JUDGMENT Rajive Bhalla, J.:- 1. Rajbir son of Baldev aged 20 years at the time of trial, is before us challenging the correctness of judgment dated 1.5.2009 and order of sentence dated 5.5.2009 convicting and sentencing him in the following terms: The appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for murder of a 13 years old girl and for an offence under the Indian Arms Act, 1959. 2. The law was set into motion by Smt. Rajpati wife of Ramesh, mother of the deceased by recording a statement, on 14.10.2008 before Bhim Singh Sl/SHO, P.S. Garhi that she was doing house hold chores and Ram Kumar her husband's elder brother was sitting out side in the street. As she came out of the house, she heard the cries of her daughter coming from the deserted house of Lakha @ Ram Sarup situated in the street at the rear of their house. They rushed to the deserted house and saw Rajbir holding her daughter from her neck with one hand and with the other holding a knife. Rajbir inflicted knife blows on her daughter, then twisted her neck and ran away with the knife. Her daughter died at the spot due to injuries inflicted with the knife and as her neck was broken. Rajbir intended to outrage the modesty of her daughter. Rajbir had already committed a similar act but a complaint was not filed. Smt. Rajpati affixed her right thumb impression on the statement which was also signed by Ram Kumar and after endorsement Ex. P-1/2, it was forwarded to Police Station, Garhi where FIR No. 110 dated 14.10.2008 was registered under Section 302 of the IPC, citing the appellant as the accused. 3. The police party headed by Bhim Singh SI/SHO, P.S. Garhi, District Jind, entered the abandoned house, where the dead body of Mamta deceased, was lying and prepared an inquest report Ex. PD. The investigating officer recorded the statements of witnesses, lifted blood stained earth from the spot placed it in a plastic container which was converted into a parcel and sealed with seal impression 'AS' and taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PR attested by PW Raj Kumar and ASI Ajad Singh. A photographer was called to the spot to take photographs. PR attested by PW Raj Kumar and ASI Ajad Singh. A photographer was called to the spot to take photographs. After leaving ASI Azad Singh at the spot, Bhim Singh SI/SHO and E/ASI Ram Kumar took the dead body to Government Hospital, Narwana for post mortem but as the post mortem could not be conducted, E/ASI Ram Kumar was left in the hospital with the dead body. SI/SHO Bhim Singh returned to the spot, prepared a rough site plan Ex. PU with marginal notes and thereafter returned to the police station. The post mortem was conducted on 15.10.2008. E/ASI Ram Kumar produced a copy of post mortem report and a sealed parcel containing clothes worn by the deceased and another parcel of a vial containing vaginal swabs of the deceased which were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PO attested by E/ASI Ram Kumar. The appellant was arrested on 16.10.2008 and upon interrogation, stated that he had illicit relations with the deceased and had concealed the knife which was used in the commission of crime beneath unused gunny bags lying in the room of his railway quarter, which he could get recovered. The disclosure statement reduced into writing was signed by the appellant and attested by Udey Ram ASI and E/ASI Ram Kumar. The knife Ex. PS was recovered and sealed in parcel with seal UR and the parcel was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. P.N. A rough site plan Ex. PV, of place of recovery of the knife was also prepared. A rough sketch of knife Ex. PM was also prepared. The investigating Officer recorded the statements of ASI Udey Ram and E/ASI Ram Kumar under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The accused appellant was medico-legally examined at General Hospital, Narwana, vide application Ex. PF. E/ASI Dalbir Singh produced a sealed parcel containing clothes of the accused which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PT. The case property was deposited with the MHC on 20.10.2008. PW Ram Kumar produced a photo copy of the school leaving certificate of the deceased, Ex. PW. On 21.10.2008, the sealed parcel containing the knife was taken from the MHC and handed over to HC Subh Karan along-with an application Ex. PE for seeking the opinion of the doctor whether injuries on the body of the deceased could have been inflicted with the knife. After obtaining opinion Ex. PW. On 21.10.2008, the sealed parcel containing the knife was taken from the MHC and handed over to HC Subh Karan along-with an application Ex. PE for seeking the opinion of the doctor whether injuries on the body of the deceased could have been inflicted with the knife. After obtaining opinion Ex. PE/1 from the concerned doctor, HC Subh Karan deposited the parcel containing the knife with the MHC. On 23.10.2008, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of MHC Om Parkash and constable Jagdish and on 4.11.2008 recorded the statement of Kuldeep Gupta draftsman and Satpal photographer. 4. Upon completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared and filed a final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The case was committed to the Sessions Court where after considering the material on record, charges were framed against the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. As the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence. 5. The prosecution examined PW-1 Dr. Devender Kumar, who deposed that post mortem examination was conducted by a board of doctors and proved Ex. PC; a copy of the post mortem report and other relevant facts including the opinion Ex. PE/1 that injuries on the person of the deceased could have been caused with the knife Ex. P5. The following injuries were found on the body of the deceased: 1. Incised wound of size 3 cm x 2 cm. x bonedeep present over the Right elbow joint clotted blood present. 2. Incised wound of size 4 cm. x 2.5 cm. x bonedeep present over the lateral aspect of left elbow joint, clotted blood present. 3. Incised wound of size 2 cm. x 1 cm. present over Medial aspect of left elbow joint, clotted blood present. 