Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sunita Chandel vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 27 February, 2017
Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr. Appeal No. 360 of 2016.
Reserved on: 4.11.2016.
.
Decided on: 27.2.2017.
Sunita Chandel ......Appellant.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent.
Coram
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
rt
For the appellant : Mr. C.N.Singh, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Virender Verma, Addl. AG.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.
Appellant herein is one of the convicts. She was convicted along with her co-accused Naresh Kumar alias Ashok Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Anil Kumar for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the commission of offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC. Their co-accused Bhaskar Chandel son of the appellant-convict was also convicted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC and 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? yes.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 2sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-.
.
2. Accused Sanju, their co-accused is a proclaimed offender and the trial qua him on and after 16.11.2013, the day when he absconded is, however, deferred for being taken up as and when he is apprehended and produced in the Court.
of
3. It is worth mentioning that co-accused/convicts, namely, Naresh Kumar alias Ashok Kumar, Suresh Kumar and rt Anil Kumar of appellant herein have, however, been acquitted by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 27.4.2016, passed in Cr. Appeal No. 275 of 2015 and its connected appeals bearing Nos. 364/2015 and 394/2015. Convict Sunita Chandel, has however, filed the present appeal on 22.7.2016 in this Court i.e. after the decision of the aforesaid three appeals, which were filed by her co-accused/convicts, as aforesaid.
4. Her complaint is that she has been convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court contrary to the provisions of law and the evidence available on record. The trial Court allegedly failed to appreciate the defence of the appellant-convict qua her modesty outraged by deceased, who entered in her bed-room and attempted to assault her sexually. On hearing her cries, her co-
accused rushed to the room and saved her from the deceased. It is her co-accused who administered beatings to the deceased. The criminal liability upon the accused was fastened for the reason ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 3 that they failed to show as to how deceased Manjeet Singh had died, had he been not administered beatings by them. The .
appellant-accused allegedly would have not made false statement qua outraging of her modesty by the deceased and thereby maligned her reputation. The testimony of PW-38 Raj Kumar who heard cries of appellant-convict qua her molestation by the of deceased is also ignored while concluding that no report to this effect was lodged by her with the police. The reasoning given by rt the trial Court, while convicting the accused persons, is perverse and not based upon proper appreciation of the evidence available on record. The findings that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt are claimed to be perverse being far fetched. The accused allegedly were implicated in the case falsely because five prosecution witnesses, namely, PW-10 Indu Kumari, PW-11 Satish Kumar, PW-13 Sant Ram, PW-16 Sanjay Kumar and PW-17 Pankaj Kumar have not supported the prosecution case.
The so called independent witnesses were interested in the success of the prosecution case, hence could not have been relied upon.
The findings of conviction, according to the appellant-convict, were based upon surmises, conjectures and hypothesis. Out of 41 witnesses examined by the prosecution, five have turned hostile, however, this fact has not been appreciated at all. The cardinal principles of criminal jurisprudence that charge could only have been said to be proved when certain and explicit evidence is ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 4 produced has also been ignored. The trial Court has also failed to appreciate that suspicion howsoever grave cannot take place of .
proof. There being no motive for the convict to have killed the deceased, the findings of conviction could not have been recorded against her. Appellant-convict Sunita Chandel, has therefore, sought her acquittal on reversal of the impugned judgment.
of
5. The prosecution case, shortly stated, is that deceased Manjeet Singh used to come to the residence of accused Sunita rt Chandel at Village Kallar frequently. She was also running a Dhaba there. Her co-accused Naresh Kumar, Suresh Kumar, Anil Kumar and Sanju (Proclaimed offender) were her servants and working in the Dhaba. They were not happy with regular visits of deceased to the Dhaba or the residence of accused Sunita Chandel. Therefore, they in connivance with said accused planned to teach a lesson to the deceased. Accused Sunita Chandel called deceased Manjeet Singh to come with a filled gas cylinder to Ashok Dhaba. He borrowed a gas cylinder from Ateh Mohammad on 18.2.2012 at Kallar and brought the same in his Alto car bearing registration No. HP-69A-4444. His brother Rakesh Kumar met him at Village Kallar. He had conversation with his brother for some time. It is, thereafter, he alone went to the bed-room of accused Sunita Chandel. She was alone in the bed-room at that time. Seeing the deceased going to the bed-room of said accused, her co-accused Naresh, Suresh and Anil Kumar followed him.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 5They all assaulted the deceased with fist and kick blows. The deceased was under the influence of liquor, therefore, he was not .
able to defend himself. On account of beatings administered to him by the accused persons, he died on the spot itself. The occurrence was witnessed by PW-38 Raj Kumar. He, out of fear, however, fled away from the place of occurrence. Blood splashed of all around in the room. The blood stains on walls and other articles in the room, though were washed by the accused persons, rt however, some blood stains remained on the idol of Goddess Kali kept in one side of the room. The dead body, after being wrapped in a mat and legs tied with a bed sheet, was loaded in the Car of the deceased and taken by accused Ashok Kumar and Anil Kumar towards Dehar. A bag containing blood stained clothes and shoes was also kept in the vehicle. At Dehar, the car was taken to the cliff near river Satluj and thrown in the river by accused Anil Kumar. Accused Ashok Kumar had thrown cell phone of deceased into the river which could not be recovered during the course of investigation.
6. After throwing the vehicle along with the dead body of Manjeet Singh into the river, accused Anil and Ashok Kumar called for taxi of their co-accused Sanjay Kumar bearing No. HP-01 B-
0617 to Barmana. They travelled therein up to Ashok Dhaba at Kallar. On the way, petrol worth Rs. 500/- was filled in the vehicle ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 6 at the petrol pump of M/S Ram Lal Anand & Sons. The payment was made by accused Ashok Kumar.
.
