MAHIPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(UTN)-2012-12-106
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on December 11,2012

MAHIPAL SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. - (1.) ONE Balbir Singh s/o Bhupal Singh r/o village Lasi, Police Station and District Chamoli wrote a complaint to Station Officer, Police Station Chamoli on 06.04.2003, regarding the killing of Avtar Singh by Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh. Balbir Singh lodged the report on being informed about the incident to him by one Hukam Singh, who was charge sheeted (as an accused) after the investigation.
(2.) ON 06.04.2003, PW 2 Hukam Singh s/o Moli Singh r/o village Lasi told DW 1 Balbir Singh that on 05.04.2003, at ' 10:30 P.M., Mahipal Singh s/o Gaje Singh and Jodh Singh s/o Digpal Singh beat Avtar Singh alias Guddu s/o Bhupal Singh with sticks. DW 2 Hukam Singh tried to intervene, but Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh beat him (DW 2) also and threw DW 2 in the bush. DW 2 Hukam Singh sustained injuries in the scuffle. When DW 2 Hukam Singh came back to the place where Autar Singh was beaten up, he found that Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh had killed Avtar Singh. The dead body, of Avtar Singh was dumped at a place situated nearby. Mahipal Singh, and Jodh Singh warned Hukam Singh not to disclose the incident to anyone, or else, he should face the consequences. On the basis of said complaint, chik FIR (Ext. Ka -3) was registered in Police Station Chamoli on 06.04.2003, at 03:15 P.M. The incident was alleged to have taken place on 05.04.2003 at 10:30 P.M. The distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was 10 km. hence, there appeared to be no delay in lodging the first information report. On the basis of said FIR, which was registered as Case Crime No. 51 of 2003 under Section 302 of IPC and Section 201 of IPC, investigation began. PW 8 S.I. Indra Pal Singh was assigned the task of investigating the case. On 06.04.2003, at 11:30 P.M., PW 8 S.I. Indra Pal Singh proceeded to the place of incident. When he reached the place where the dead body of the victim was lying, the people standing there informed PW 8 that the same might be the territorial jurisdiction of Patwari. Patwari disclosed to PW 8 that the case was to be investigated by regular police. On being satisfied that the investigation was to be done by the regular police, PW 8 took the dead body in his possession and prepared inquest report (Ext. Ka -7). He also prepared related papers Ext. Ka -8 and Ext. Ka -9. He sent the dead body for postmortem. PW 8 took the statements of DW 2 Hukam Singh and PW 2 Bachan Singh on 07.04.2003. He also prepared site plan (Ext. Ka -12). Investigating Officer also made a search for the named accused persons, but they were not found at their houses. On the pointing of DW 2 Hukam Singh, accused persons Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh were arrested, arrest memos (Ext. Ka -13 and Ext. Ka -14) whereof were prepared. When the statements of accused persons were recorded, they confessed their guilt and also offered to disclose the place where the stick, by which the victim was beaten, was concealed. On 08.04.2003, PW 8 recorded the statements of Bhawan Singh and Smt. Subhaga Devi. On 09.04.2003, PW 8 recorded the statement of PW 1 Dr. R.K. Sundriyal. On 10.04.2003, accused Hukam Singh (DW 2) was arrested and the arrest memo (Ext. Ka -15) of the same was prepared. The stick used in the commission of crime was recovered on the disclosure and pointing of accused Mahipal Singh, a recovery memo (Ext. Ka -6) whereof was prepared. On 11.04.2003, Mahipal Singh was medically examined and was sent to jail. On 18.04.2003, site plan (Ext Ka -17) of the place where the dead body was found was prepared. On 20.04.2003, the statements of some witnesses were taken. On 21.04.2003, statement of PW 3 Vilok Singh and other witnesses were recorded. On 04.05.2003, PW 8 submitted charge sheet (Ext. Ka -18) against the accused persons Mahipal Singh, Jodh Singh and Hukam Singh. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charges for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and Section 201 of IPC were framed against the accused persons namely, Mahipal Singh, Jodh Singh and Hukam Singh, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. It may be pointed out at this stage that informant Balbir Singh was not examined on behalf of prosecution; instead he got himself examined as DW 1. Eight witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. They were - PW 1 Dr. R.K. Sundriyal, PW 2 Bachan Singh, PW 3 Vilok Singh, PW 4 Nain Singh, PW 5 Constable Kailash Chandra Lakhera, PW 6 Shishu Pal Singh, PW 7 Kedar Singh and PW 8 S.I. Indra Pal Singh. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in reply to which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. Accused Hukam Singh said in his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. that he was implicated because the police was annoyed with him. He admitted in response to questions no. 9 and 10 that Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh were arrested in his presence. Both of them confessed their guilt. Mahipal Singh offered to show the place where the stick, by which Avtar Singh was killed, was concealed. Accused Hukam Singh also said that the stick was disclosed on the disclosure and pointing of accused Mahipal Singh, a recovery memo whereof was prepared. He further stated that he too was present with the police when the said recovery was made. He admitted many a facts which pertained to the accused Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh. He (Hukam Singh) offered to examine himself in defence and got himself examined as DW 2. Accused Mahipal Singh denied all the allegations in his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He said that he had no enmity with Avtar Singh (victim) or PW 8 Indra Pal Singh. The third accused Jodh Singh also, in his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., denied the allegations leveled against him. He said that he had no enmity either with DW 1 Balbir Singh or Nain Singh or PW 8 S.I. Indra Pal Singh. DW 1 Balbir Singh and DW 2 Hukam Singh were examined in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned trial court exonerated accused Hukam Singh of the charges levelled against him, but convicted accused persons Mahipal Singh and Jodh Singh for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and Section 201 of IPC and were sentenced appropriately. Aggrieved against the order of conviction and sentence, present criminal appeal was preferred.
(3.) WHEN the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW 1 Dr. R.K. Sundriyal, he found the following ante mortem injuries on dead body of the victim: i) Laceration over right parietal bone 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. with clotted blood over it. ii) Swelling on face, eyelids with bleeding from nose and mouth. iii) Depressed bruise forehead 10 c.m. x 2 c.m. just above both eyebrows. iv) Abrasion right forearm, dorsum of right wrist 3 c.m. x 4 c.m. with clotted blood. v) Abrasion dorsum of right hand 3 c.m. x 4 c.m. vi) Abrasion dorsum of left forearm 9 c.m. x 6 c.m. vii) Abrasion left side of chest over the 9th rib 4 c.m. x 2 c.m. left lateral side. viii) Longitudinal bruise upper back between scapula 9 c.m. x 2 c.m. ix) Abrasion lower back 13 c.m. x 13 c.m. with peeling of skin. x) Abrasion right thigh posterior aspect 5 c.m. x 5 c.m. with peeling of skin. xi) Abrasion right knee, anterior aspect with clotted blood 6 c.m. x 3 c.m. xii) Abrasion on posterior aspect of left knee with clotted blood 9 c.m. x 5 c.m. xiii) Abrasion left leg lower part anterior aspect 6 c.m. x 3 c.m. with peeling of skin.;


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