Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 27.10.2006 and order of sentence dated 28.10.2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonipat, thereby convicting the appellant Dinesh for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Accordingly, the convict was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months.

Facts first. The case of the prosecution, unfolded from FIR Ex. PA/1 is that Balister son of Ravi Dutt Tyagi, resident of Jainpur, Police Station Murthal, aged 42 years, put the criminal law into motion by getting his statement recorded as Ex.PA. On 3.5.2005, a telephonic message was received at Police Station Sadar Sonepat that a person alongwith his motorcycle was lying dead on Kami road at some distance from the drain. On receipt of this information, SI/SHO Anup Singh (PW-14) alongwith ASI Somvir, HC Jagbir Singh No.557, EHC Bande Singh No.63, Constable Mahesh No.138 reached at the spot on a private vehicle, where Balister son of Ravi Dutt and Raj Kumar son of Jaggan resident of village Jainpur were found present. The complainant Balister (PW-1) stated that he was residing at the above-said address and was doing the work of agriculture.

In this regard, a case had been registered against Sandeep and his family members in Police Station G.R.P., Sonepat for dowry death. In that case, his brother Satpal was the main witness, wherein date of hearing was fixed for 7.5.2000 in the Court. About one month before the date of occurrence, father of Sandeep, Sapattar, his uncle (Tau) Mangu son of Asha Ram and Siri Om son of Khacheru caste Tyagi, resident of Jainpur came to them and said "let's go to Satpal" and request him not to give evidence against them in dowry death case. Complainant alongwith the above said three persons went to the house of Satpal and requested him not to give evidence against them in the dowry death case. However, Satpal clearly stated that he will give true evidence in the case. At this, Mangu, Sapattar and Siri Om said to Satpal in the presence of Balister that they would get him killed if he was insisting upon his stand for giving evidence against them.

After recording the statement, Anup Singh, SI/SHO Police Station Sadar Sonepat read over the statement to its author Balister (PW-1), who admitted the same to be correct and put his signatures in Hindi.

Having found a cognizable offence under Sections 302/120-B/34 IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act, the statement was sent to the police station for registration of the case through constable Mahesh No.138. It was directed that after registration of the case its number be informed. Special report of the case be sent to the concerned officers. Photographer be also sent at the spot. SI/SHO alongwith his fellow officials proceeded to the place of occurrence for investigation. Based on the above-said facts, investigation was started by SI Anup Singh (PW-14). He prepared the rough site plan of the place of occurrence as Ex.PZ. He lifted the blood stained earth from the spot, which was made into a sealed parcel and taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PD. He also prepared the inquest report Ex. PU. The dead body was sent to the hospital for post-mortem examination through ASI Somvir (PW-6).

After hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution was able to prove its case against accused Dinesh under Section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. However, it was also held that the prosecution failed to prove charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act against accused Dinesh and also the charge either under Section 302 read with Section 34 or Section 216 IPC against the remaining accused.

Consequently, accused Dinesh was held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and he was convicted accordingly, whereas the remaining accused were acquitted of the charge framed against them, vide judgment dated 27.10.2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonepat. Convict-appellant Dinesh was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. However, an application having been moved on behalf of convict Dinesh under Section 427(2) Cr.P.C., his sentence was ordered to run concurrently with the sentence of life imprisonment already granted to him in earlier case bearing FIR No.227 of 2001 registered under Section 302/498-A IPC at Police Station Ganaur. It was so ordered by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonepat vide his order of sentence dated 28.10.2006.