7. On 19.2.2012, PW-9 ASI Gulab Singh, In-charge PP Dehar received information that a tyre of light vehicle was visible in river Satluj at Dehar. Rapat Ext. PW-9/A to this effect was entered in the Daily Diary and ASI Gulab Singh rushed to the spot. He of found a white coloured vehicle lying in river Satluj. Accordingly, information was given to SHO, Police Station Sundernagar and a rt crane was sought to be deployed to take out the vehicle from river.
The vehicle was taken out and it was found to be an Alto car bearing registration No. HP-69A-4444. The dead body with both legs tied with bed sheet was lying inside the car. On inspection of the dead body, injuries were found present on the head and other parts thereof. On enquiry from Sahil (PW-18), son of deceased, he disclosed that the vehicle was of his father Manjeet Singh. Said Sahil accompanied by PW-1 Surjeet and PW-36 Vikrant rushed to the spot. He identified the dead body to be that of his father Manjeet Singh. Consequently, statement of PW-18 Sahil Ext. PW-
18/A was recorded by Jagdish Chand (PW-39), the then Insp./SHO, PS Sundernagar. On the basis of Ext. PW-18/A, FIR Ext. PW-27/A was registered at PS Sundernagar.
8. Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand (PW-39) had clicked photographs Ext. PW-39/A-1 to PW-39/A-17 of the dead body on the spot. He also prepared the site plan Ext. PW-39/B. The ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 7 vehicle was seized by the police vide seizure memo Ext. PW-1/A. Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand had prepared inquest papers Ext. PW-
.
39/C and PW-39/D. The docket Ext. PW-29/A was sent along with the inquest report for conducting autopsy on the corpus of Manjeet Singh. The autopsy was conducted by PW-29 Dr. Ranesh Kumar. He issued the post mortem report Ext. PW-29/B. On of perusal of the reports of chemical examiner Ext. PW-29/C to PW-
29/E, Ext. PW-22/B and Ext. PW-22/C, PW-9 ASI Gulab Singh in rt his opinion has found the cause of death of Manjeet Singh to be the combined effect of head trauma and hypovolemic shock. The inner Ext. P-6, shirt Ext. P-7 and pullover Ext. P-8 of the deceased were taken into possession by Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand vide seizure memo Ext. PW-4/A.
9. During the course of the search of the house of accused Sunita Chandel, conducted by Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand in the presence of PW-2 Ram Saran and PW-30 Balak Ram, the blood stains were found to be removed. PW-5 ASI Jasbir Singh was deputed to take team of scientists from RFSL Gutkar to Kallar and Dehar. The team had inspected the room in the house at Kallar which was lying sealed and taken into possession a table cloth Ext. P-11 vide seizure memo Ext. PW-5/C, piece of mat Ext.
P-12 vide seizure memo Ext. PW-5/D. Blood stains were also lifted from the idol of Goddess Kali lying in the room. Blood on the walls was also marked/scratched by the team of scientists. The blood ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 8 on the door of adjoining room was collected on a piece of paper and taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-5/F. PW-5 ASI Jasbir .
Singh had thereafter prepared the site plan Ext. PW-5/H. Photographs Ext. PW-7/A-1 to PW-7/A-14 were also clicked by PW-7 Const. Yadvinder Singh. At Dehar, the team of scientists had seized blood stained pieces of seat belt Ext. P-1 and piece of of rear seat cover Ext. P-2 vide seizure memo Ext. PW-3/A. A shoe, black in colour Ext. P-3, was also seized by the team along with a rt card case containing sand Ext. P-4 vide seizure memo Ext. PW-
3/C. The water of river Satluj was also taken for sample in a bottle Ext. P-3 and seized vide memo Ext. PW-3/B. PW-5 ASI Jasbir Singh had prepared site plan Ext. PW-5/M and Const. Yadvinder Singh had taken photographs Ext. PW-7/A-15 to PW-7/A-27. The report Ext. PW-22/A was prepared by PW-22 Tek Chand, one of the members of the inspection party. After analyzing the sample, he prepared detailed reports Ext. PW-22/B and PW-22/C. On 22.2.2012, PW-9 ASI Gulab Singh had got the car HP-69A-4444 of the deceased checked up mechanically from mechanic Ramesh.
The report is Ext. PA. The clothes of accused Sunita i.e. Salwar Ext. P-16 and shirt Ext. P-17 were also seized vide memo Ext. PW-
6/A. Accused Anil Kumar and Naresh Kumar allegedly made disclosure statements Ext. PW-8/A and PW-8/B and in consequence thereof identified the spot at Village Dehar from where they had thrown down the vehicle along with the dead body.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 9Identification memos are Ext. PW-8/C, PW-39/E and Mark-DO1.
The spot map Ext. PW-39/F and PW-39/G were prepared by Insp.
.
SHO. Jagdish Chand. The empty cylinder Ext. P-18 was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW-11/A on 26.2.2012. The same was identified to be that of Ateh Mohammad (PW-15). The disclosure statement made by accused Anil Kumar Ext. PW-11/B of was recorded and at his instance pants Ext. P-19 was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW-11/C. Currency notes rt worth Rs. 3,000/- lying in the dash board of the car were also taken into possession by the police. Pants of accused Bhaskar Chandel Ext. P-9 and P-10 were seized vide seizure memo Ext. PW-
4/B on 29.2.2012. On that very date, accused Suresh Kumar had made disclosure statement Ext. PW-4/D and consequent upon the same got recovered two vests Ext. P-20 and P-21 on the basis thereof. Accused Sunita Chandel, allegedly gave demarcation of the room, where after administering beatings to the deceased, he was killed vide seizure memo Ext. PW-11/A. The spot maps Ext.
PW-20/A, PW-21/B and PW-31/B as well as jamabandi(s) Ext.
