Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 229 (UTT)

MOHAN SINGH SAHI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2015-04-29

BARIN GHOSH, V.K.BIST

body2015
JUDGMENT (Per: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J.) This appeal has been preferred by the convict through the Superintendent, District Jail, Haridwar against the judgment and order dated 22.08.2012, passed by Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, in Sessions Trial No. 01 of 2011 whereby said court has convicted accused/appellant Mohan Singh Sahi under section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life, and directed to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months. The appellant has been further convicted under section 506 I.P.C. sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. On 13.11.2010 F.I.R. was lodged by the brother of the deceased at Police Station, Kotwali Pithoragarh that on 12.11.2010 his sister Gita was brutally beaten by her husband, Mohan Singh between 09:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M., due to which she died. The incident was witnessed by her eleven year daughter Nitu and eight year son Ajay. Due to threat given by their father, the children could not cry. F.I.R. no. 66 of 2010 was registered against accused Mohan Singh Sahi relating to offences punishable under sections 302, 506 IPC. P.W.7 Inspector Pooran Singh Bhatt investigated the matter. Statement of the daughter of the deceased was also recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. After investigating the matter, Investigating Officer P.W.7 submitted charge sheet against accused Mohan Singh Sahi for his trial in respect of offence punishable under sections 302, 506 IPC. 3. During trial the prosecution got examined P.W.1 Km. Namita Sahi @ Nitu (eye witness), P.W.2 Jitendra Singh (brother of the deceased), P.W.3 Dr. Jai Raj Singh Naviyal (who conducted post mortem examination), P.W.4 Raghuveer Singh Sahi (Jaith of the deceased), P.W.5 Anandmal (neighbourer), P.W.6 Shri Dinesh Chandra Pandey (Ex Pradhan of village), P.W.7 Shri Pooran Chandra Bhatt (who investigated the matter), P.W.8 R.P. Kohli (Sub Inspector), P.W.9 Ravindra Kumar Kaushal (Sub Inspector). Oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which he (Mohan Singh Sahi) pleaded that evidence adduced against him is false. He got himself examined as D.W.1. The trial court after hearing the parties found that prosecution has successfully proved charge of offence punishable under sections 302, 506 IPC, against accused Mohan Singh Sahi and convicted him accordingly under section 302, 506 IPC. He got himself examined as D.W.1. The trial court after hearing the parties found that prosecution has successfully proved charge of offence punishable under sections 302, 506 IPC, against accused Mohan Singh Sahi and convicted him accordingly under section 302, 506 IPC. After hearing on sentence, the court convicted accused/appellant as mentioned above. 4. Before further discussion, we think it just and proper to mention the ante mortem injuries recorded by P.W.3 Dr. Jai Raj Singh Naviyal at the time of post mortem examination on the dead body of deceased Gita Sahi on 13.11.2010. The ante mortem injuries are being reproduced from autopsy report (Ex. A3) prepared by said medical officer: (i) Lacerated wound at parietal part of right side head, size 12 cm x 3.5 cm bone deep. (ii) Lacerated wound at right side of occipital region size 5 cm x1.5 cm bone deep. (iii) Lacerated wound at left side of occipital region size 3.5 cm x 1.25 cm bone deep. (iv) Contused injury and swelling at right side hand just above right ear 5 cm x 4 cm. (v) Contused injury and swelling at lower occipital region 4cm x 5 cm. (vi) Contused injury and bluish in colour at right side of 6 cm x 3 cm, 4 cm x 3 cm. (vii) Contused injury at left side face 3cm x2 cm to 3cm x 1.5cm, colour bluish. (viii) Contused injury and bluish in colour at whole right upper limb and shoulder only. (ix) Deep lacerated wound at upper part of right upper limbs size 1.25cm x 1cm x ½ cm. (x) Contused and bluish colour at whole back and lower back. (xi) Multiple abrasion in left right side of hip. (xii) Contused injury at posterior part of thigh backside. (xiii) Contused injury and bluish colour at upper part of left upper limb size 12 cm x 6 cm. (xiv) Deep lacerated wound at just above left elbow joint size 1.5 cm x 1 cm x 0.5 cm. (xv) Multiple abraded injury at left. (xvi) Bony defamatory near left wrist joint. (xvii) Contused injury and bluish colour of Anter left part of size 40 cm x 10 cm. (xviii) Abraded injury at right side leg anterio middle side. (xix) 2 3 deep at left leg. (xx) Defamatory at upper bone of left leg, just below left knee joint. (xv) Multiple abraded injury at left. (xvi) Bony defamatory near left wrist joint. (xvii) Contused injury and bluish colour of Anter left part of size 40 cm x 10 cm. (xviii) Abraded injury at right side leg anterio middle side. (xix) 2 3 deep at left leg. (xx) Defamatory at upper bone of left leg, just below left knee joint. The medical officer opined that deceased died due to ante mortem injury on head and other injuries. 