Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1226 (ALL)

Jitendra Verma @ Jony v. State Of U. P.

2019-05-07

DINESH KUMAR SINGH I, RAMESH SINHA

body2019
JUDGMENT : Hon. Ramesh Sinha, J. 1. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 7.4.2018 passed by Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Ghaziabad convicting the appellant u/s 302 IPC for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.20,000/-and in default payment of fine, further undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and u/s 307 IPC for five years R.I and a fine of Rs.10,000/-and in default payment of fine, further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. All the sentence shall run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case as has been set-out in the FIR by the informant is that on 11.08.2013, at about 10.30 in the night, the informant and his wife Praveen Kaur, his son Arvind and Rana Jasdeo Singh and his mother Smt. Ram Chameli were present in their house. At that time, the brother-in-law of the informant namely Jitendra Verma @ Jaani threatened his wife Praveen Kaur on mobile no. 9558160077 “Too mere plot ke kagazon pe sign nahi kar rahi hai, mai araha hoon. Aaj tujhe va tere pure parivaar ko jaan se maar doonga”. After a short time, the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani came with a knife at his house and stated that all of them would be put to right place and as soon as he entered in the house, he assaulted Praveen Kaur with an intention to kill her by knife. When the informant and his son ran to save Praveen Kaur, then accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani assaulted with an intention to kill Rana Jasdeo Singh on his chest due to which Rana Jasdeo Singh got injured seriously. The accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani also assaulted the informant with the knife. The informant took the injured persons to Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar where the doctor declared Rana Jasdeo Singh to be dead and Praveen Kaur who was also seriously injured, was being medically treated. On the basis of written report lodged by the informant against the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani, a FIR was registered as Case Crime No.516 of 2013 u/s 302, 307, 452 IPC. A chik FIR which was marked as Ext.Ka-21 was prepared on the basis of written report which was also endorsed in the G.D. was marked as Ext.Ka-6. On the basis of written report lodged by the informant against the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani, a FIR was registered as Case Crime No.516 of 2013 u/s 302, 307, 452 IPC. A chik FIR which was marked as Ext.Ka-21 was prepared on the basis of written report which was also endorsed in the G.D. was marked as Ext.Ka-6. S.I. Azad Pal Singh who took over the investigation, reached the place of occurrence and collected blood-stained and simple earth and kept them in a separate boxes and sealed the same and took into the custody. Further the photograph of the place of occurrence was also taken. The inquest report of the dead-body of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh was conducted at Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar on 12.8.2013 at 00:30 hours which is marked as Ext.Ka-2. Thereafter, the dead body of the deceased was sent to post-mortem under a sealed condition to District Hospital, Ghaziabad and the post-mortem was conducted by Dr. K.M. Tiwary on 12.8.2013 at 12.45 p.m. The S.I before sending the dead-body for post-mortem had prepared police papers no.13 which is marked as Ext. Ka-7 and Photonash as Ext.Ka-8, letter to C.M.O as Ext.Ka-9. The investigation of the case was conducted by Senior Inspector Udai Veer Singh Baliyan who recorded the statement of the informant and witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C, and prepared the site-plan Ext.Ka-13. He recovered the clothes of the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani which he was wearing at the time of incident and recovered the same from his house and prepared the recovery memo of the same which is marked as Ext.Ka-14. He also prepared the site-plan of the place from where clothes of the accused were recovered which is marked as Ext.Ka-15. After arresting the accused, he prepared arrest memo which is marked as Ext.Ka-16. At the pointing out of the accused, the weapon of assault i.e. knife was recovered which is marked as Ext.Ka-17 and also site-plan from where the knife was recovered was prepared by him, which is marked as Ext.Ka-18. He also send the blood-stained and simple earth in a bundle along with the blood-stained clothes of the accused and the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh and blood-stained knife to Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala, Agra and after completing the formalities, he submitted the charge sheet against the accused u/s 452, 302, 307 IPC before the competent court. 