PW-20/B and PW-21/C were obtained from Sukardeen (PW-20), Nikka Ram (PW-21) and Naresh Kumar (PW-31). Ext. PW-38/A, statement of PW-38 Raj Kumar was got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. from PW-41 Sh. Aneesh Garg, JMIC Sundernagar.
The case property was deposited in the malkhana with HC Anil Kumar (PW-26) vide entry Ext. PW-32/C. Seven sealed parcels ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 10 were deposited with PW-26 HC Anil Kumar which were entered at Sr. No. 1040 Ext. PW-32/D. On 24.2.2012, 26.2.2012 and .
29.2.2012, Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand had deposited sealed parcel i.e. gas cylinder with PW-26 HC Anil Kumar vide entries at Sr. Nos.
1042, 1043 and 1046, Ext. PW-32/E to PW-32/G.
10. The case property was sent to RFSL, Mandi through of PW-33 HHC Durga Dass vide RC No. 195/11-12. The remaining case property was also sent to FSL, Junga through PW-25 Const.
rt Suresh Kumar vide RC No. 199/11-12. Some more case property was sent to RFSL, Gutkar, Mandi thorugh PW-24 HHG Chander Kant vide RC No. 202/11-12. Some case property was again sent to RFSL, Gutkar through HHC Durga Dass Vide RC No. 195/11-
12.
11. Since the occurrence had taken place within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Sadar Bilaspur, therefore, FIR registered in PS Sundernagar along with its record was transferred there vide letter Ext. PW-26/A. On the receipt of order Ext. PW-
14/A from Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, Ext. PW-40/A, FIR Ext. PW-40/B was registered in Police Station Sadar, Bilaspur.
PW-40 SI Vijay Kumar had conducted the spot inspection at Kallar and prepared site plan Ext. PW-40/C. He got the custody of accused transferred from case FIR No. 20/12 of PS Sundernagar to case FIR No. 84/2012 registered at PS Sadar Bilaspur. Accused Ashok Kumar and accused Anil Kumar had demarcated the spot at ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 11 Dehar to PW-40 SI Vijay Kumar. The entire case property was also got transferred to the record of FIR No. 84/2012. Entry to this .
effect came to be made in the malkhana register.
12. On completion of the investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed in the Court of learned JMIC, Bilaspur. The case being triable by the Court of Sessions, the of same was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur by learned JMIC, Bilaspur vide order dated 4.9.2012.
13. rt Charge against accused persons, namely, Sunita Chandel, Anil Kumar, Naresh Kumar alias Ashok Kumar and Suresh Kumar was framed under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC whereas against accused Sanju and Bhaskar Chandel under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC. They pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.
14. The prosecution, in order to sustain the charge against the accused, has examined 41 witnesses in all. The material prosecution witness is, however, PW-1 Surjeet Singh, the real brother of deceased Manjeet Singh. He has identified the dead body of his brother deceased Manjeet Singh lying inside the vehicle HP 69-A-4444 and also identified the vehicle to be that of his deceased brother. PW-3 Ankush Kumar is the witness, who while playing Cricket ran after the ball which fell into river Satluj where he noticed vehicle No. HP 69-A-4444 having fallen in the river. It is, in his presence, the vehicle was brought out of the water by the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 12 police with the help of a Crane. PW-4 ASI Ram Lal is a witness in whose presence Insp./SHO Jagdish Chand (PW-39) had conducted .
the inspection of the dead body after being taken out from the vehicle. PW-5 ASI Jasbir Singh is a witness to the inspection of the place of occurrence of Village Kallar by a team of FSL whereas PW-6 HC Chaman Lal is a witness to the recovery of salwar and of shirt of accused Sunita Chandel vide Ext. PW-6/A. According to him, she while in custody disclosed that the salwar and shirt worn rt by her were the same which she had worn on the date of occurrence. PW-8 Om Prakash Modgil was examined to prove that accused Anil and Ashok Kumar had disclosed that they first stopped the vehicle near Satya Narain Mandir at Dehar and then break was applied and after alighting from the vehicle they removed the hand break and pushed down the vehicle into the river. PW-9 ASI Gulab Singh is a person to the recovery of vehicle HP 69-A-4444 from river Satluj by the police officials. PW-10 Kumari Indu is daughter of accused Sunita Chandel. She was examined to prove the prosecution case qua administering beatings with fist and kicks by the accused persons, however, she turned hostile and deposed that she had seen the deceased outraging the modesty of her mother. PW-11 Satish Kumar has also turned hostile to the prosecution case and admitted that sim No. 86796-94616 was given by him to accused Sunita Chandel and denied that I.D proof of Ashok Kumar was with respect of this sim.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 13He is also a witness to the recovery of gas cylinder and pants of accused Anil Kumar vide Ext. PW-11/B and PW-11/C. He was .
also associated to prove the recovery of two vests (banians) vide recovery memo Ext. PW-11/E at the instance of accused Suresh.
PW-12 Nand Lal is also a witness to the recovery of cylinder from accused Sunita Chandel. PW-13 Sant Ram is a witness to recovery of of two vests from nullah by accused Suresh and witness to the recovery memo Ext. PW-11/E. PW-14 Sher Ali is a witness to the rt fact that the deceased had come to him on 18.2.2012 and asked for a gas cylinder. He, however, was having only one cylinder.
PW-15 Ateh Mohd. is a witness to prove the prosecution case that gas cylinder was hired by the deceased from him on return basis.
PW-16 Sanjay Kumar, a taxi driver at Kandraur was associated to prove the prosecution case qua hiring of his taxi by accused Anil and Suresh to perform back journey from Barmana to Kallar after throwing the vehicle in river Satluj at Dehar, however, he turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. PW-17 Pankaj Kumar is a salesman in the Petrol Pump. He admitted filling of petrol worth Rs. 500 in the vehicle HP 01-B-0617 at 3-3:30 AM on 19.2.2012, however, did not support the prosecution case that Rs.
