- (1.) The sole accused who stood trial before the Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to undergo a further period of six months. Aggrieved by the conviction recorded and sentenced imposed by the trial Court, the accused has preferred the present appeal. Prosectuion version:
(2.) (a ) Ajit Singh and Kuldeep Singh are co-brothers. The accused is a permanent resident of United States of America. PW15 Mukesh Mehta was familiar to deceased Kuldeep Singh as he was his neighbour. On 13.4.2002 deceased Kuldip Singh came to him and informed that he was waiting for his co-brother Ajit Singh. He also informed him that Ajit Singh had already reached ISBT Delhi and made a request to use his mobile to contact Ajit Singh. The deceased contacted the accused using the mobile of PW15 and conveyed to him that he was proceeding to the shop of PW15 from where he could be picked up. The deceased Kuldeep Singh had tea with him and informed him that he would be accompanying his cobrother for 3 or 4 days. Kuldeep Singh had a telephonic conversation again with the accused Ajit Singh over mobile phone and he got instructions from accused Ajit Singh to wait for him outside the shop of PW15. After a short while PW15 came out of is shop and saw the deceased Kuldeep Singh boarding a car in which Ajit Singh was travelling. (b) On 13.4.2002 PW2, Suresh, a milk vender hailing from Harkesh Nagar, Delhi had been to his village Nayagaon by Scooter. While returning to Delhi from his village he purchased a beer bottle at Dundahera border having reached at 9.15 pm on the said day. Deceased Kuldeep Singh who was consuming liquor along with another person called him to an Indica car where he was sitting. PW2 Suresh informed him that he was proceeding to his house. He also sat there for about 25 minutes and shared liquor with them. During that time, deceased Kuldeep Singh introduced him to the accused Ajit Singh as his London based co-brother. (c) PW17 ASI Subhash Chander incharge of Police Post Badshahpur was present at Dogharbandh Tigra Road along with two constables when Mange Ram met him and made a statement Ex.PD/1. In his statement Mange Ram had disclosed that when he reached Didar Chowk at about 7.00 am on 14.4.2002 he saw a dead body of an unknown person by the side of the road. It appears that some unknown driver of a vehicle had hit him by rash and negligent driving and on account of which he had died. PW17 made an endorsement Ex.PD/2 on the said statement and sent the same to the Police Station for registration of the case through Constable Manoj Kumar for registration of the case. (d) PW3 SI Charan Singh attached to Sadar Gurgaon Police Station recorded formal First Information Report Ex.PD, for offences under Section 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. (e) PW17 reached the spot along with Constable Faqir Chand. He summoned the photographer PW5 Gajender Singh to take photographs of the dead body. He recorded the statement of Rati Ram and completed the inquest proceedings. He also prepared rough site plan Ex.PQ. On the same evening the dead body of the deceased was identified by PW9 Jasbir Singh as that of his brother Kuldeep Singh. (f) PW1 Dr. Nawal Kishore performed the post mortem examination on 14.4.2002 on the dead body of an unknown person who was later on identified by PW9 Jasbir Singh as that of his brother Kuldeep Singh. PW1 found the following injuries : i) Crush injury on the left side and front of face. Clotted blood was present and brain matter was protruding out. On dissection fracture of maxilla on left side, nasal bone, frontal bone, left and right parietal bone were detected. ii) Abrasion on the left shoulder. iii) Blood froth in the mouth and hostrils. All the injuries were found to be ante mortem and were sufficient to cause death in the normal course of nature. He opined that the deceased would have died about 24 hours prior to post mortem examination due to the crush injuries that could have been caused by a heavy stone. The post mortem report prepared by PW1 was marked as Ex.P.C. (g) PW16 SI Dharampal recorded the statement Ex.P1 of PW9 Jasbir Singh on 20.4.2002. He made endorsement Ex.PD/1 and sent special reports about the conversion of the case into one under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in the light of the statement given by PW9 Jasbir Singh. He recorded the statements of the witnesses. On 24.4.2002 PW11 Jaswinder Singh and PW13 Hawa Singh brought the accused Ajit Singh to the Police Station. Ajit Singh was arrested. The car was recovered vide memo Ex.PO/1. The statements of PW11 Jaswinder Singh and PW13 Hawa Singh also were recorded by PW16. (h) On interrogation the accused suffered a disclosure statement Ex.PJ/1 in the presence of PW9 Jasbir Singh and Raj Kumar. On the basis of the disclosure statement a stone was recovered from the concealed place identified by the accused. After completion of the investigation, final report was filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C. by Inspector Ramesh Pal. Statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. (i) The accused was confronted with the incriminating portion found in the testimony of the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution. The accused having denied his role has submitted that he was detained by the Police on suspicion on 15.4.2002 itself when he attended the rasam pagri of the deceased. He had been falsely implicated in this case as he was not in a position to pay any bribe demanded by the police officials for clearing him of the charges. He had never visited Delhi on 13.4.2002. He had no idea as to how Kuldeep Singh had died. He was in Mohali at the time when he received the information from his brother-in-law Bupinder Singh over phone that Kuldeep Singh had died. Submission on the side of the accused-appellant
(3.) Mr. S.S.Behl, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the motive part of the prosecution was not established. Had the accused got illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased, the deceased would not have waited for the arrival of the accused for the purpose of giving company to him for 3 or 4 days. The accused being the permanent resident of USA would have left for USA immediately after the occurrence. He would not have been loitering around till 244.4.2002, the day on which the arrest was shown by PW16. Recovery of the material object namely blood stained stone was not established. The human blood found on the stone was not connected to the accused. The chain of circumstances projected by the prosecution was not established beyond reasonable doubt. Submission by the State Counsel;