Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 2485 (ALL)

Balbir Singh v. State of U. P.

2004-12-10

K.K.MISRA, M.C.JAIN

body2004
M. C. JAIN, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT-BALBIR Singh has come up in appeal against the judgment and order dated 12th March, 1981 passed by Sri H. C. Lal, the then II Additional Sessions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial No. 166 of 1980. He has been convicted under Sections 394 and 412, I. . P. C. The sentence of life imprisonment has been awarded for the former offence and five years rigorous imprisonment for the latter. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. ( 2 ) THE incident took place on 24-12-1979 at about 3 a. m. in village Nidhauli Kalan, police Station Nidhauli Kala, District Etah and the report was lodged on 24-12-1979 at 4. 45 a. m. by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2. Dr. Ratan Lal Jain was the resident of Block no. 1 of town Nidhauli Kalan. He was a medical practitioner. Three or four miscreants entered his house in between the night of 23/24-12-1979 at about 3 a. m. from the southern side and successively opened shots, killing him (Dr. Ratan Lal Jain) and his son Anil Kumar in the southernmost room of his house where a lantern was glowing at the time of the incident. Thereafter, they gained entry in another room from the eastern window, overpowered Smt. Virmati-wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and looted cash ornaments and S. B. B. L. gun of the doctor therefrom. ( 3 ) INFORMANT Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 was also a medical practitioner by profession and in those days he was living in the house of Prem Chand, adjacent to the house of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain towards east. On hearing the sound of gunshot, Dr. Kishan Pal singh PW-2 and his compounder who used to live with him, came out with their torches. They spotted 3-4 persons coming out of the house of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and running away towards western side. Two of them had guns. Meanwhile, he also heard shrieks of the wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and when he went inside, he (Dr. Kishan Pal Singh) found dr. Ratan Lal Jain and his son Anil Kumar lying dead in the room with gunshot injuries. Ratan Lal Jain and running away towards western side. Two of them had guns. Meanwhile, he also heard shrieks of the wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and when he went inside, he (Dr. Kishan Pal Singh) found dr. Ratan Lal Jain and his son Anil Kumar lying dead in the room with gunshot injuries. Smt. Virmati informed him that 3-4 miscreants whose faces she had seen in the light of the lantern, had entered the house from towards the south and had killed her husband and son by opening fire through the southern window. She further told him that after entering the house from the eastern window, they carried away the licensed s. B. B. L. gun and some ornaments, valuables, clothes etc. from there. ( 4 ) ACCORDINGLY, Dr. Kishan Pal Singh pw-2 wrote down the F. I. R. stating therein that he and his compounder Damodar Singh had also seen and recognized the miscreants in the light of the torches and could recognize them on coming face to face. On the lodging of the F. I. R. , a case was registered. Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 was the Station Officer of the Police Station at that time and the case was registered in his presence. He with police force proceeded to the spot. As soon as he entered the town Nidhauli kala, he was handed over the list of robbed property by Kishan Pal Singh. He then reached the place of occurrence and started investigation, deputing S. I. Sri Chand and other police personnel to trace out the accused persons. Dog squad was also summoned. He examined the torches of dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 and that of his compounder in the light of which they had recognized the miscreants. Statement of smt. Virmati-wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jairi was also recorded. Dog squad reached the spot. The dog called chetak after sniffing the place of incident reached village Boorha accompanied by the Investigating Officer, S. I. Sri Chand and other police personnel. The dog stopped in that village on a well in the sahan of the house of Surajpal and Nawab. Virmati-wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jairi was also recorded. Dog squad reached the spot. The dog called chetak after sniffing the place of incident reached village Boorha accompanied by the Investigating Officer, S. I. Sri Chand and other police personnel. The dog stopped in that village on a well in the sahan of the house of Surajpal and Nawab. On inquiry, it was found that the accused-Balbir Singh, a relative of Nawab and surajpal, original resident of village Nameni, police Station Kasganj, District Etah and a traceless history-sheeter had been residing in that house since long and that very morning he had gone out after washing himself on that well while it was still dark. Thus, the association of Balbir Singh with this crime came to be suspected. The Investigating Officer started a search for him at different places but to no effect. ( 5 ) INQUEST on the dead bodies was held by S. I. Sri Chand on the direction of Station officer and after preparation of necessary papers, they were sent for post-mortem. Post-mortem over the dead body of Dr. Ratan lal was conducted on 25-12-1979 at 3. 