500/- was paid by accused Ashok. He did not support the prosecution case that two other persons were sitting in the car.
PW-18 Sahil is son of deceased who had identified the dead body of his father and also vehicle No. HP 69-A-4444. PW-19 Mohinder ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 14 Singh was examined to show that on his way to home around 8- 8:30 PM, he had seen the vehicle HP 69-A-4444. In his cross-
.
examination, he has admitted that he could not tell the registration number of other vehicles. The vehicle of this number was found to have been written by him on his left hand. PW-28 Navjeet Singh Sangwan was examined to prove call detail reports Ext. PW-28/A of to PW-28/C. PW-29 Dr. Ramesh has proved the post mortem report Ext. PW-29/B. PW-30 Balak Ram is a witness to the seizure rt of the room of Dhaba of accused Sunita Chandel by the team of RFSL, Gutkar, Mandi. PW-35 Ganpat Ram is the owner of truck No. HP-24A-7873 and he was associated to prove the prosecution case that accused Ashok Kumar had asked Raj Kumar (PW-38) the driver of his truck to bring vegetables. PW-36 Vikrant Sharma is the witness who accompanied Sahil, the son of deceased to Dehar and also a witness to the recovery of vehicle from river Satluj.
15. PW-39 Raj Kumar, allegedly driver of truck No. HP-
24A-7873 belonging to PW-35 Ganpat Ram, was associated to prove the prosecution case that on asking by accused Ashok Kumar, he had brought vegetables and delivered the same to said Ashok Kumar in the Dhaba. PW-39 Insp./SHO Raj Kumar, PS Sundernagar has conducted the investigation in this case. PW-41 is Aneesh Garg, the then Judicial Magistrate Sundernagar, who had recorded the statement of accused Raj Kumar under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 1516. The remaining witnesses are formal as they remained associated during the investigation of the case in one way or the .
other.
17. Now, if coming to the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of accused Sunita Chandel, while answering question No. 99, she has stated that a person well built and having beard came of into her room during the night time and sat on her bed where she was resting alone. He started molesting her by pressing her breast rt and thereafter tried to pull the string of her Salwar with an intention to rape her. In order to rescue herself, she gave a slap on his face. She also raised alarm. On her shrieks, workmen who were working in the hotel and on the top floor also came downward alongwith numerous persons who were taking meals in the Dhaba at that time.
18. Her co-accused in their statements under Section 313 CrPC, have stated that they heard crises of Sunita Chandel and went to her room where people were giving beatings to some unknown person. They rescued her from his clutches by giving him fist and kick blows and dragged him outside the room. After some time, she also came out of room. No person was there except her daughter. PW-39 Jagdish, has admitted in his cross-examination that deceased Manjeet was alone in the room of Sunita.
Volunteered that he was there for some time and had been called.
He also admitted that during the course of investigation, it ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 16 transpired that PW Indu Chandel was present in the adjoining room. It has come on record, during the investigation that .
appellant-convict Sunita had given beatings to Manjeet Singh.
19. As noticed at the outset, all the accused except accused Bhaskar Chandel, were convicted and sentenced for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of read with Section 34 IPC whereas accused Bhaskar Chandel under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC.
20. rt Sh. C.N.Singh, Advocate, has with all vehemence argued that convict-appellant Sunita Chandel had never beaten up the deceased. It is, rather her co-accused Anil Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Naresh Kumar who had beaten up the deceased to protect the honour and dignity of owner of the Dhaba i.e. Sunita Chandel, aforesaid. Accused Sunita Chandel had not denied the presence of deceased in her room. The deceased entered in her room when she was all alone and tried to outrage her modesty.
According to Mr. Singh learned counsel, the deceased was seen by PW-10 Indu Kumari outraging the modesty of her mother accused Sunita Chandel. It has also been argued that when accused Sunita Chandel raised alarm, her co-accused came down and administered beatings to the deceased to save their master, said accused Sunita Chandel from the clutches of the deceased who was trying to assault her sexually. Learned counsel has also pointed out from the evidence available on record that deceased ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 17 entered into the room of accused Sunita Chandel under the influence of liquor and attempted to rape her. The alcohol content .
in his blood, as per the scientific investigation conducted in the matter was found to be 111.52 mg%. It has, therefore been urged that accused Sunita Chandel never administered beatings to the deceased and it is rather her co-accused who had beaten him up of on seeing their master said Sunita Chandel was being assaulted sexually by the deceased. Our attention has also been drawn to rt the judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Appeal No. 275 of 2015 and its connected matters Cr. Appeal Nos. 364 of 2015 and 394 of 2015 dated 29.4.2016, whereby her co-accused Anil Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Naresh Kumar alias Ashok Kumar, who according to Mr. Singh were principal accused in this case, have been acquitted of the charge framed against them. It has, therefore, been contended that the points in issue in this appeal are covered in favour of the convict-appellant Sunita Chandel by the judgment ibid.
21. On the other hand, learned Addl. Advocate General, though has made an attempt to support the impugned judgment, however, according to him, co-accused of Sunita Chandel have already been acquitted by this Court.
22. As noticed supra, charge against the appellant-convict Sunita Chandel is under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC. In view of the evidence available on record, whether any ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 18 case for commission of the said offence is made out against her or not is a first and foremost question which needs adjudication in .
this appeal.