3. He also send the blood-stained and simple earth in a bundle along with the blood-stained clothes of the accused and the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh and blood-stained knife to Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala, Agra and after completing the formalities, he submitted the charge sheet against the accused u/s 452, 302, 307 IPC before the competent court. 3. The trial court framed charges against the accused-appellant for offence u/s 452, 302, 307 IPC who denied the charge and claimed his trial. 4. The prosecution in support of it's case has examined P.W.1 Devendra Singh who is the informant of the case, P.W.2 Praveen Kaur, P.W.3 Arvind Singh, P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal, P.W.5 Dr. K.N. Tiwary, P.W.6 Constable 104 Gangadhar Sharma, P.W.7 S.I Azad Pal Singh, P.W.8 Senior S.I. Udaiveer Singh Baliyan, P.W.9 Constable 3117 Pankaj Sharma, P.W.10 Narendra Kumar. 5. The accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. has denied the prosecution case and has stated that the investigation which was conducted by the Investigating Officer is a wrong one. He further stated that Devendra Singh, Parvinder Singh and Jasdeo had assaulted him for which a report was lodged by him at police station and the police had arrested him and thereafter shown him to have absconded. He further stated that after the death of her mother, with the consent of Praveen Kaur, Chandan Singh had taken away the jewelleries of his mother and sold the same and when he questioned about it, then they told him that he has no authority on the same and also on the plot. He told them that as to where he would keep his children. The grand daughter born to Praveen Kaur on account of which he had gone to her house where quarrel took place and Harvindar had assaulted him on his head by an iron rod due to which it started bleeding. Thereafter all of them had assaulted him and Devendra Singh in order to kill him had assaulted him with knife. He had slipped on the mud and the knife was inflicted on his son Jasdeo. The public had allowed him to fled away from the place of occurrence and when he had gone to lodged a report, then the police personnel stated that his report would be written later on and he would first come to the house of Praveen Kaur. The public had allowed him to fled away from the place of occurrence and when he had gone to lodged a report, then the police personnel stated that his report would be written later on and he would first come to the house of Praveen Kaur. After taking him to the house of Praveen Kaur, the police brought him back. The police personnels had changed his clothes and taken to police station where he was locked and in spite of his request, no medical examination was conducted. The accused refused to give evidence in defence. 6. P.W.1 Devendra Singh in his deposition before the trial court has stated that he is an Editor of Punjabi Darshan Magazine. His mother-in-law Smt. Sudesh Khanna died on 16.5.2013 and there is a plot of 60 yard in Modi Nagar at Sai Colony. His wife are two sisters. The name of his wife is Praveen Kaur and her sister's name is Seema Rani. They have one brother namely Jitendra Verma @ Jaani who is his brother-in-law. His brother-in-law Jitendra Verma @ Jaani claimed his full right on the plot of his mother-in-law Sudesh Khanna which was in Sai Colony as he wanted to sell the same but as Jaani was not of good character and was keeping a bad company, his wife was against Jaani for selling the said plot as she stated that besides Jaani there is right of wife and son of Jaani namely Shashi Bala and Chirag @ Chhenu. The incident took place on 11.8.2013 at 10.30 in the night. The witness stated that prior to the said incident, he had come to Modi Nagar at his house at about 9-9.30 p.m. and after taking bath when he was taking his dinner, at that moment his brother-in-law called to his wife Praveen Kaur on phone and he threatened her stating uttering that she was not signing on the documents of the plot, hence he would kill her and her family members. His wife told to Jaani on phone that he should come to his house and talk about it. At that time it was 10.10 in the night and he along with his wife Praveen Kaur and sons Arvind and Rana Jasdeo Singh and mother Ram Chameli were present in his house. His wife told to Jaani on phone that he should come to his house and talk about it. At that time it was 10.10 in the night and he along with his wife Praveen Kaur and sons Arvind and Rana Jasdeo Singh and mother Ram Chameli were present in his house. After few minutes, his brother-in-law Jitendra Verma @ Jaani came with a knife in his hand to his house and as soon as his wife opened the gate of his house, Jaani while entering in the house assaulted on his wife Praveen Kaur with an intention to kill with the knife in his hand. The witness and his sons Rana Jasdeo Singh and Arvind ran to save Praveen Kaur during which Jitendra Verma @ Jaani with an intention to kill inflicted a knife blow on his chest due to which his son received serious injuries. There was some scuffle between him and the accused near the house of the gate. In the said incident, he