45 p. m. by Dr. R. P. Dixit PW-1. The same doctor conducted post-mortem over the dead body of Anil Kumar on 25-12-1979 at 4. 45 p. m. Dr. Ratan Lal was aged about 65 years and Anil Kumar was aged about 18 years. 1 day had passed since both of them had died. Suffice it to say that both died of gunshot injuries. ( 6 ) THE accused-Balbir Singh could be apprehended on 26-12-1979 on a tip off by an informer, while coming on foot, about 30 paces from Nagaria Cut. His search yielded a country-made gun and two cartridges. His involvement in the commission of crime came to light on his interrogation. His Dhoti was found to be stained with blood. He allegedly admitted to have sold golden Pattar of the Hansli (Ex.-I) and Hamel (Ex.-II) to laxmi Narain, goldsmith of Nidhauli Kalan against receipts. He handed over the receipts (Ex. Ka-4 and Ka-5) to the police party. He was made Baparda and brought to Nidhauli kalan where two witnesses Lala Ram and mohan Lal were picked up from a crossing. They approached the shop of Laxmi Narain pw-6. He handed over the receipts (Ex. Ka-4 and Ka-5) to the police party. He was made Baparda and brought to Nidhauli kalan where two witnesses Lala Ram and mohan Lal were picked up from a crossing. They approached the shop of Laxmi Narain pw-6. The accused demanded the golden pattar and Hamel, reminding him that he had sold the same in the morning of the incident. The shopkeeper produced those ornaments which were taken in possession and sealed under memo by the Investigating Officer in the presence of witnesses. The dhoti of the accused was taken off his body as it was found to be stained with blood and was sealed at the spot with memo prepared by S. I. Sri Chand. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of Laxmi Narain lala Ram and others and returned to the police Station along with the accused in, baparda state and lodged him in the lock up. The articles Were deposited in Malkhana. The Investigating Officer then put in a report for identification of the accused. He searched for the other accused, but in vain. The accused-Balbir Singh was subjected to identification and on the result of the same being known, he was charge-sheeted. A report was also made for identification proceedings with regard to the articles recovered and identification in respect thereof was held. ( 7 ) THE prosecution in all examined 16 witnesses. Material evidence consisted of the statement of Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 who had seen the accused going out from the house of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain in the company of two or three others and the recovery of golden Pattar (Ex. I) and silver Hamel (Ex. II) at his instance from the shop of Laxmi narain Lal PW-6, the recovery having been supported by Lala Ram PW-10 and Fateh alam Khan PW-11. Another important witness was smt. Virmati PW-3, wife of the deceased Dr. Ratan Lal Jain, but she could not identify the accused at the time of identification and unfortunately, there was no other inmate in the house except Dr. Ratan lal Jain and the other deceased Anil Kumar besides herself at the time of the incident. Both these males met their end at the hands of the robbers. However, Smt. Virmati PW-3 gave an eye account of the incident which took place inside the house and about the death of her husband Dr. Ratan lal Jain and the other deceased Anil Kumar besides herself at the time of the incident. Both these males met their end at the hands of the robbers. However, Smt. Virmati PW-3 gave an eye account of the incident which took place inside the house and about the death of her husband Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and the son Anil Kumar Jain as a result of firing resorted to by the desperadoes. ( 8 ) THE accused pleaded false implication and his defence was that Dr. Kishan pal Singh PW-2 had treated him for boil. He denied that he had departed from the well in the Sahan of the house of Surajpal and nawab after washing his hands and feet there. He admitted that he had been residing in that house for 3-4 years before the incident and had married his maternal nephews and nieces from there as Nawab singh and Surajpal were his maternal nephews. He denied that he took the police party to the shop of Laxmi Narain Lal PW-6 and got handed over the ornaments to the police. He also denied that he had taken these