab had been shed of), 1/3 cm x 1/4 cm on the dorsum of right hand, 5 cms above the MP joint of right middle finger. 2. Semi healed abrasion (scab had been shed of) 1/2 cm x 1/4 cm on the dorsum of left hand, 5-1/2 cms above the joint of left index finger. D. During the course of the investigation, it was revealed that the Appellant, who is also the complaint in the case, was the perpetrator of the crime. Thus, he was arrested and upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, he pleaded not guilty and, hence, claimed trial. E. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as 15 witnesses and a large number of documents. Ajit Singh (PW.-6), a witness who had last seen the three together stated that he had found the Appellant engaged in a quarrel with both the deceased from the first floor of his warehouse. Sardul Singh (PW.-7), had seen the Appellant last with the deceased persons on 13.3.1997, while he was climbing the stair case that led to the house of deceased. The prosecution examined Harbhajan Singh (PW.-8), who deposed that. the Appellant had made an extra judicial confession before him stating that he had committed the murder of both the said persons. Ranjit Singh, Patwari Halqa (PW.-15), was examined to prove that Amarpreet Kaur and Lakhwinder Kaur both had agricultural lands in their names. Amarpreet Kaur had sold 19 kanals, 17 marlas of land to Tarsem Singh (father of the Appellant), (PW.-1) on 13.2.1995, and he had later on, sold 16 kanals out of the said land to Gurnam Singh. It also came on record that Lakhwinder Kaur had sold 19 kanals 17 marlas of land to Amarpreet Kaur. There is nothing on record to show where the sale proceeds have gone, despite the fact that sale deeds were duly executed. More so, there is no plausible explanation with regard to the motive Amarpreet Kaur might have had for executing such transfer of land in the name of her father-in-law, Tarsem Singh. F. The Appellant when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as ('Code of Criminal Procedure.'), simply pleaded his innocence, and submitted that he had been falsely implicated in the said case. G. The trial court after appreciating the entire evidence on record, convicted the Appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and awarded him the sentence, as mentioned hereinabove. H. The High Court dismissed the appeal vide impugned judgment and order dated 27.5.2008. Hence, this appeal.
(3.) We have heard Shri Ashok Kumar Saini, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, and Shri Kuldip Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab, and perused the records.;