LAWS(UTN)-2007-9-9

RAM SINGH Vs. STATE

Decided On September 24, 2007
Ram Singh and Anr. Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment & order dated 14 -03 -1984 passed by Sri Bramha Kishore, the then Sessions Judge, Almora (Camp Ranikhet) in ST. No. 50 of 1983 whereby the Appellants Ram Singh and Himmat Singh were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 IPC. Both the Appellants were also convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 460 IPC. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts, in nutshell, are that a written report Ex.ka.1 was lodged by Nandan Singh Manral PW1 at the headquarter of Patwari Kuridhar at 2 a.m. in the intervening night of 09/10 -08 -1983 alleging therein that on 09 -08 -1983 at about 9:30 p.m. with a view to commit theft two unknown persons unauthorizedly entered into the house of Smt. Motuli Devi - widow of Trilok Singh. After entering into the house, the accused persons strangulated Smt. Motuli Devi and stabbed her with a 'Chura'. Hearing the noise, the people of neighbouring house gathered there and found Smt. Motuli Devi still alive in the injured condition and they enquired from her about the incident. Smt. Motuli Devi told them that two unknown persons with a view to commit theft strangulated her neck and given knife blow to her. In the meantime, the accused persons made their escape good leaving a 'Chura', a pair of shoes & 'Chappal', battery torch and a 'Kanghi' (comb) at the spot. On the basis of report, a Chick FIR was prepared and necessary entries were made in the general diary. The Patwari visited the spot and recorded the statement of Nandan Singh Manral PW1 and sent a person to call Patwari Manila for his help. After appointing panchas, the Patwari prepared the inquest report and other connected papers. The Patwari found a piece of rope Ex.7 around the neck of the dead body and got it removed. He also got removed the blood stained blouse and petticoat worn by the deceased and took it in his possession. The Patwari took the blood stained 'Chura', a Lorha/Batta (a piece of stone used for grinding spices), a battery torch and 'Kanghi' (comb) lying near the dead body. He also recovered a pair of leather shoes and 'Hawai Chappal' lying outside the house of the deceased. When the Appellant Himmat Singh was arrested by the Patwari, he interrogated the Appellant Himmat Singh and saw a blood stained injury above the knee of his right leg. After completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the chargesheet before the court against the Appellants.

(3.) THE prosecution in support of its case examined eight witnesses. Nandan Singh Manral PW1 is the scribe of the FIR and he is the informant of this case. He is the witness before whom the deceased told him that she had been strangulated and thereafter stabbed by the Appellants. The prosecution has also adduced the evidence of Madan Singh Adhikari PW2, who is the Patwari of Ratan Khal. Appellant Himmat Singh was apprehended by Joga Singh PW6 on 10 -08 -1983 and he was handed over to Patwari, Ratan Khal. Dr. V.S. Pal PW3 is the medical officer, who conducted the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. The prosecution has also adduced the evidence of Umed Singh PW4 who has stated in his evidence that the Appellant Himmat Singh took tea in his tea -stall at about 6am on 10 -08 -1983 and purchased a pair of 'Hawai Chappal' from his shop and thereafter he left the shop. He is also the witness of extrajudicial confession made by Himmat Singh Appellant. The prosecution has also adduced the evidence of Inder Singh Bangari PW5 and Joga Singh PW6 before whom the dying declaration was made by the deceased. Inder Singh Bangari PW5 and Joga Singh PW6 proved the oral dying declaration of the deceased. Joga Singh PW6 is also the witness of extra -judicial confession made by Himmat Singh. Moti Singh PW7 has proved the 'Panchayatnama' Ex.ka.4. T.D. Sati PW8 is the Investigating Officer of this case and he proved the chargesheet.