articles to Laxmi Narain and sold them on the pretext that he had to go out and needed money. He denied that Dr. Kishan Pal Singh pw-2 did not know him from before. According to him, he was shown to everybody at the Police Station and put up for identification twice. He also dubbed as incorrect the prosecution case that Smt. Virmati PW-3, rajesh Kumari PW-4 and Subhash Chand pw-5 had correctly identified articles Exhibits I and II at the identification proceedings before the Magistrate and that these ornaments belonged to Smt. Virmati. He pleaded ignorance with regard to the remaining allegations of the prosecution. ( 9 ) AT the hearing of the appeal, none turned up from the side of the appellant though he is represented on record by S/ sri S. K. Bisaria and Y. K. Saxena, Advocates. We have heard Smt. Praveeen Shukla, learned A. G. A. and perused the record. We propose to decide the appeal on merits dealing with the relevant aspects of the matter as provided in the case of Bani Singh v. State of U. P. , AIR 1996 SC 2439 : (1996 All LJ 1399 : 1996 Cri LJ 3491 ). We have heard Smt. Praveeen Shukla, learned A. G. A. and perused the record. We propose to decide the appeal on merits dealing with the relevant aspects of the matter as provided in the case of Bani Singh v. State of U. P. , AIR 1996 SC 2439 : (1996 All LJ 1399 : 1996 Cri LJ 3491 ). ( 10 ) SCRUTINIZING the evidence on record, we intend to cross-check the findings and reasonings of the learned trial Judge in the succeeding discussion. ( 11 ) NATURALLY, the first question is about the happening in which two persons (father and son) are said to have been murdered and a robbery committed of the licensed gun, jewellery, clothes etc. from the house of the deceased in between the fateful night. On this aspect of the matter, the testimony of smt. Virmati PW-3-wife of the deceased Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and mother of the deceased anil Kumar is material. She has given vivid description of the incident that in the eventful night, at about 2 or 3 o clock she was sleeping in the middle room of her house and her husband and son were sleeping in the room towards the courtyard on the left side which had one door and two windows. In that room, a glowing lantern was there on the peg. Three or four robbers entered the house from the southern side. They tapped the window. As a result, all of them awoke. However, none of them opened the door. The robbers then fired from the window at her husband who fell down on receiving the injury. When Anil Kumar deceased ran towards him to support him while he was falling, the robbers fired on him also and he also fell down on the ground and died. It is also there in her statement that thereafter the robbers entered the room in which she was sleeping and assaulted her, asking the whereabouts of the property. They broke open the Almirah and looted cash, ornaments and a gun therefrom. She further testified that two of the robbers had guns with them while the third one had a tamancha and the fourth one had a lathi. According to her, the robbers did not permit her to speak or to cry out. But as soon as they went out of the house, she raised alarm which immediately brought her neighbour Dr. She further testified that two of the robbers had guns with them while the third one had a tamancha and the fourth one had a lathi. According to her, the robbers did not permit her to speak or to cry out. But as soon as they went out of the house, she raised alarm which immediately brought her neighbour Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 and his compounder there. It should be observed here that as per the statement of Dr. Kishan pal Singh PW-2, his compounder was living with him in the adjoining house belonging to Prem Chand, a fact which was not challenged in his cross-examination. We note that the incident was not challenged from the side of the defence. The factum of death of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and his son Anil Kumar as a result of shooting stands established by the testimony of Dr. R. P. Dixit PW-1 also and post-mortem reports. The statement of the Doctor that these deaths could have taken place in the night of 23/24-12-1979 at about 3 a. m. was not disputed, inasmuch as the Doctor was not cross-examined by the defence despite opportunity being given. Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 who investigated the case and reached the place of occurrence within an hour of the lodging of the F. I. R. at 4. 45 a. m. by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 also found the two dead bodies there and other physical evidence as to this robbery. He found the plaster of the floor blood stained and took the same in possession. He also found a hammer (material Ex. III) and a piece of Chap (wooden butt of the gun) (material ex. IV) which also he took in possession. A pellet mark in the wood of the window was also found by him. He observed the broken almirah wherefrom ornaments etc. had been looted. The Investigating Officer found one of the door planks of the broken window to be stained with blood. He took in possession the same too. ( 12 ) DR. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2, residing in the immediate neighbourhood of the place of the incident, had awoken by the sound of gunfires which were 2 or 3 in number as he stated. His statement was that he and his compounder were residing in the neighbouring house. On hearing the gunfire, he and his compounder immediately came out. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2, residing in the immediate neighbourhood of the place of the incident, had awoken by the sound of gunfires which were 2 or 3 in number as he stated. His statement was that he and his compounder were residing in the neighbouring house. On hearing the gunfire, he and his compounder immediately came out. He had a torch which he was flashing. A little after hearing the gunfire and on coming out with torch, he saw three miscreants coming out of the house of Dr. Ratan lal Jain whom he saw in the light of the torch flashed by him. According to him, two of them were carrying guns. His further statement is that soon after these persons had gone away, he heard the shouts of the wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain. Then he went inside the house along with his compounder and found that Dr. Ratan Lal Jain and Anil kumar were lying dead with marks of gunfires on their bodies. Smt. Virmati pw-3-wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain deceased revealed that the robbers had entered the house from the southern side of the house and committed robbery with the murder of her husband and son. It was then that he wrote down the F. I. R. which he took to the police Station and lodged the same there. ( 13 ) SO, to come to the point, the factum of the incident is clinchirigly established by the evidence that we have referred to above. It has to be recalled, as we pointed out, that the incident has not been challenged by the defence too. ( 14 ) WE now switch over to the next important question relevant for the decision of the appeal as to the participation of the accused-appellant in this crime. His participation in the alleged crime is based on his identification by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 and the recovery of two items of robbed jewellery at his instance on 26-12-1979 at about 8 p. m. from the ornament dealer laxmi Narain Lal PW-6 of the same village nidhauli Kalan in the presence of a public witness Lala Ram PW-10, he (accused) having been arrested by the Investigating Officer Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 on 26-12-1979 itself at the place called nagaria Cut. It is there in the testimony of Dr. It is there in the testimony of Dr. Kishan Pal singh PW-2 that he had very well seen three persons coming out of the house of Dr. Ratan lal Jain when he himself had come out of the neighbouring house with flashing torch on hearing the sound of gunfire. The accused was put up for identification which was conducted by the Special Executive Magistrate, netrapal P. W. 16. It was in the identification parade held on 25-2-1980 that Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 picked up the accused as one of the participants of this crime. He did not commit any mistake. He categorically stated before the Court also that the accused-Balbir Singh was one of the persons whom he had seen on the fateful night. He with his two other companions had come out of the house of Dr. Ratan Lal jain and he had very well seen him in the light of the torch that he had. He categorically stated that he did not know him from before. After the fateful night, he saw him only in the identification parade in jail and thereafter in Court. He refuted the suggestion that he had treated the accused for some boil. The accused-appellant did not lead any evidence to back his contention that he was treated by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2. Nor could he show any enmity with this witness. This witness does not have any unsavoury antecedents. Rather, he happens to be a respectable person. His testimony has the ring of truth and he was a natural witness being resident of the neighbouring house where the incident took place. The Investigating officer had examined his torch on reaching the place of incident and had found the same in working order. It has also to be kept in mind that it was he who had lodged the f. I. R. , 1. 