STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Vs. SUNDER LAL
LAWS(UTN)-2012-7-26
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 10,2012

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Appellant
VERSUS
SUNDER LAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This government appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 5.4.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in S.T. No. 33/1998, 'State Vs. Sunder Lal' whereby the accused Sunder Lal has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him under Sections 302, 328 and 394 IPC. Brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged on 24.12.1997 at about 12 noon at P.S. Muni-Ki-Reti, District Tehri Garhwal by one Sunil Singh, who is the brother of deceased Jaipal Singh. In the FIR, he states that on 23.12.1997 at about 8 AM, while his brother Jaipal Singh S/o Narain Singh, aged about 43 years, went from his village to collect 'Bajri'. After collecting the same, he was climbing down to his village. On his way, accused Sunder Lal asked him i.e. the brother of the complainant to stop over and have a 'Biri'. Soon thereafter, accused Sunder Lal brought his brother in an unconscious state at the complainant's shop. When the complainant asked as to what had happened to his brother, he was informed by accused that Pradhan Ji (deceased) had consumed liquor and, therefore, is not in his senses but there was nothing to worry about and he would be alright after some time. The complaint then states in his F.I.R. that he took his brother to the local Primary Health Center, 'Paoki Devi', where he was admitted but subsequently, the doctor, who was examining Jaipal Singh (injured), referred him to the better hospital at Rishikesh. While he was being taken from 'Paoki Devi' for Rishikesh hospital, his brother passed away. The body was thereafter brought back to the village and on the next day, i.e. on 24.12.1997, an FIR could be lodged. In the FIR, the complainant expresses doubt about the manner in which his brother had died and, therefore, he requested the post-mortem to be conducted on the body of deceased. The post-mortem thereafter was conducted on the same day, i.e. on 24.12.1997 at 4:45 PM. There is no ante-mortem injury found on the body of deceased and his larynx and bronchi were congested, so were his right and left lungs, as well as his heart. The cause of death could not be ascertained, hence viscera was preserved and sent for examination. Meanwhile, the police did nothing on the report which was lodged on 24.12.1997. Subsequently thereafter on 17.6.1998, the Viscera report came wherein it was revealed that the stomach, parts of intestine and liver, kidney and spleen of the deceased were found to contain a poison known as 'aluminum phosphide, apart from ethyl alcohol'. Thereafter, on 23.7.1998, the accused was arrested. Consequent upon the report lodged by Sunil Singh (brother of deceased), the investigation was done by the police, upon completion of which, a chargesheet was filed against the accused under Sections 302/ 328/ 394 IPC.
(2.) The case was committed to the court of Sessions on 19.9.1998 by the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal. Soon thereafter on 29.9.1998, the charge was framed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal against the accused Sunder Lal under Sections 302, 328 and 394 IPC. The same was denied by the accused who claimed trial.
(3.) The case of the prosecution is that the accused Sunder Lal had deliberately given poison to Jaipal Singh in the liquor which was served to him by the accused, as a result, he died a few hours later. The motive which has been presented by the prosecution is that deceased, on that fateful day, was carrying some money with him, as it has come in the evidence given by PW 6 Sauna Devi (wife of deceased).;


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