along with his wife also received injuries. The said incident was witnessed by his neighbour Virendra, S/o Preetam Giri and Smt. Kamlesh daughter of Kishan Lal and other persons who arrived at the place of occurrence and seen the incident. Jitendra Verma @ Jaani pushed them and fled away displaying the knife in his hand towards Om Sai Santpura Colony. The witness took his injured son Rana Jasdeo Singh to Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar where doctors declared him dead. A written report was written by his son Chandan Singh on the dictation of the said witness who also read out to him and thereafter he had signed the same and submitted to police station Modinagar. He has proved the written report as Ext.Ka-1 under his signatures. The inquest of the dead-body of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh was conducted in his presence at Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar. He has proved the same as Ext.Ka-2 as he was one of the witness of the panchayatnama. The Investigating Officer recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C and at his pointing out, the Investigating Officer prepared site-plan of the place of occurrence. Photographs were also taken of the place of occurrence which were 23 in number and are available on record. The injuries received by him and his wife Praveen Kaur in the said incident was also medically examined on 12.8.2013 in District Hospital C.H.C, Govindpuri Modinagar. Photographs were also taken of the place of occurrence which were 23 in number and are available on record. The injuries received by him and his wife Praveen Kaur in the said incident was also medically examined on 12.8.2013 in District Hospital C.H.C, Govindpuri Modinagar. The accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani had also threatened the witness and his family members for not deposing against him for which he had also lodged NCR on 9.8.2014 at police station Modinagar. In his cross-examination, the witness has stated that he studied up-to class intermediate and prior to the incident, there was no animosity with him. He has stated that the written report was written by his son Chandan Singh and the incident has taken place at 10.30 in the night and he has taken his son to the hospital at 10.45 p.m and reached the hospital at 11 p.m by car belonging to his neighbour Ashok Malhotra. He has not informed about the incident on phone to the police. After his wife and his son Arvind along with the person injured, from whose car the injured was taken to the hospital had also accompanied him. The accused was not arrested in-front of him as he came to know that he was arrested from Tehsil and he was arrested on 20.8.2013 and nothing was recovered from him in his presence and when he was arrested, he had gone on his own to the police station. He has denied that he was not present at the place of occurrence, hence he is not able to give his correct prescription of the incident. He further denied that Jitendra Verma @ Jaani has not assaulted his son and some unknown miscreant has assaulted and in order to grab the plot of the mother of Jaani false FIR has been registered against him. 7. P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur who is the wife of P.W.1 Devendra Singh and mother of the deceased has deposed before the trial court that they were two sisters and one brother namely Jitendra Verma @ Jaani and her younger sister lives at Ambala. Her mother Smt. Sudesh Khanna has died on 16.5.2013. Her mother prior to her death was living in Awas Vikas Madhopura, Meerut. In the year 2012, her mother had sold her house situated at Meerut and had taken a plot of 60 yard at Sahra Road, Modinagar in Sai Colony. Her mother Smt. Sudesh Khanna has died on 16.5.2013. Her mother prior to her death was living in Awas Vikas Madhopura, Meerut. In the year 2012, her mother had sold her house situated at Meerut and had taken a plot of 60 yard at Sahra Road, Modinagar in Sai Colony. The accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani present in the Court is her real brother. He did not do any work and some time used to ply tempo. Her brother is addicted to drugs and used to take liquor and her brother used to claim his right over the said plot of her mother but she opposed the same as she stated that on the said plot, there was right of the wife Shashi Bala and minor son Chirag @ Cheenu of her brother on account of which the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani used to feel annoyed with her and because of the quarrel, the wife of Jitendra Verma @ Jaani left him and gone along with her minor son to her parent's house at Ambala. After the death of her mother Smt. Sudesh Khanna, she performed her last rights and thereafter his brother Jitendra Verma @ Jaani was pressurizing her to give the said plot to him for which he wanted the signatures of the said witness. The witness deposed that her husband and children said that the said plot be given to the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani but her sister and