T.H.B.CHALAPATHI, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will dispose. of Criminal Appeal Nos. 275-SB and 276-SB of 1986, as both these appeals arise out of the same judgment.
(2.) LIBERTY is the most cherished human right. These appeals provide a typical example how a citizen can be deprived of the Constitutional guarantee of personal liberty by the delays in disposal of the cases and thus bring the judicial mechanism to ridicule. The appellants served their sentence of five years of imprisonment long before listing of these appeals for hearing. A mere glance at the judgment of the trial Court clearly shows that these convictions cannot be sustained under law. The appellants in these two appeals were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala in Sessions Case No. 7T/1985/4.8.1985 for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The first accused and the complainant Balwinder Singh are brothers of Gurbax Singh while the second accused is the wife of the deceased. Gurbax Singh and his wife Anoop Kaur shifted to Samaria town from their native village. The first accused Mehal Singh also started living in the same town. It is the case of the prosecution that Mehal Singh developed illicit relations with the wife of the deceased Gurbax Singh. Gurbax Singh on coming to know this, complained about this to his other brothers. On the Lohri day, Balwinder Singh visited their house at Samana and found that his brother Gurbax Singh was not available at the house. On enquiry from the accused, they informed that Gurbax Singh had gone to Muktasar and he would return in four or five days. Balwinder Singh again visited the house of the deceased alongwith one Tek Chand when Anoop Kaur confessed to him that she and Mehal Singh have murdered Gurbax Singh and buried him in the house. Thereafter, Balwinder Singh went to the Police Station Samaria and gave a report. On the basis of the said report, the police registered a case in F.I.R. No. 28 dated January 30, 1985. After registering the case the Sub Inspector of Police reached the house of the deceased on the same day and recorded the statements of the accused and recovered the dead body from a room of the residence of Gurbax Singh-deceased. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. After completion of investigation, he filed charge-sheet in the Special Court, Judicial Zone, Patiala. The Special Judge took the case on file and framed charges against both the accused for the offences under, Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 201 IPC. Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the said charges. Thereafter, the case had been transferred to the Court of Sessions Judge, Patiala in view of the amendment of Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses and marked documents. On a consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala acquitted both the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC but convicted the accused for the offence under Section 201 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each. Aggrieved by the said convictions and sentences imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, both the accused preferred above appeals through jail.
(3.) IT is to be seen whether there is legally acceptable evidence to show whether the accused were guilty of the offence under Section 201 IPC. There cannot be any doubt that Gurbax Singh died due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation in view of the evidence of P.W. 1, a Medical Officer who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Gurbax Singh about more than ten days after the death. According to the case of the prosecution the dead body was buried in the house of the deceased consisting of only one room as per plan Ex. PJ by the accused to conceal the evidence of the murder. PW. 3 Balwinder Singh on whose complaint the case was registered by the police in FIR No. (sic) was declared result and was cross-examined by the prosecution. He stated that he did not lodge any report about the occurrence at Police Station Samaria. He further stated that he identified the dead body of Gurbax Singh at the time of post-mortem. In the cross-examination by the accused, he stated that the police was searching and making enquiries about the disappearance of Gurbax Singh since 10/12 days prior to the recovery of the dead body. He also stated that Anoop Kaur (A.2) and his mother were also detained in the police station till the time of digging out the dead body. He also stated that A.1 was also detained in the Police Station for 10 or 15 days before recovery of the dead body. It is suggested to P.W. 3 in the cross-examination by Addl. P.P. that he stated in his complaint Ex.PD that Anup Kaur told him that the dead body was buried in the house.;