23. As per the prosecution case itself, deceased Manjeet Singh was regular visitor to accused Sunita Chandel and her Dhaba. Her co-accused Anil, Suresh Kumar and Naresh Kumar of alias Ashok Kumar allegedly were not happy with such visits of the deceased to their master Sunita Chandel aforesaid. The further rt allegations against her are that she in connivance with her co-
accused as aforesaid planned to teach a lesson to the deceased. It was part of such conspiracy that deceased was called by accused Sunita Chandel to come to Dhaba along with a gas cylinder. He did so and came to her Dhaba and also brought the gas cylinder with him. As per further case of the prosecution, accused Sunita Chandel was all alone in her room and was taking rest in her bed room. The deceased straightway went down to her bed room and on seeing him going there, her co-accused as a part of their planning also came down to her room and pounced upon the deceased. They had beaten up the deceased with fist and kicks, as a result thereof, he received injuries on his person, including on vital parts of his body and succumbed to the injuries so received by him. In order to screen the evidence, his dead body was taken in his own car i.e. HP-69A-4444 by accused Anil Kumar and Suresh Kumar towards Dehar side. The dead body along with the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 19 car was made to roll down into the river Satluj at Dehar by them.
The car was seen in water by local residents playing cricket at a .
stage when the cricket ball fell into the river and PW-3 Ankush Kumar while in search of the ball went there and noticed the Car in the water. The information came to be given to the police of PP Dehar and subsequently PS Sundernagar. The police swung into of action and the car was taken out from the river in the presence of PW-1 Surjeet Singh and PW-3 Ankush Kumar by Insp./SHO rt Jagdish Chand (PW-39).
24. Now, if coming to the defence of appellant Sunita Chandel, while answering question No. 99, in her statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., she has admitted that the deceased having come to her room during night time, sat on her bed where she was resting alone, started molesting her by pressing her breasts. The deceased also tried to pull the string of her salwar intentionally to subject her to sexual intercourse. Also that she slapped him and raised alarm. On her shrieks, her co-accused working in the Dhaba also reached there along with several customers, who were having their meal in the Dhaba at that time.
Her co-accused and the other customers administered beatings to the deceased to save her from his clutches. The deceased was dragged by them outside the room. Similar plea has been raised by her co-accused in their defence. According to them, the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 20 deceased after being beaten up was dragged outside the room and he fled away from the spot in his car.
.
25. The close scrutiny of the prosecution evidence and the plea so raised by the accused persons in their defence leaves no manner of doubt that the deceased was present in the room of accused Sunita Chandel, who was all alone in the room. On of finding Sunita alone in the room, the possibility of the deceased having outraged her modesty and made an attempt to assault her rt sexually cannot be ruled out for the reason that had it been not so, there was no occasion for her to raise alarm and her co-accused to have administered beatings to the deceased. The prosecution story that the accused persons were not happy with frequent visits of the deceased to Sunita and her Dhaba cannot be believed to be true by any stretch of imagination for the reason that they were only workers and to whom she had been meeting and who had been coming to her perhaps was immaterial for them. Aggrieved thereby, if any, would have been her son accused Bhaskar Chandel or her daughter Kumari Indu (PW-10) or at the most Sunita Chandel herself. The plea raised by accused Sunita in her defence finds corroboration from the testimony of her daughter PW-10 Kumari Indu, who in unequivocal terms deposed in her cross-
examination conducted by learned Public Prosecutor that deceased Manjeet Singh was molesting her mother who slapped him. It is denied that she could hear shrieks of the deceased and according ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 21 to her rather it is her mother who was crying. On this, she made hue and cry and workers from the Dhaba came to the room of her .
mother. According to her, the deceased was outraging the modesty of her mother. He was trying to pull the string of the salwar of her mother whereas her mother was resisting to such act attributed to him. The workers from the Dhaba came down along with other of persons and administered fist and kick blows to the deceased who was ultimately dragged out of the room. He was given beatings rt outside the room by those persons. The defence of the accused, therefore, seems to be probable and nearer to the factual position.
26. Interestingly enough, it is not the prosecution case that accused Sunita Chandel had also joined hands with her co-
accused in administering beatings to the deceased. As per the prosecution case, it is rather her co-accused who had administered beatings to the deceased with fist and kicks. On this score also, we fail to understand as to how criminal liability could have been fastened upon accused Sunita Chandel. Since, to our mind, Sunita was molested by the deceased and the possibility that the deceased attempted to assault her sexually cannot be ruled out, therefore, it was well within her right of private defence to slap the accused and also raise alarm to save her from the clutches of the deceased. The present, as such, is a case where the accused had not acceded her right of private defence while freeing herself from the clutches of deceased, who entered her room, fondled with her ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 22 breasts and tried to open the string of her salwar. This aspect of the matter has been dealt with in detail by a Coordinate Bench of .
this Court in its judgment dated 29.4.2016 supra, rendered in Cr.
Appeal No. 275 of 2015 titled Anil Kumar vs. State of H.P. and its connected Cr. Appeals preferred by the co-accused of Sunita Chandel against the findings of their conviction and sentence of recorded by learned trial Court in this very judgment which is under challenge in the present appeal. The relevant extract rt whereof reads as follows:
"44. In this case, accused have not acceded their right to private defence while saving Sunita Chandel from the deceased, who entered her room, fondled with her breasts and tried to open the string of her Salwar. According to plain reading of Section 100 IPC, the right of private defence of body extends, under the restrictions mentioned under Section 99 of the Indian Penal Code to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the descriptions enumerated there under, including assault with the intention to commit rape.
45. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Yeshwant Rao v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 1992 SC 1683 have held that in a case where accused assaulted victim on seeing his minor daughter being sexually molested by victim right of private defence is extendable to such case. Fact whether sexual intercourse was with or without consent of daughter was not ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 23 material. Fact whether the cause of subsequent death of victim was internal injury due to fall or .
result of blow by accused is also not material.