other relatives asked the witness to give the said plot in the name of the wife of Jitendra Verma @ Jaani otherwise he would sold the said plot and would misuse the money for his bad habits. The father of the said witness Kanti Verma had gone away somewhere in the year 2001 and his whereabouts could not be known. On the date of the incident i.e. 11.8.2013 at 10.30 p.m., her brother had called her on phone and uttered that she should sign the papers of the said plot otherwise her all the family members would be done to death. He had called few minutes before the incident and had come to the house at 10.30 p.m. At that time, she along with her son Rana Jasdeo Singh, her husband Devendra Singh and mother-in-law Ram Chameli were present in the house. He had called few minutes before the incident and had come to the house at 10.30 p.m. At that time, she along with her son Rana Jasdeo Singh, her husband Devendra Singh and mother-in-law Ram Chameli were present in the house. The gate was opened by her and the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani was having a knife in his hand. He caught-hold of her neck with an intention to kill and assaulted her with the said knife. On her shriek , her son Rana Jasdeo Singh and Arvind came to save her and Jitendra assaulted her with the knife which hit her on elbow. When her son Rana Jasdeo Singh tried to save her, then the accused Jitendra inflicted him with knife blow on his chest on account of which he was seriously injured and had fallen down. There was scuffle took between her husband, herself and accused Jitendra at the plot of Udaiveer and on hearing the shouts, her neighbour Virendra and Kamlesh also arrived there and they stated that firstly we should attend to Rana Jasdeo Singh, then they left accused Jitendra who fled away displaying the knife. They took her son Rana Jasdeo Singh to Lokpriya Hospital where the doctors declared him dead. In the incident, she and her husband also received injuries and the injuries were examined at the District Hospital, Govindpuri. The Investigating Officer interrogated her about the incident and recorded her statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officer also called the photographer and took the 23 photographs which are available on record. In her cross-examination, she stated that she has one sister namely Seema and brother Jitendra @ Jaani. Her brother lives at a distance of 100-150 meters from her house. Her husband used to take out his own magazine. On 11.8.2013 her husband was in the house. On the said day, her husband had come from Bombay at about 9 p.m. and the phone call of Jaani had come at 10.30 p.m. Jaani pressed her neck from one hand and from the other hand, he was carrying a knife which he had hidden and she could not see the knife. She did not made call to police from her house and called the police from the hospital. She got her medically treated at Lokpriya Hospital and was getting regular treatment in the said hospital. She did not made call to police from her house and called the police from the hospital. She got her medically treated at Lokpriya Hospital and was getting regular treatment in the said hospital. They had taken their son to the hospital between 10.45-11 p.m. and her son Rana Jasdeo Singh who was bleeding. There was no dispute between her and Jitendra from before and only she was threatened by him for signing the papers of the plot. The statement of the witness was recorded by the police after 8-10 days u/s 161 Cr.P.C. The police had not got her signatures on any papers and she was not aware of the fact that during the quarrel Jaani received any injuries or not. She denied the suggestion that because of the quarrel between them, the injury was caused by knife of any other person from amongst them and it was not the assault of knife by Jaani. She further denied the suggestion that Jaani had not brought any knife with him as she is not telling the colour etc. of the knife. She further denied the suggestion that she did not receive the injury from the knife of Jaani but because of quarrel between them an injury was caused to her. A question was put on behalf of the accused to the said witness that at the time when Rana Jasdeo Singh had caught her from behind then why Devendra Singh and Arvind were assaulting the accused with hockey stick and stick of baseball on account of which he received injuries. She answered to the said question that Jaani as soon he arrived had assaulted her and when Rana Jasdeo Singh had come to save her, he was also inflicted with knife. 