45 hours after the incident. The statement of Smt. Virmati PW-3 (wife of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain) is to the effect that the robbers did not permit her to speak or to cry out but as soon as they went out of the house, she raised alarm which immediately brought Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 and his compounder to whom she narrated what had happened. Her this statement of having been silenced by the robbers is supported by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 and his compounder to whom she narrated what had happened. Her this statement of having been silenced by the robbers is supported by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 who testified that after hearing the sound of gunfires, which were two or three in number, he came out of his house with a torch with his compounder damodar but could not hear any other sound emanating from anywhere. But after a little while, he saw the three miscreants (including the accused-appellant) coming out of the house of Dr. Ratan Lal Jain. He saw them very well in the light of the torch flashed by him. It stands well explained that commanding the lady to keep quiet, the robbers hurriedly collected the looted booty and then went out of the house. ( 15 ) WE should also point out here that this contention of the accused-appellant also falls through that he had been shown to the witnesses earlier to his identification parade in jail. It is a fact that Smt. Virmati PW-3 could not identify him at his identification parade. Had he been shown to the witnesses earlier to the identification parade in jail, naturally Smt. Virmati PW-3 would have also invariably picked him up at the identification parade. Her omission to do so completely demolishes the contention of the accused-appellant of having been shown to the witnesses prior to identification parade in jail. Smt. Virmati PW-3, a lady of 55 years of age, in terror ridden frame of mind at the time of the incident, could not dare to look into the faces of desperadoes and it explains her omission to pick up the accused-appellant at his identification parade. ( 16 ) THE sole identification of the accused-appellant by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 would not have been sufficient to warrant his conviction in ordinary circumstances, but here his such identification is coupled by the recovery of looted ornaments at this instance only two days after the incident consequent upon his arrest. And this clinches his involvement and participation in the crime in question. The relevant evidence on this aspect of the matter may be made mention of to ensure clarity. Ex. Ka-4 is the list of looted articles given to the Investigating Officer Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 by Dr. And this clinches his involvement and participation in the crime in question. The relevant evidence on this aspect of the matter may be made mention of to ensure clarity. Ex. Ka-4 is the list of looted articles given to the Investigating Officer Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 by Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 when the former was entering Nidhauli Kalan to reach the spot after the lodging of the F. I. R. The statement of Dr. Kishan Pal Singh PW-2 is that when he returned to the spot after lodging the F. I. R. , Smt. Virmati PW-3 called him and dictated the list of looted property (Ex. Ka-4) which he was carrying to the Police station. He met the Investigating Officer in the way whom he handed over the same. At item No. 4 of this list, the description is given of 8 Haslis (a type of heavy necklace) with golden cover thereon, gold being 8 Tolas. At serial No. 14 the article noted is silver Hasel with George V coins with Chauk in the middle. It is there in the testimony of Investigating Officer S. I. Fateh Alam Khan PW-11 that with the aid of the dog squad he had reached the well in the Sahan of the house of Surajpal and Nawab Singh in village boorha on the day following the incident and on the interrogation, it came to light that balbir (accused), a relation of Nawab and surajpal, original resident of village Nimaini, p. S. Kasganj, District Etah had been residing in that house since long and that very morning had gone out after Washing his hands and feet on the well while it was still dark. It was in this way that association of balbir Singh with this crime surfaced and his search was started by the Investigating officer. It is to be recalled that in his statement under Section 313, Cr. P. C. the accused-appellant-Balbir admitted to be residing there for the last three-four years and that Nawab Singh and Surajpal were his maternal nephews. On 25-12-1979 the Investigating Officer unsuccessfully raided the house of accused-Balbir Singh in his native village. On 26-12-1979, he visited Etah and from there went to village Khiri, P. S. Ekka, district Manipuri in search of the accused-appellant Balbir Singh. On 25-12-1979 the Investigating Officer unsuccessfully raided the house of accused-Balbir Singh in his native village. On 26-12-1979, he visited Etah and from there went to village Khiri, P. S. Ekka, district Manipuri in search of the accused-appellant Balbir Singh. On the information received from an informer, he reached the place named nagaria Cut near village nidhauli Kalan and there he apprehended