M.K. Mukherjee, J. - (1.) The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated May 30, 1987 rendered by the Designated Court, Rohtak, while disposing of Sessions Case No. 550 of 1986 and Arms Act Case No. 551 of 1986. By the impugned judgment and order the Court convicted and sentenced the appellant Devinder alias Pappy under Section 302, IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 6 of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 ("TADA" for short).
(2.) Shorn of details the prosecution case is as under: (a) Ramphal (the deceased) used to sell vegetables from his shop-cum-residence in the Janta Colony, Rohtak city. On July 26, 1986 at or about 9 A.M. the appellant went to his shop and asked for some vegetables on credit. Ramphal told the appellant that as he had not paid his earlier dues he would not oblige him any more. Since such refusal of Ramphal was in the presence of two others, namely, Jagdish (P.W. 10) and Satbir Singh (P.W. 11), the appellant felt insulted and left in a huff. (b) About twenty minutes thereafter the appellant came back with a knife and remarked that he would teach him (Ramphal) a lesson for insulting him in the presence of others. Ramphal, who was then cooking, stood up and attempted to escape. He, however, could not succeed in his attempt as the appellant gave him two blows with the knife - one on the left side of the chest and the other on the abdomen. Jagdish and Satbir Singh, who were there still then, and one Umesh, who had reached there by chance, witnessed the assault. (c) Jagdish and Umesh then carried Ramphal in a rickshaw to the Medical College Hospital, Rohtak where he was examined by Dr. Sushil Kumar Jain (P.W. 5) first. After examination, Dr. Jain sent a medico legal report (Ex. PS) and a rukka (Ex. PD) to the Police Post attached to the hospital where an entry in terms thereof was made by Constable Mangal Singh (P.W.1) in the daily diary book at 1.45 P.M. (Ex. PE). (d) In the meantime, however, - at 11.30 A.M. to be precise - the City Police Station, Rohtak had received a telephonic message from the above Police Post about the admission of Ramphal in the hospital with injuries on his person and, after recording that message in the daily diary book (Ex. PF), ASI Tota Ram (P.W. 12) had left for the hospital. Reaching there he found Jagdish present and recorded his statement (Ex. PZ) at 2.40 P.M. which was treated as the FIR. After forwarding the statement to the Police Station for registering a case. Tota Ram took up investigation and went to the spot. He prepared a rough site plan and seized some blood-stained earth therefrom in the presence of Jagdish and Satbir. (e) Ramphal, who was admitted as an indoor patient in the hospital, was operated upon by Dr. Pradeep Kumar (P.W.7) for his injuries but he succumbed to them on the following day i.e. July 27, 1986 at 11.30. On receipt of the information the case which was earlier registered against the appellant under Section 307, IPC was converted into one under Section 302, IPC and a special Report (Ex. PH) was sent to the local Magistrate. ASI Tota Ram then went to the hospital and after holding inquest upon the dead body of Ramphal, sent it for autopsy which was performed by Dr. M. K. Bishnoi (P.W. 9). (f) In course of the investigation the appellant was arrested on July 29, 1986 and pursuant to a statement made by him to Tota Ram on July 31, 1986 (Ex. PEE) a spring activated knife concealed under the bricks in a deserted kotha towards the southern boundary wall of Hanuman Park, Rohtak was recovered in the presence of Jagdish (P.W. 10) and Daya Chand. After recovery of the knife a separate case was registered against the appellant under the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 6 of TADA. (g) The blood-stained earth recovered from the spot, the shirt removed from the dead body of Ramphal and the knife recovered pursuant to the statement of the appellant were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (F.S.L.), Madhuban for chemical examination and human blood was detected on all those articles on such examination. On completion of the investigation ASI Tota Ram submitted two separate charge-sheets against the appellant; one under Section 302, IPC for the murder of Ramphal on July 26, 1986 and the other under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 6 of TADA for unlawful possession and user of a spring actuated knife.
(3.) The two cases arising out of the above charge-sheets were clubbed and tried together and were disposed of by the impugned judgment in the manner indicated above.;