8. P.W.3 Arvind Singh who is the brother of the deceased and son of P.W.1 and P.W.2 at the time of his deposition before the trial court has stated that the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh was his real elder brother and the injured of the present case Devendra Singh is his father and injured Praveen Kaur is his mother. The accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani is his real maternal uncle. The incident had taken place on 11.8.2013 at about 10.30 p.m. in the night. At the time of incident, the accused used to live in a rental house of his neighbour Devendra Chaudhary. The accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani is his real maternal uncle. The incident had taken place on 11.8.2013 at about 10.30 p.m. in the night. At the time of incident, the accused used to live in a rental house of his neighbour Devendra Chaudhary. He was a drug addict and used to consume liquor. Occasionally he used to ply tempo and was in the company of bad boys and does not do any work. Because of his bad habits and harassment, his wife Shashi Bala became disturbed and she along with her minor son Chirag, had left him and went to live with her parents prior to three years of the incident. His grand-maternal-mother (Naani) died on 16.5.2013 and she after disposing of her house at Awas Vikas Madhopura, Meerut, had purchased a plot at Modinagar in Sai Colony which was of 60 yard. After the death of her grand-maternal-mother, the accused Jitendra @ Jaani who was his Mama, was after her for signing the documents of the said plot and used to have quarrel with her and also threatened her. The witness and his other family members had told her mother to give the said plot to him as what they have to do with it but her aunt (Mausi) Seema and other relatives had told her mother not to give the said plot to the accused Jitendra as he would sold the same and misuse the money in drinking liquor and give the said plot in the name of his wife and minor son Chirag. On the date of incident i.e. 11.8.2013 at 10.30 p.m., the accused Jitendra had made a phone call to her mother and had some quarrel with respect to the said plot on which her mother had asked her to come to her house and talk about the same. At that time, he along with his father Devendra Singh, elder brother Rana Jasdeo Singh, grand-mother Ram Chameli and mother Praveen Kaur were present in the house. At that time, he along with his father Devendra Singh, elder brother Rana Jasdeo Singh, grand-mother Ram Chameli and mother Praveen Kaur were present in the house. After some time on the same day at 10.30 p.m., his maternal-uncle (Mama) Jitendra @ Jaani had come to his house and knocked at the gate and when her mother Praveen Kaur opened the gate of the house then as soon as the accused entered in the house, he caught-hold of her mother on neck and assaulted her with the knife in his hand with an intention to kill which hit on her elbow. In order to save her mother Praveen Kaur, his younger brother Rana Jasdeo Singh, his father Devendra Singh and he himself intervened on which Jitendra @ Jaani assaulted his brother Rana Jasdeo Singh with a knife in his hand in order to kill his brother and inflicted on his chest due to which his brother Rana Jasdeo Singh was injured and had fallen down outside the gate of the house. During the said incident, there was some scuffle between them and the accused in the vacant plot outside the house. On hearing the noise his neighbours Virendra Giri and Kamlesh also arrived at the place of occurrence. The neighbours told that Rana Jasdeo Singh is seriously injured and yearning for life and firstly to care him and during the said time, Jitendra @ Jaani displaying the knife in his hand threatening them and pushing them fled away towards his house. They took the injured Rana Jasdeo Singh to the Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar where he was declared dead. In the said incident his mother Praveen Kaur and father Devendra Singh also received injuries and their injuries were examined at District Hospital, Govindpuri. The witness in his cross-examination has deposed before the trial court that he used to work in the magazine which was taken out by them. The disputed plot is in the name of his grand-maternal-mother (Naani). He returned at 9.15 p.m. from Bombay. Prior to 2 to 4 minutes before 10.30 p.m., a phone came to his other and the accused arrived after 2-3 minutes from the call which he made to Praveen Kaur. When his mother was assaulted, at that time, Jitendra was outside the door of the house. The accused Jitendra was outside the door when the mother had received injuries by knife. When his mother was assaulted, at that time, Jitendra was outside the door of the house. The accused Jitendra was outside the door when the mother had received injuries by knife. The accused did not enter the house after the incident of inflicting the knife was made. The knife was of red colour and was full of blood. Rana Jasdeo Singh had come to save his mother and the accused straight away assaulted with knife to Rana Jasdeo Singh. At 10.45 to 11 p.m., Rana Jasdeo Singh was taken to the hospital. At the time of incident, no one had called the police and Rana Jasdeo Singh was taken to the hospital by car. He could not see whether after the incident blood was oozing out from Rana Jasdeo Singh or not. The knife by which the assault was made by the accused, he did not try to snatch the same. The I.O had recorded the statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. after 8-10 days at his house. He had not