JAI CHAND Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-10-22
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on October 09,2013

JAI CHAND Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) APPELLANTS convicts Jai Chand and Kuldeep have preferred the above titled appeals, are being decided together, against the judgment and order of their conviction dated 21.12.2010 rendered by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No. 193/2009. The said trial pertained to the Crime No. 21/2009, PS Shyampur, District Haridwar, whereby three accused persons, namely, Sandeep @ Bobby, Jai Chand and Kuldeep, were tried. On conclusion of the trial, all the three accused persons were found guilty of the offences under Section 364A, 302, 201/34 IPC and they were sentenced appropriately. This Court has been informed by the appellants' Counsel that the third accused Sandeep @ Bobby has not preferred any appeal against his conviction. The genesis of the prosecution story is that one Pushpendra @ VP Singh, S/o Rajendra Singh was missing since 1 PM of 25.3.2009 from his house at Jwalapur, Haridwar. He left his home on his bike with mobile number '9756018646' but did not return till the missing report was lodged on 26.3.2009 at 10 A.M. A massive hunt was made by his father, but in vain. Hence, the missing report Ex. Ka -1 was lodged by Rajendra Singh (PW 1). Further, a report was given by Rajendra Singh to the PS Pathri. In addition to the facts, as were stated in the missing report, he informed to the police that some miscreants have demanded rupees twenty lakhs by making a ring call from the aforementioned mobile number of his son to the mobile number '9917185764' belonging to his nephew. So, he narrated that his son had been kidnapped for ransom by the scoundrels, who were threatening too. It was further averred in the report that the voice of the criminal demanding the ransom has been recognized to be of Kuldeep, S/o Premchand, who hails from village Jiyapota. Besides, it was also stated that his son Pushpendra was seen in the company of Kuldeep, Sandeep @ Bobby and Jai Chand by Kusum Raj, Sukhveer and others. So, he was confident that all these three accused persons, hereinafter referred to as A1, A2 and A3 respectively, have kidnapped his son for ransom because all these three miscreants were not found available in their home. This additional report is Ex. Ka -2. Chick of missing report lodged earlier is Ex. Ka -4.
(2.) AFTER lodging the report with the above averments, the police came into action and arrested A2 (Sandeep @ Bobby) on 28.3.2009. His arrest memo is Ex. Ka -7. As per the prosecution version, A2 confessed his guilt before the police by making the self -incriminatory statement to commit the murder of Pushpendra. He named A1 and A3 having complicity in the commission of crime. At the instance of A2, the dead body of Pushpendra was recovered from the jungle. Recovery memo is Ex. Ka -8. It bears the signature of Sandeep @ Bobby. At his instance, the rope which was used for strangulation was also recovered. Recovery memo is Ex. Ka -9, which bears the signature of A2. A jute bag wherein the dead body was packed was also recovered by the police. Its recovery memo Ex. Ka -10 bears the signature of A2. It was also revealed during the course of investigation that before the commission of crime, all the accused persons consumed liquor with the deceased. So, empty bottles of liquor and bear were also recovered at the instance of A2. Recovery memo thereof is Ex. Ka -11. It also bears the signature of A2. Al was arrested by the police and at his instance, the SIM of IDEA Mobile Company was recovered from beneath a stone and that SIM was kept within a polythene wrapped further by some paper. Recovery memo thereof was prepared, which is Ex. Ka -12. It bears signature of A1 (Kuldeep). Inquest report Ex. Ka -13 was prepared on 28.3.2009 at the place of recovery i.e. jungle of Shyampur. Inquest proceedings lasted till 19.30 hours of that day. Since the dead body was recovered on 4th day of the incident, so it was well -identified by his father Rajendra Singh as well as other persons of the village. The witnesses of the inquest report opined that the deceased died due to strangulation. Nonetheless, they recommended for the post -mortem.
(3.) THE post -mortem report is Ex. Ka -3. It was prepared by Dr. S.M. Khan, who had conducted the autopsy on 29.3.2009 at 2.15 PM in District Hospital, Haridwar. The victim was 19 years' old. The Doctor opined that the death had occurred about 5 -6 days back and the cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. The following ante mortem injury was found on the dead body: (1) Ligature mark present, 35 c.m. x 2.5 c.m. area and the neck encircling 5 c.m. below right ear, 5.5 c.m. below the left ear, 4 c.m. below the chin and above the thyroid cartilage base of mark reddish and margins are ecchymosed.;


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