the accused while he was coming from Pilwa side on road on foot. Because of exigency of situation, public witnesses could not be secured. On the disclosure by the accused that he had sold one gold Pattar of Hansli and hasel to Laxmi Narain, goldsmith of Nidhauli kalan, he was taken to Baparda with two witnesses Lala Ram and Mohan Lal, picked up from the crossing, to the shop of the said goldsmith. When he demanded the golden cover (Pattar) of Hansli and Hasel from the goldsmith Laxmi Narain that he had sold in the morning of the incident, the shopkeeper laxmi Narain Lal PW-6 produced those articles which were taken in possession by the investigating Officer and sealed on the spot. Laxmi Narain Lal PW-6 supported the prosecution that these articles were sold to him by the accused-Balbir in the morning of 24-12-1979. He had approached this witness at his house and sold them for Rs. 1560/-urging that he had to go home and urgently needed money. This witness proved the receipts Exhibits Ka-5 and Ka-6 and stated that they were prepared at the time of the sale of these articles. He also stated in his cross-examination that he knew the accused from before because he used to visit the market. There was no question of this witness suspecting the accused when he approached him urging urgency for money and when he knew him from before. Lala Ram pw-10, a public witness, resident of village nldhauli Kalan has supported the recovery of these articles from Laxmt Narain Lal PW-6 at the behest of the accused-appellant. ( 17 ) IDENTIFICATION in respect of these articles had been held through identification proceedings on 21-1-1980 by the Special executive Magistrate Sri Netrapal PW-16. Smt. Virmati PW-3, her daughter Rajesh kumari PW-4 and her son Subhash Chand pw-5 correctly identified these articles. Smt. Virmati PW-3 stated that these articles were looted at the time of the robbery. They were with her since after her marriage and were in her use. Smt. Virmati PW-3, her daughter Rajesh kumari PW-4 and her son Subhash Chand pw-5 correctly identified these articles. Smt. Virmati PW-3 stated that these articles were looted at the time of the robbery. They were with her since after her marriage and were in her use. Her two other family members also rightly identified these articles. They were the most natural witnesses of their identification who Would have seen the same a number of times at their house being used by Smt. Virmati PW-3. ( 18 ) WE note that the link evidence is also complete as to the safe keeping of these articles in sealed cover between the point of recovery and identification by the witnesses. Obviously, the recovery of two items of jewellery within two days after the robbery at the instance of the accused-appellant is a very important piece of evidence proving his participation in this crime. He, as is clear, was arrested only two days after the incident, made Baparda and lodged is such in jail to be identified by the informant Dr. Kishan Pal Singh pw-2 (a natural witness residing in the immediate neighbourhood of the place of the incident) who had seen him in the light of the torch while leaving the scene of crime with his associates after committing this crime with his associates. ( 19 ) JUDGING the entire scenario in the light of the evidence brought on record by the prosecution, i. e. , the identification of the accused-appellant by an independent and natural witness coupled with recovery of two robbed items of jewellery at his behest two days after the incident, clinchingly established his participation in the commission of this crime. We have cross-checked the reasonings and findings of the learhed trial judge with the evidence on record and find ourselves in agreement of the same. We have cross-checked the reasonings and findings of the learhed trial judge with the evidence on record and find ourselves in agreement of the same. He rightly observed that the two murders were committed for facilitating the commission of the robbery and as such the offence committed was that of Section 394, I. P. C. Since two robbed items of jewellery had been recovered at the instance of the accused-appellant two days after the incident, he was also rightly found guilty of the offence punishable under section 412, I. P. C. The sentence of life Imprisonment under Section 394, I. P. C. and that of five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 412, I. P. C. (with the direction of running of sentences concurrently) do not call for any interference. ( 20 ) RESULTANTLY, the appeal is devoid of substance and merits. It is hereby dismissed. The accused-appellant-Balbir Singh is on bail. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah shall cause him to be arrested and lodge in jail immediately to serve out the sentences as imposed. ( 21 ) COMPLIANCE be reported within two months. Record of the lower Court be returned back. Judgment be certified to the Court below. Appeal dismissed. . .