taken the police personnel after the incident to the house of Jaani. He had not visited to the police station along with his father for lodging the FIR. He could not tell what clothes the accused Jaani was wearing at the time of incident. The police had not recovered any item in his presence. He denied the suggestion that during the quarrel, from amongst them any person's knife or kripan hit the deceased to Rana Jasdeo Singh. He further denied the suggestion that because of the greed of the plot, the accused Jaani has been falsely implicated in the present case. 9. P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal has deposed before the trial court that he was posted at Community Health Centre at Modinagar, district Ghaziabad at emergency post and on the said date on 12.8.2013 at about 8 p.m., the police had brought the injured Smt. Praveen Kaur, injured Devendra Singh and he examined at 8 p.m. to Smt. Praveen Kaur and found following injuries on her person:- (1). Incised wound 1.5 cm. X 0.5 cm. X muscle deep on outer aspect of right elbow joint. (2). Complain of head ache. (3). Complain of pain in right fore-arm and hand. 10. In the opinion of the doctor, injury no.1 was possibly caused by sharp-edged weapon. The injury was simple in nature and was one day old. Incised wound 1.5 cm. X 0.5 cm. X muscle deep on outer aspect of right elbow joint. (2). Complain of head ache. (3). Complain of pain in right fore-arm and hand. 10. In the opinion of the doctor, injury no.1 was possibly caused by sharp-edged weapon. The injury was simple in nature and was one day old. So far as injury no.2 and 3 are concerned, no opinion could be given about the same. He has proved the medical examination report of injured Praveen Kaur as Ext.Ka-3 under his handwriting and signatures. He stated that the said injury could be caused on 11.8.2013 at about 10.30 p.m by sharp-edged weapon like knife. He further deposed that on 12.8.2013 at 8.15 p.m., he examined injured Devendra Singh and found following injuries on his person:- (1). Abrasion 08.0 cm. X 0.5 cm. on lateral aspect of left side of chest. 10.00 cm. from left nipple. (2). Abraded contusion 3.0 cm. X 1.0 cm. on lateral aspect of left side of chest 06.0 on below from injury no.1. (3). Abraded contusion 06.0 cm. X 06.0 cm. on anterior aspect of right knee joint. (4). Abrasion 04.0 cm. X 04.0 cm. on anterior aspect of left knee joint. (5). Complain of back ache and left thigh. 11. In the opinion of the doctor, said injuries were simple in nature and were possible to have been caused by hard and blunt object and the said injury was one day old. So far as injury no.5 is concerned, no opinion can be given and he has proved the injury report of the injured as Ext.Ka-4 under his handwriting and signatures. It is further stated that the said injury could be caused on 11.8.2013 at 10.30 p.m. In his cross-examination, the witness has stated that the injuries sustained by the injured Praveen Kaur, none of the injuries were of such a nature that death would be caused and all the injuries were simple in nature. So far as the injuries sustained by the injured Devendra Singh is concerned, none of the injuries were of such a nature that death would be caused and all the injuries were simple in nature. The said injury can be caused because of fall on brick etc. He denied the suggestion that he has prepared false medical examination report and falsely deposing before the Court. 12. P.W.5 Dr. The said injury can be caused because of fall on brick etc. He denied the suggestion that he has prepared false medical examination report and falsely deposing before the Court. 12. P.W.5 Dr. K.N. Tiwari in his deposition before the trial court has stated that on 12.8.2013 he was posted as Senior Consultant in M.M. G Hospital, Ghaziabad on 12.8.2013. On the said day at 12.45 p.m., he had conducted the post-mortem of Rana Jasdeo Singh, S/o Devendra Singh who was brought in a sealed condition by constable Omveer Singh through the Station Officer of Police Station Modinagar. He found the following injuries on his person:- (1). Incised wound 2.5 cm. X 1 cm on left side of chest to the front 5 cm. above the nipple at one O' Clock position. Wound is cavity deep. Oblique parallel to arrela tailing of 1 cm. seen from upper parts of wound. 13. On the internal examination, he found that left lung and membrane of heart were found to be cutt and there was blood found inside the chest cavity. In the intestine of the deceased 300 ml. semi digested food was found. The duration of the death of the deceased was half day old and in the opinion of the doctor, the death was caused as a result of ante-mortem injuries sustained. He has proved the post-mortem report as Ext.Ka-5 under his handwriting and signatures and he had stated that in his opinion, the death of the deceased could have been caused on 11.8.2013 at 10.30 p.m. on account of injuries sustained on his person. The clothes which were found on the dead-body of the deceased were baniyan and two underwear and one kada and one ring which were sealed by him and