- (1.) Murari Lal, who was accused No. 2 before the Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, was convicted under S. 302 I. P. C. and sentenced to death. He was also convicted under Section 460 read with Ss. 34, 457, 380, 392, 394 and 397, I. P. C. but sentenced under Section 460 read with S. 34 and S. 394 read with S. 397 only to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years on search count. On appeal by Murari Lal and on reference by the learned Sessions Judge, the High Court to Madhya Pradesh altered the conviction from S. 302 I. P. C. to S. 302 read with S. 34 I. P. C. and substituted the sentence of imprisonment for life for the sentence of death. Otherwise the appeal was dismissed. Murari Lal has preferred this appeal by special leave of this Court.
(2.) H. D. Sonawala (the deceased) used to live alone in one of the two 'quarters' in the compound of the Parai Dharmshala at Jabalpur. He was the Area Organiser of Charak Pharmaceuticals Company of Bombay. On the night of 12-7- 1972 he went out to dinner at the house of P. W. 2 and returned home at about midnight. He retried for the night. Next morning, his driver P. W. 9 and his servant P. W. 6 came to the house in the usual course to attend to their duties. The gate was found locked. They called out their master but there was no response. P. W. 6 who also had a key opened the lock and went inside. Sonawala was found murdered in his bed. A first information report was given at the police station Omti, Jabalpur. The Station House Officer, P. W. 28, came to the scene, found things in the room strewn about in a peel-mell condition. He seized various articles. One of the articles so seized was a prescription pad Ex. P-9. On pagrs A to F of Ex. P-9, there were writings of the deceased but on page 6, there was a writing in Hindi in pencil which was as follows: [Matter being in Hindi it is omitted. - Ed] Translated into English it means: "Though we have passed B. A., we have not secured any employment because there is none to care. This is the consequence. sd/- Balle Singh". The dead body of Sonawala was sent to the Medical Officer for post-mortem examination. There was an incised wound on the neck 71/2" long, the maximum width of which was 2" of tissues and vessels up to the trachea were cut. Trachea was also cut. For several months after the discovery of the murder, the investigation made no progress till 18-2-1973. On that day pursuant to information received in connection with some other case of theft in which one Roop Chand appeared to be involved, the Station House Officer secured the presence of Petrick (A-1) and questioned. Petrick made a statement and led them to his room from which two choppers and as many as 234 items of stolen property were seized. We may mention that out of the 234 items so seized, only two were alleged to belong to Sonawala, one was a tie-pin and the other was a cheque-book. Thereafter, the house of Petrick's father Gabrial was also searched and 310 items of stolen property were recovered, none of which has anything to do with this case. On 19-2-73 Murari Lal (A-2) said to be a friend of Petrick was questioned. He made a statement and led them to the house of his maternal-uncle. Suraj Prasad (A-4). Murari Lal asked his uncle to produce the wrist-watch, which was done. The wrist-watch had some special characteristic of its own and it was later duly identified by unimpeachable evidence as belonging to the deceased. Specimen writings Exs. P-41 to P-54 of Murari Lal were obtained. They were sent to a handwriting and finger-print expert P. W. 15 along with the prescription pad Ex. P-9, for his opinion. The expert gave his opinion that the writing in Hindi at page 6 of Ex. P-9 and the specimen writings of Exs. P-41 to P-54 were made by the same person. Petrick, Murari Lal, Gabrial and Suraj Prasad were tried by the learned Session Judge. Suraj Prasad was acquitted. Gabrial was convicted under Sec. 411. Petrick and Murari Lal were both convicted under S. 302 I. P. C. and sentenced to death as already mentioned. The sentence of death passed on Petrick and Murari Lal was altered to imprisonment for life by the High Court. Petrick has not further appealed but Murari Lal has.
(3.) The two vital circumstances against Murari Lal were : (1) the recovery of a wrist-watch which belonged to the deceased Sonawala and (2) the writing in Hindi at page 6 of Ex. P-9 which was found to be in his handwriting indicating his presence in the house of the deceased on the night of the murder and his participation in the commission of the offences. Shri. R. C. Kohli, learned counsel for the appellant, argued that the recovery of the wrist-watch was too remote in point of time to connect the appellant with the crime. He further argued that the High Court fell into a grave error in concluding that the writing at page 6 of Ex. P-9 was that of the appellant. He submitted that the evidence of P. W. 8 who claimed to be familiar with the handwriting of the appellant was wholly unacceptable, that it was not permissible in law to act upon the uncorroborated opinion-evidence of the expert P. W. 15 and that the High Court fell into a serious error in attempting to compare the writing in Ex. P-9 with the admitted writing of the appellant.;