4. Two contusions of sizes 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm, and 2 cm x 1 cm. present over the right side of neck, on anterior aspect. 5. Two contusions of sizes 2.2 cm x 1.0 cm. and 1 cm. x 1 cm. present over the left side of anterior aspect of neck. 6. There is contusion of 3 cm. x 2 cm. present over the posterior aspect of left-side of neck. On dissection is fracture seen at 2nd cervical vertebra associated with contusion and laceration of spinal cord. 7. Contusion of size 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. x 1 cm. present over the left side of anterior aspect of neck. 6. There is contusion of 3 cm. x 2 cm. present over the posterior aspect of left-side of neck. On dissection is fracture seen at 2nd cervical vertebra associated with contusion and laceration of spinal cord. 7. Contusion of size 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. present over the right breast below the nipple. 8. Two abrasions contusions of sizes 5 cm. x 0.5 cm. and 2 cm. in size present over the upper chest. 9. Contusion of size 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. present over the left lower chest. Organ of generation external & Internal:-- Contusions of round shape, 6 in number present in a row over, the left side of left side of upper thigh, just below the inguinal region placed obliquely. There is clotted blood present around the right inguinal region and upper thigh medial aspect. On vaginal examination pubic hair present. No injuries seen on vulva and labia on P/V examination hymen ruptured admitted two fingures easily. Uterus normal size and empty. Vaginal swab taken. Opinion In our opinion the cause of death in this case is due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries described which are antemortem in nature and are sufficient to cause death in normal course of nature. Possibility of rape could not be ruled out. Probable time that elapsed between injury and death was immediate and between death and PME was 12 to 24 hours. 6. PW-3 is constable Jagdish Chander who tendered his affidavit Ex. PG regarding deposit of case property with the MHC and the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban. 7. PW-4 is E/ASI Om Parkash who tendered his affidavit Ex. PH and deposed with respect to the safe custody of the case property. 8. PW-5 is Kanwaljit Singh, E/ASI who proved recording of FIR Ex. P.J. 9. PW-6 is Satpal, the photographer who proved photographs Ex. PK to PQ, relating to the dead body. 10. PW-7 is E/ASI Fateh Singh who received the special report from ESI Kanwaljeet Singh and delivered it to the Illaqa Magistrate. 11. PW-8 is ASI Azad Singh who has deposed that blood stained earth lifted from the place of occurrence and put into a plastic container with seal bearing impression 'AS' and seal after use was handed over to him. The parcel was taken into possession, vide recovery memo Ex. 11. PW-8 is ASI Azad Singh who has deposed that blood stained earth lifted from the place of occurrence and put into a plastic container with seal bearing impression 'AS' and seal after use was handed over to him. The parcel was taken into possession, vide recovery memo Ex. PR which was attested by Raj Kumar and the deponent. 12. PW-9 is Kuldeep Gupta, Draftsman, who prepared the site plan Ex. PS demarcating the place where the dead body was lying. 13. PW-10 is E/ASI Dalbir Singh who proved application Ex. PF moved for examination of the appellant Rajbir and proved recovery memo Ex. PT with respect to the clothes worn by the appellant. 14. PW-11 is ASI Udey Ram who has deposed with respect to the arrest of the appellant and the disclosure statement suffered by the appellant which led to recovery of a knife etc. 15. PW-12 is ASI Ram Kumar who has deposed with respect to the arrest of appellant, arrival of police party, preparation of the inquest report Ex. PB, appellant for getting post mortem examination conducted, the conduct of the post mortem; receipt of a parcel, clothes of the deceased etc as well as the disclosure statement made by the appellant and recovery of the knife. 16. PW-13 is Smt. Rajpati wife of Ramesh and mother of the deceased, who is an eye witness has deposed in consonance with her statement made before the police. 17. PW-14 is Ram Kumar son of Karam Chand an eye witness to the occurrence who was present alongwith PW-13 Smt. Rajpati when they saw the appellant inflicting injuries upon the deceased and twisting her neck. He has deposed that Smt. Rajpati told him that she heard the cries of her daughter coming from the abandoned house of Lakha. When they entered the house, he saw the appellant holding a knife in one hand and holding the neck of the deceased with other. On seeing them, appellant twisted the neck of the deceased and caused injuries with the knife. Rajbir fled from the spot with the knife. 18. PW-15 is SI/SHO Bhim Singh, the Investigating Officer, who has deposed with respect to the various aspects of the investigation upto the filing of the challan. 19. On seeing them, appellant twisted the neck of the deceased and caused injuries with the knife. Rajbir fled from the spot with the knife. 18. PW-15 is SI/SHO Bhim Singh, the Investigating Officer, who has deposed with respect to the various aspects of the investigation upto the filing of the challan. 19. Upon conclusion of prosecution evidence, incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to the appellant in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The appellant denied these circumstances and pleaded his innocence and false implication. 20. After considering the evidence on record and arguments addressed, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as recorded in the opening part of this judgment. 21. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been wrongly convicted as the evidence on record is not sufficient to prove that he committed the murder of Mamta. The prosecution evidence is based upon the deposition of PW-13 Smt. Rajpati and PW-14 Ram Kumar who are both interested witnesses. The prosecution has failed to produce any independent witness. It is argued that if, as alleged, by PW-13 the appellant had already outraged the modesty of Mamta a few months before the present occurrence, the fact that the complainant and other family members did not inform the police, proves that somebody else committed the murder. It is also contended that during the entire course of disclosure statement, recoveries etc., no independent witness was joined by the Investigating Officer thereby raising an inference that recoveries and disclosure statement are false. It is further submitted that as the alleged occurrence took place in a public locality, it is rather surprising that no one from the locality was associated much less joined by the police. 22. Counsel for the State of Haryana submits that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the appellant by ocular and medical evidence duly corroborated by recovery of knife which as per report received from FSL was stained with human blood. The prosecution may not have associated any person from the locality but there is no reason to doubt the account of two eye witnesses. It is further submitted that the opinion of the doctor that the knife Ex. P5 could have been used in inflicting injuries squarely brings home the appellant's guilt without any shadow of doubt. 23. The prosecution may not have associated any person from the locality but there is no reason to doubt the account of two eye witnesses. It is further submitted that the opinion of the doctor that the knife Ex. P5 could have been used in inflicting injuries squarely brings home the appellant's guilt without any shadow of doubt. 23. Before proceeding any further, it would be appropriate to point out that Smt. Rajpati-complainant has filed an application to place on record a compromise Annexure A-1 dated 26.2.2014 wherein parents of the deceased have entered into a compromise with Baldev Singh son of Hari Ram father of the appellant. Counsel for the appellant and counsel for the complainant pray that in view of the compromise the appellant may be acquitted or a lenient view may be taken of the matter. 24. We have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and order as well as the compromise Annexure A-1. The subject matter of this appeal is the brutal murder of a 13 year old girl. The trial Court has held appellant guilty on the basis of (a) ocular evidence (b) evidence of motive (c) medical evidence (d) recovery of the weapon of offence and (e) evidence that the weapon was used in the offence. 25. Smt. Rajpati, PW-13 mother of the deceased heard the cries of her daughter, informed her husband's elder brother and both of them ran towards the abandoned house of Lakha Singh where they saw the appellant Rajbir holding her daughter from her neck while holding a knife in the other hand. On seeing Rajpati and Ram Kumar, the appellant inflicted injuries with the knife and twisted the neck of the deceased which led to her instant death. After inflicting the injuries, the appellant fled from the spot with the knife. 26. A perusal of the statements of Smt. Raj Pati PW-13 and Ram Kumar PW-14 recorded before the police as well as their depositions in Court, reveal that they have deposed in unision about the brutal manner in which the appellant murdered a minor girl i.e. by twisting her neck and inflicting injuries with a knife. The doctors PW-2 and PW-3, have deposed that during post mortem, they found a contusion on the neck, a fracture of the 2nd cervical vertebra, associated with the contusion and laceration of the spinal cord. The doctors PW-2 and PW-3, have deposed that during post mortem, they found a contusion on the neck, a fracture of the 2nd cervical vertebra, associated with the contusion and laceration of the spinal cord. The medical evidence has, thus, corroborates the testimony of eye witness. The doctor has also opined that the other injuries on the person of the deceased could have been caused by the knife Ex. P-5. The knife Ex. P-5 was recovered pursuant to a voluntary disclosure statement suffered by the appellant. The knife was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The report Ex. PX, received from the FSL records that the knife was found to be stained with human blood thereby leaving no ambiguity as to the appellant's guilt that he committed the murder of Mamta, a 13 years old girl. The evidence of motive, is available in the deposition of PW-13, mother of the deceased who had deposed that prior to the present occurrence, the appellant had outraged the modesty of her daughter but she did not report the matter to anybody to save the reputation of the family. 27. An argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the prosecution did not associate any independent witness or did not record the statement of any resident of the locality, in our considered opinion, is entirely misplaced as the prosecution has produced two eye witnesses who have deposed in consonance with their statements recorded by the police and narrated particulars of the crime. Though it is desirable that an independent witness should be associated at the time of recording of disclosure statements but failure to do so does not, in the absence of any suspicious circumstance, raise a doubt as to the veracity of a disclosure statement or recovery. A perusal of the evidence on record establishes that the appellant committed the murder of Mamta by inflicting knife injury and breaking her neck. The evidence adduced by the prosecution, particularly, the deposition of two eye witnesses corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of the knife, is clear, cogent and does not suffer from any legal flaw. The learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant. As regards the compromise, the less said the better. The parents of the minor girl appear to have bartered her life, a course we can neither countenance or condone or accept. The learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant. As regards the compromise, the less said the better. The parents of the minor girl appear to have bartered her life, a course we can neither countenance or condone or accept. The compromise is, therefore, rejected. In view of the discussion referred to above, the prosecution having proved the appellant's guilt, the appeal is dismissed. …………………