had given to the constable who came along with the deceased. In his cross-examination he has deposed that the baniyan which the deceased was wearing, there was sign of hole of knife or not, he does not know. There was one injury outside on the dead body of the deceased and there was no other sign of injury was found on his body. It is true that because of the said injury, there was excessive bleeding on account of which the deceased died. He further deposed that the knife which is used for cutting the vegetables which is sharp-edged and long, the injury could be possible by it. It is true that because of the said injury, there was excessive bleeding on account of which the deceased died. He further deposed that the knife which is used for cutting the vegetables which is sharp-edged and long, the injury could be possible by it. He denied the suggestion that he has not conducted the post-mortem of Rana Jasdeo Singh and further denied the suggestion that he is falsely deposing before the court. 14. P.W.6. Constable 104 Gangadhar Sharma has deposed that on 8.11.2013, he was posted as Constable Clerk at police station Modinagar and on the said day, Devendra Singh, S/o late Iqbal Singh, R/o Om Shahi Shantpura, Modinagar, P.S. Modinagar, district Ghaziabad had given written report against the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani for assaulting his son Rana Jasdeo Singh Rana on his chest and also that he was injured and his wife was also injured and the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh was taken to the Lokpriya Hospital where the doctors declared him dead and his wife was being treated in the hospital. On the written report, he prepared the Chik FIR No.404 and registered Case Crime No.516 of 2013 u/s 452, 307, 302 IPC against Jitendra Verma. On the Chik Computer constable no.522 Pankaj Kumar had endorsed the same. The Chik FIR was also endorsed in G.D. No.60 at 23.40 hours on 11.8.2013 by him and he has proved the carbon copy of the G.D which he prepared from the original which was on record under his handwriting and signatures and proved the same as Ext.Ka-6. In cross-examination he has deposed that at the time of lodging of the report, the informant Devendra Singh had come alone. At that time inspector In-Charge Ashok Kumar Sisodia was posted. The FIR was written by him with the orders of the Station Officer and he had firstly endorsed the things in the G.D. and thereafter in the computer. He denied the suggestion that the FIR was written at the police station. The I.O recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. at the Police Station and denied the suggestion that he was falsely deposing. 15. P.W.7 S.I. Azad Pal Singh had deposed before the trial court that on 11.8.2013, he was posted at Police Station Modingar being the In-charge of police outpost Govindpuri. The I.O recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. at the Police Station and denied the suggestion that he was falsely deposing. 15. P.W.7 S.I. Azad Pal Singh had deposed before the trial court that on 11.8.2013, he was posted at Police Station Modingar being the In-charge of police outpost Govindpuri. And he has received an information about the murder of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh at 23.40 hours in the night for which an FIR being Case Crime No.516 of 2013 u/s 452, 307, 302 IPC was registered at Police Station Modinagar, Ghaziabad. On 12.8.2013 at 00.30 hours, he had conducted the Panchayatnama of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh and prepared all the police papers in connection with the same which he prepared at the time of the panchayatnama at Lokpriya Hospital, Modinagar and he has proved the inquest report and other police papers as Ext.Ka-2, Chalan Nash as Ext.Ka-7, Photo Nash as Ext.Ka-8, letter to C.M.O Ext.Ka-9 and letter to C.M.O paper no.9Ka as Ext.Ka-10, Namoona Mohar as Ext.Ka-11 out of which Ext. Ka-9 and Ka-10 he had got the same prepared by his accompanying constable after dictating the same and had signed the same and has proved the papers as Ext.Ka-2, Ext.Ka-7 and 11 in his writing and signatures. After conducting the panchayatnama, he had sealed the dead-body of the deceased and handed over the same to the police constable no.1732 Omveer Singh and police constable 32326 Nirdesh Kumar for taking it to Mortuary for post-mortem. On 12.8.2013 on the instructions of I.O Udaiveer Singh Balian he had taken the blood-stain and simple earth from the place of occurrence and kept separately in boxes and sealed the same and he has proved the same in his signatures and handwriting as Ext.Ka-12 after seeking the permission from the court concerned, the sealed bundle which was opened before the court and thereafter sent consisting the clothes of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh and articles which were found during the post-mortem which he identified the same to have been found during the panchayatnama of the deceased and proved the same as material Ext.Ka-1 and Ext.Ka-2 and besides he also proved the material Ext.Ka-3 and Ext.Ka-4 and the blood-stain earth as material Ext.Ka-5, Ka-6, Ka-7 and Ka-8 which he had taken from the place of occurrence. He denied the suggestion that he did not conduct the inquest of the deceased and is falsely deposing before the court. 