Their lordships have held as under:
"9. It will be noticed that before the Sessions Judge the appellant had pleaded the right of private defence also but the Sessions Judge after noticing that the assault was an act of sudden and grave provocation did not pursue the matter further. It appears to us that it is a case where of the right of private defence arises and the case is fully covered by Sections 96, 97 read with Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code. Whether it was a case of sexual intercourse with rt consent or without consent the fact remains that according to the case of the prosecution Chhaya was of 15 years of age and, therefore, the act of Lakhan Singh, deceased, would amount to rape within the meaning of Section 375 Clause (6) of the Indian Penal Code. The Panchanama Ext. P- 4 shows that the attempt of rape or actual sexual intercourse was not fully complete and it is in that state of affairs that the appellant is alleged to have assaulted the deceased with spade on his head. As per the medical evidence the cause of death is not by spade but it was due to the rupture of the liver which could be either by fall on hard object, as the appellant stated that the deceased tried to run away but hit against the wall and fell on the ground or it could be as a result of blow given by the appellant. The fact remains that the right of private defence is extendable to the facts of the present case when the daughter of the appellant was being sexually molested. It appears that this part of the case of the appellant was not brought to the notice of the High Court. The judgment of the High Court mainly deals with the prosecution case only. The right of private defence is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. We thus find that the appellant is entitled to acquittal. We would accordingly hold the appellant not guilty of the offence Under Section 325, I.P.C. as well. The result is that the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellant is set aside."
46. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghavan Achari and Njoonjappan vs. State of Kerala reported in AIR 1993 SC 203 have ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 24 held that when accused found deceased in compromising position with his wife and deceased .
causing multiple injuries including grievous injury to accused, accused thereafter using chopper and causing death of deceased, accused thus cannot be said to have exceeded his right of private defence and thus was entitled to acquittal. Their Lordships have held as under:
of "8. We have already noticed the injuries received by the appellant vide Ext. P. 7 as well as those confirmed at the time of discharge, Ext. P. 13. There can be no doubt also that rt the compromising position in which the appellant found the deceased with his wife it gave the appellant the grave and sudden provocation. This provocation was further aggravated when the appellant found the deceased taking further offence of causing grievous injury of the nature referred earlier to him and in the circumstances the right as envisaged under Section 100 became available to the appellant. No court expects the citizens not to defend themselves particularly when they have already suffered grievous injuries. It is clear that though the appellant has a chopper in his hand he did not initially use it against the deceased and it was only when the deceased succeeded in using the oil lamp, which is described as dangerous weapon by the High Court, which caused multiple injuries including grievous injury, that the appellant's provocation got further aggravated and it cannot be said on the facts and circumstances of the case that the appellant has exceeded his right of private defence.
9. The result is that the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside and he is acquitted."
47. A Division Bench of the Orissa High Court in State of Orissa v. Nirupama Panda, reported in 1989 Crl. LJ 621 has held that when accused stabbed deceased person as he outraged her ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 25 modesty, she was entitled to acquittal. The Division Bench has held as under:
.
"8. Along with the evidence of dying declaration it is necessary to consider the statements made by the respondent before P.W. 10, For this purpose, it is necessary to make a further reference to his evidence where he stated that after hearing from the deceased about the cause of the chest wound, the witness found the respondent standing on the verandah of Bansidhar Das and enquired from her. The respondent told him that she stabbed the deceased, of because he outraged her modesty (Atyachar). The above statement of the respondent was inculpatory in part and exclupatory in the other part. But considered as a whole, it did not tantamount to an extrajudicial confession for the reason that she had rt justified her action of stabbing the deceased in exercise of her right of private defence. Even if the statement is received as a piece of extrajudicial confession because of its inculpatory part, yet on the basis thereof and on consideration of the exculpatory part, it cannot be used as an incriminating piece of evidence against her, because she had every right to save her honour even by causing the death of the person who either committed rape on her or attempted to commit the same. The above being the position, the statement made by the respondent on the query of P. W. 10 instead of supporting the prosecution actually worked as a defence which was quite acceptable.
10. The evidence of P. W. 4 discloses that the respondent was married, but after her widowhood she led an immoral life by living as a mistres of Bansidhar Das. Even though for the sake of argument it is accepted that she was the mistress of Bansidhar Das, yet she was within her rights to save her honour from a rapist. Even a whore is entitled under law to protect herself from attacks of an intending rapist. Therefore, immoral character of the respondent, even if it is true, is of little consequence."
48. A Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in Badan Nath vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 1999 Cr. LJ 2268 has held that the deceased is alleged to have taken opportunity of absence of mother of prosecutrix and after alluring ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 26 the accused/appellant to consume liquor made an attempt to commit rape upon daughter of accused, .
who was pregnant. Accused in anger stabbed deceased with sword lying in the room. Accused was entitled to benefit of right of private defence of person of his daughter. The Division Bench has held as under:
of "13. The circumstances of the instant case do indicate that during the night of occurrence, deceased Arjun Singh's wife namely Nand Kanwar (PW 3) was not in his house. She rt along with her mother-in-law had gone to Kumadu Kura and returned to home on the next day after getting information from a messenger. It is noticed from the statement of DW 1 Smt. Kusum that during the night of occurrence her mother was also not present in accused appellant Badan Nath's house. Only DW 1 Smt. Kusum, accused appellant Badan Nath, her younger brother and sister were present. From the aforesaid circumstantial evidence it can be inferred that deceased, taking the opportunity of absence of her mother, after alluring accused-appellant Badan Nath to consume liquor, made an attempt to commit rape upon DW 1 Smt. Kusum who was pregnant. It is established from the statement of PW 4 Smt. Guddi that DW 1 was in advance pregnancy and she gave birth to a child after one or one month and a half following the date of occurrence. It is admitted by PW 4 Smt. Guddi that on the date of occurrence DW 1 was sleeping in the first floor of her home along with her sister who was about 9 or 10 years old. It is highly probable that as she was in advance pregnancy, she resisted the sexual intercourse with deceased and this resistance caused reasonable apprehension in the mind of accused appellant Badan Nath who reached on the spot and found deceased Arjun Nath, under the influence of liquor, was making attempt to commit rape upon his daughter and so he, in anger, stabbed to the deceased from the sword lying in the room.::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 27
14. There is yet another reason to arrive at the aforesaid conclusion. We are of the opinion that it is not necessary that every part of the .
