AMAR SARAN J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal has been filed against a judgement and order dated 5.11.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Ghaziabad in ST No. 1839 of 2003 convicting and sentencing the appellant Ravendra to imprisonment for life under section 302 IPC and a fine of Rs. 5000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was to further undergo six months imprisonment. Out of the fine, Rs. 3000/- was directed to be given to Smt. Brijesh as compensation.
(2.) IN a nutshell, the case of the prosecution was that Smt. Brijesh, PW 4, wife of the deceased was sleeping at her home on 13.8.2003 at 2.00-2.30 AM with her husband and children in Block-C, Vikas Kunj, Ghaziabad, when the appellant Ravendra came to her house and knocked at the door. Smt. Brijesh tried to dissuade her husband from opening the door at that time, but her husband told her that the person knocking was his real brother and he may have something important to say and he opened the door. The appellant was accompanied by one other person. They went upstairs and started talking to her husband. Smt. Brijesh went to the roof where she slept with her children. After some time she heard some shuffle of persons running, then she saw her Devar, the appellant and one other person running away. She came to the room where she saw the corpse of her husband, whose neck was cut. For this act, she held her Devar and the other person responsible. Her father-in-law used to work as a gardener in the horticultural department in Delhi. He died 3-4 years earlier and in his place her Devar had got the job. Her husband had filed a case in Court that he should be given the job in place of his father. Apart from this, there was some dispute of her father- in-law's gratuity and other funds and there was enmity between the appellant and the deceased on this score as well. Smt. Brijesh got the report scribed by Sardar Yogendra Singh and lodged it at the police station Loni, at 7.15 AM on 13.8.2003 (Ext. Ka-4). The only eyewitnesses in this case are PW 4, Smt. Brijesh, the wife of the deceased Mahendra Pal and PW 7, Km. Poonam, the daughter of the deceased. The other witnesses in this case are PW 1, Charan Singh, who was a neighbour of the deceased; PW 2 Yogendra Singh and PW 3, Surendra Kumar, who were the inquest witnesses; PW 5, Dr. Y.P. Singhal, who conducted the post- mortem on the body of the deceased; PW 6, SI Kamal Singh, the Head Moharrir, before whom the FIR was lodged and who prepared the check FIR; PW 9, H.P. Gautam, who was the first investigating officer and PW 8, SI Munshi Lal, who was the second investigating officer, who submitted the charge sheet in this case. Four defence witnesses have also been examined in this case, who are DW 1, Smt. Sumarati, the mother of the appellant and the deceased; DW 2, Smt. Shakuntala, the sister of the deceased; DW 3, Ramvir Singh, neighbour of the deceased and DW 4, Kaley, another neighbour of the deceased.
(3.) IN her evidence in Court PW 4, Smt. Brijesh, wife of the deceased, affirmed the version given by her in the FIR about how the appellant Ravendra knocked at the door between 2- 2.15 AM in the night of 13.8.2003 and asked her husband to open the door as he wanted to talk about something. In spite of her protests, her husband opened the door saying that the appellant was his real brother and he may have something important to say. On opening the door, her Devar and one other person entered the house and then they sat in a room upstairs. She did not know the name of the other person accompanying her Devar. As the appellant, his companion and the deceased started talking, she went on the other roof and slept there. On hearing the sound of people running away, she woke up at 2.50 A.M. She entered the room and found her husband dead with his neck slit and saw her Devar and companion fleeing away. Her husband, the deceased had been murdered by her Devar and his companion. She further deposed that her father-in-law used to work in Delhi. He had died 3-4 years earlier and Ravendra had got his job in her father-in-law's place. Her husband wanted to get employment in place of his father. The funds and other money had been taken by her mother-in-law. There was a dispute between the appellant, the deceased and their MOTHER OVER THE FUND MONEY OF HER FATHER-IN-LAW PREM RAJ. This dispute was the cause of the murder of her husband. Her husband had filed a case against the appellant for getting the job in place of her father-in-law. P.W. 7, Km. Poonam deposed that on the night in question, she was sleeping with her mother on the roof. Her uncle Ravendra and a companion were going down the stairs, which caused Poonam and her mother to wake up. She found her mother weeping as her father's neck had been cut. However, she did not see anyone cutting the neck or running away. Her mother had told her that at 2.00 AM her uncle Ravendra and his companion knocked at the gate. Her father asked her mother to open the gate, but she did not open the gate, but on the repeated persuasion of her father, she opened the gate. Her uncle told her mother that he wanted to talk alone with her father. Then her mother came upstairs and slept there. She woke up only when the appellant was running away with his companion. By then, her father had already been murdered. There was a dispute between her father and her uncle over getting employment in place of her grand-father, after his death.;