5. P.W.1, Km. Namita Sahi, is the star eye witness of the incident who has stated on oath that Mohan Singh is her father. The incident was of 12.11.2010. On that night, her mother was beaten by her father by foot and fist. He also hit on her head by wooden stick and her head was broken. He had also broken her hand and foot and due to all those injuries her mother fell down and died. This witness has also stated that when her father killed her mother, he asked P.W.1 and her brother not to cry, otherwise he would kill them. This witness proved her statement given under section 164 Cr.P.C. P.W.2 Jitendra Singh, complainant, is brother of the deceased. He stated that he got information on mobile that some incident has happened with his sister. On that information, he reached to the house of her sister where he found his sister dead. He found injuries on every part of body of the deceased. He stated that when he asked his niece Km. Nitu Sahi and nephew Ajay Sahi about the incident, they told him that their father Mohan Singh has beaten their mother by foot, fist and wooden batton, due to which she died. P.W.3 Dr. Jai Raj Singh Naviyal stated that deceased died due to injury on her head and other injuries. This witness has proved post mortem report. In his statement he narrated 20 external and 3 internal injuries found on the body of the deceased. P.W.4, elder brother of the accused and P.W.5, resident of same village stated that accused used to beat his wife. P.W.6, Dinesh Chandra Pandey, ex Pradhan of the village stated that on 13.10.2010, one Shamsher Sahi informed him that accused had killed his wife on previous day. He is witness of Panchnama as well as recovery memo. P.W.4, elder brother of the accused and P.W.5, resident of same village stated that accused used to beat his wife. P.W.6, Dinesh Chandra Pandey, ex Pradhan of the village stated that on 13.10.2010, one Shamsher Sahi informed him that accused had killed his wife on previous day. He is witness of Panchnama as well as recovery memo. He stated that at the behest of P.W.1 daughter of the deceased, police recovered three wooden sticks, used in crime. P.W.5 and P.W.6 also stated that accused confessed that he had killed his wife and regretted for his action. Statements of other prosecution witnesses are formal in nature. 6. We have carefully considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties. Though the accused, in his statement recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., has denied that he killed his wife, but in his statement, given as D.W.1, he has admitted the fact that deceased died due to hit of wooden stick used by him. P.W.1 is his daughter. She is star eye witness. In her statement, she narrated entire incident in detail. She clearly stated that her father brutally beaten her mother by fist, foot and stick, due to which she died. Her testimony is quite natural reliable, trustworthy and cannot be disbelieved. Her statement alone is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. She also got the sticks used in the crime recovered, recovery of which was also proved by P.W.6. In Forensic Lab Report, human blood of A B group was found on the sticks. Thus, the statement of P.W.1 that three sticks were used in committing the crime also finds support from Forensic Lab Report. We have also seen the post mortem report. 20 external and 3 internal injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Injuries are serious in nature. Every part of the body was brutally hit by the stick. Thus, it is successfully proved that accused/appellant killed the deceased. Considering the entire material on record, we do not find any reason for interference. The appeal is dismissed. The judgment of Court below is affirmed. The appellant is in jail. He will serve out the sentence awarded by the Court below. 7. Let a certified copy of this judgment be sent to the Superintendent of Jail concerned and a copy of the same alongwith the original record, be sent to the trial court.