evidence of the victim Smt. Kusum (DW 1) should be confirmed in the minutest details by independent evidence. Such corroboration can be sought either from direct evidence or from circumstantial evidence or from both. The circumstantial evidence on record leads towards an irresistible conclusion that blood was found on the bed where DW 1 Smt. Kusum was sleeping at the night of of occurrence. The Investigating Officer has taken pieces of plastic niwar of the bed in his possession which are proved to be soaked with blood on which victim Smt. Kusum (DW 1) was sleeping at the night of occurrence. The rt trail of blood stains were found on the upstairs and on the wall leading to the room where Smt. Kusum (DW 1) was sleeping.
However, no blood was found on the boundary wall of accused appellant embedded with glasses and in the Courtyard where the deceased is alleged to have jumped in the house of accused appellant. The aforesaid fact is fully established from the statement of PW 12 Madan Nath Son of Kishore Nath who, soon after the incident, saw the place of occurrence and found blood on the plastic niwar of bed of DW 1, he also found blood stains on the upstairs of the wall leading to the room of DW 1 where she was sleeping but found absence of blood on the wall of accused appellant embedded with glasses and in the Courtyard. The statement of PW 12 inspires our confidence and it is held that deceased Arjun Singh did go to the room of DW 1 Smt. Kusum on the first floor of house of accused appellant where she was sleeping. The existence of blood on the plastic niwar of the bed where DW 1 was sleeping and blood stains on the upstairs and on the wall leading to the room leads towards a strong inference that DW l is a truthful witness and deceased Arjun Singh did make attempt to commit rape with DW 1 against her will. In such a situation within the meaning of Section 100, IPC the right of private defence of accused appellant extends to causing death of deceased Arjun Singh.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 2815. Another strong reason attributable to arrive at the aforesaid conclusion is that in the Indian Society refusal to act by the Courts .
on the testimonial value of a victim of sexual assault in absence of any corroboration as a rule tantamounts adding insult to injury. We are of the opinion that woman in tradition- bound, impermissible Indian Society would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity has been committed by anyone. In the case on hand we are of the view that DW 1 of must be deemed to be conscious of the danger being ostracized by the Society including by her husband, her own family members, relatives and neighbours. The statement of DW 1 Smt. Kusum who alleged herself to be rt victim of sex offence deserves to be given a great weight in the facts and circumstances of the present case as discussed here in above.
To our mind the probabilities factor taken into account by the learned Sessions Judge does not render the sworn testimony of DW 1 unworthy of credence. DW 1 Smt. Kusum is put to a searching cross-examination by Public Prosecutor but nothing has been brought to our notice which may lead to discredit her sworn testimony.
16. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the present case we are of the view that the accused appellant deserves to be given benefit of right of private defence of person of his daughter Smt. Kusum (DW 1) as envisaged under Section 100, IPC wherein it is provided that the right of private defence of body extends, under the restrictions mentioned under Section 99 of the Indian Penal Code to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the descriptions enumerated there under. The case on hand squarely falls under Clause (3) of Section 100 which clearly provides that an assault with the intention of committing rape gives right of private defence which extends up to causing of death. In the present case, deceased Arjun Singh gave an assault with intention to commit rape with DW 1 Smt. Kusum who is daughter of accused appellant Badan Nath, therefore, in such a situation he is entitled to be given benefit of right of private ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 29 defence of person of his daughter Smt. Kusum (DW 1) as envisaged under Clause (3) of Section 100, IPC and an argument contrary .
to it advanced by learned Public Prosecutor is not acceptable to us."
49. In the instant case also, the plea taken by the defence is that deceased tried to outrage modesty of Sunita Chandel. She raised alarm. Accused came down and gave beatings to the of deceased. In this case, accused can be said to have exercised their right of private defence by giving beatings to the deceased person to save the rt modesty of Sunita Chandel.
50. A learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in Bhadar Ram vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2000 Cr. LJ 1174 has held that the accused on hearing his widowed sister-in-
law's cry for help rushed to her house with Gandasa, her house was found open by accused and injured was found grappling with her and trying to outrage her modesty, accused saved his sister-in-law from clutches of injured and inflicted Gandasa blow while injured was running away. Act of accused can be said to be in exercise of right of private defence and accused was entitled to acquittal. The learned Single Judge has held as under:
"15. Accused appellant admitted even under Section 313, Cr.P.C. thatatabout 10-11 P.M. his sister-in-law Mohra cried to save her. He rushed to her house and found that the door of her house was opened and appellant was grappling with her. The appellant assaulted on Nand Ram and inflicted gandasi blow which he had taken when going to the house of Mohra. Then Nand Ram ran away from where. Smt. Mohra was examined in ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 30 defence by the appellant. She stated that she was asleep in the courtyard of her house. It has small boundary wall. At about 10-11 P.M. .
Nand Ram grappled her body, she woke up and started crying. Then Bhadar Ram, whose house is adjacent, came armed with a gandasi, Nand Ram left her. He was chased by Bhadar Ram and two injuries were inflicted by Bhadar Ram on Nand Ram infront of her. She admitted that Nand Ram was a married person and it was submitted by the prosecution that Nand Ram, being a married of man, could not have indulged in this activity. He is not right. Nand Ram as told by him as PW-4 is aged about 40 years. Mohra is a widow aged about 30-35 years and it was possible that Nand Ram could have gone there rt in order to outrage her modesty for attempt to commit rape. It is not always correct to say that a married man could not indulge in such activity. She stated that blood was found outside her house when police came in the morning. She stated that her father-in-law is a blind man and she told the story of her woe to the Sarpanch named as Girdhari. No report could be lodged because her father-in-law was a blind man and the Sarpanch did not help her. Ordinarily Mohra who is a widow lady would not involve her honour in order to save appellant in case defence was not true. The learned Sessions Judge did consider the defence but was of the view that since right of defence was a right subject to restrictions indicated in Section 99 of IPC and one of the conditions is that harm indicated in self defence must be no more than is legitimately necessary for the purpose of defence and since the appellant exceeded his right, he was punished. Learned Sessions Judge relied on AIR 1974 SC 1550 : 1974 Cri LJ 1015, On karnathSingh v. The State of U.P., the facts of which were completely different than the facts of the present case. In that case on the day of occurrence when Deep Narain returned home Girja Singh complained to him how Onkarnath had beaten him without any rhyme and reason. Deep Narain Singh assured him that he would censure and correct Onkarnath. When Jagdish Narain reached home Deep Narain told him how Onkamaih had beaten Girja Singh at about noon. Thereafter the two brothers Narain and ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 31 Deep Narain proceeded together to their cotton field. When they were coming back from the field, they met Onkarnath and .
Chhabi Nath. Deep Narain asked Onkarnath as to why he had beaten Girja Singh. Onkarnath insolently replied that he had done so that he would repeat the feat and would see what Deep Narain could do. A scuffle ensued.
Both the parties then proceeded to their respective houses. The deceased and his brother had hardly gone 70-80 paces and reached near the Darwza of Hanuman Prasad, of when all the five appellants and Amar Nath Singh came there in a body and surrounded them. Chhabi Nath attempted gandasa blows on the head of Jagdish Narain which the latter warded off on his hands. Vijai Bahadur Singh rt snatched away the gandasa from Chhabi Nath. The assailants then ran away leaving Deep Narain and Jagdish Narain injured at the spot. The facts in the citation relied by the learned Sessions Judge were quite different. But the principle laid down is that the harm indicated in self defence must be no more than is legitimately necessary for the purpose of defence and the right is conterminous with the commencement and existence of a reasonable apprehension of danger to body from an attempt or a threat to commit the offence. It avails only against a danger, real, present and imminent.
16. Applying this principle itself in this case, I find that there was a real danger to the body of Mohra who at the dead hour of night was grappled by Nand Ram in order to outrage her modesty for committing rape. She is a widow lady, nobody to help as her father-in-law was a blind man. She came later on, made complaints to Sarpanch about the incident who did not pay any heed. It was appellant who after hearing her noise and whose duty as her deceased husband's younger brother was to save her, came after hearing her hue and cry. He was a young boy of 23-24 years of age. He saved her from the clutches of Nand Ram and assaulted him with gandasi when he was running. It cannot be said that it was done in excess of right as a right of reprisal for punishment. Appellant saw Nand Ram grappling with his widow sister-in-law, was enraged because of grave and sudden ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 32 provocation. He came prepared having a gandasi in his hand when he heard hue and cry of his sister-in-law at the time of dead .
hour of night on his part. Had he a firearm with himself he could have come with a firearm and could have shot at Nand Ram seeing that Nand Ram was grappling with his widow sister-in-law at that dead hour of night.
To say that it was not in a right exercised in defence then what else could be. Section 100 of IPC gives a right of private defence of the body to the extent of causing death when an of assault is made with an intention of committing rape. Accused appellant had seen Nand Ram grappling with his sister-in-law and he has probabilised the defence. I am of rt the view that he had a right of private defence in assaulting Nand Ram. Reference may be made to Salikram v. State, (1990) 1 Crimes 630 (Madh Pra). In this case accused was entitled to right of private defence under Section 100 (thirdly) IPC and consequently entitled for acquittal.
9. It will be noticed that before the Sessions Judge the appellant had pleaded the right of private defence also but the Sessions Judge after noticing that the assault was an act of sudden and grave provocation."
27. The judgment ibid was further assailed by the State of Himachal Pradesh in the Apex Court by way of SLP (Cr.) No. 7381 of 2016 titled State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Anil Kumar. However, the Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment dated 30.9.2016 has been pleased to observe that there is no justification to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court and as such, SLPs were ordered to be dismissed. Meaning thereby that the judgment of this Court in Cr. Appeal No. 275 of 2015 and its connected matters dated 29.4.2016 has now attained finality. Therefore, we need not to discuss the evidence any further for the reason that points ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 33 raised in this appeal are covered in favour of the convict-appellant by the judgment of this Court in Anil Kumar's case (supra). It .
would thus not be improper for us to conclude that no case for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read With Section 34 IPC is made out against accused Sunita Chandel. It is worthwhile to mention here that her case is rather of on better footing as compared to that of her co-accused Anil Kumar, Suresh Kumar, Naresh Kumar alias Ashok Kumar who rt now stands acquitted of the charge because as per the prosecution case itself, beatings were administered to the deceased by them and not by her. The recovery of the car from river Satluj and that of the gas cylinder in the manner as claimed by the prosecution is also not suggestive of that it is the convict-appellant who murdered the deceased nor sufficient to connect her with the commission of offence.
28. Since the entire evidence has been gone into in detail in Anil Kumar's judgment (supra) and her co-accused have been acquitted by this Court and also that the judgment of this Court has even been upheld by the Apex Court also, the findings of conviction and sentence recorded against appellant-convict Sunita Chandel are neither legally nor factually sustainable. We, therefore, allow this appeal and quash the impugned judgment whereby she has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay Rs. 5000/- fine under Sections 302 ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP 34 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC. We also order to set her free forthwith, if not required in any other case.
.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary) Judge.
February 27, 2017. (Vivek Singh Thakur), (karan-) Judge.
of rt ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:40 :::HCHP