16. P.W.8 Udaiveer Singh Baliyan has deposed before the trial court that on 11.8.2013 he was posted at Police Station Modinagar as Senior Sub Inspector and on the said day Case Crime No.516 of 2013 u/s 452, 307, 302 IPC, was registered at P.S. Modinagar and the investigation of which was entrusted to him on 12.8.2013 and has visited the place of occurrence and at the pointing out of the informant, he had prepared the site-plan which was in his handwriting and signatures and has proved the same as Ext.Ka-13. He had recorded the statement of the witnesses and of the informant. He had recovered the clothes of the accused Jitendra Verma which he had wore at the time of incident and prepared the recovery memo of the same and proved the same as Ext.Ka-14. He also prepared the site-plan of the place from where the clothes of the accused Jitendra Verma were recovered which was in his handwriting and signatures and has proved the same as Ext.Ka-15. He has also prepared the arrest memo of the accused which was in his handwriting and proved the same as Ext.Ka-16. He had also recorded the statement of the accused and also got recovery at his pointing out, the weapon of assault I.e knife in the presence of the witnesses who got the same recovered from the plot of Udaiveer Nehra and handed over the same and confessed that he has used the said knife in the murder of the deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh on 11.8.2013 at 10.30 p.m. in the house which was blood-stain and has prepared the recovery memo of the same on 20.8.2013 at 9.30 a.m. and got the signatures of the witnesses and proved the same as Ext.Ka-17. The witnesses Sri Chandra Prakash and Sri Kishan had signed the said recovery memo and copy of the recovery memo of the weapon was also supplied to the accused. He has also prepared the site-plan of the place of occurrence from where the knife was recovered which was in his handwriting and proved the same as Ext.Ka-18. He has also proved the Ext.Ka-19 and Ext.Ka-20 which are the charge sheet and the report of the Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala. He has also prepared the site-plan of the place of occurrence from where the knife was recovered which was in his handwriting and proved the same as Ext.Ka-18. He has also proved the Ext.Ka-19 and Ext.Ka-20 which are the charge sheet and the report of the Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala. Though he was cross-examined by the defence on several points but nothing truthful could be obtained which may help the defence by his cross-examination. He has denied the suggestion that he has not arrested the accused from Tehsil Gate of Modinagar and he had arrested him after one week. He has further denied the suggestion that the accused was made to sit at the Police Station from the date of incident. He had not gone to the place of incident in the night. He has further denied the suggestion that he had not recorded the statement of the witnesses and is deposing falsely before the trial court. 17. P.W.9 Constable 3117 Pankaj Sharma has deposed before the trial court that on 11.8.2013, he was posted as Computer Clerk in Police Station Modinagar. He had pasted the FIR being Case Crime No.516 of 2013, u/s 452, 307, 302 IPC which was written on the report of the informant Devendra Singh and lodged against accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani and pasted the same in the computer word by word as mentioned in the Chik FIR and proved the same as Ext.Ka-21. 18. P.W.10 Narendra Kumar, Scientific Officer, Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala, Lucknow has deposed before the trial court that on 12.8.2013, he was posted as Senior Scientist in Vidhi Vigyan Kshetriya Ikai. He had told to Investigating Officer Sri Udaiveer Singh Baliyan that he was called at the place of occurrence for field inspection and had reached at the place of occurrence Santpura, Modinagar and after getting the required information about the incident from the family members of the deceased who were present on the spot, photography of the place of incident and also of the house of the accused was done. On the inspection of the house of the accused, blood-stained shirt, baniyan and pant were recovered for which photography of the same was done and the same was handed over the Investigating Officer and in all 23 photographs were taken which were marked as material Ext.Ka-12-34. On the inspection of the house of the accused, blood-stained shirt, baniyan and pant were recovered for which photography of the same was done and the same was handed over the Investigating Officer and in all 23 photographs were taken which were marked as material Ext.Ka-12-34. The report of the Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala is on record and has been proved by him as Ext.Ka-22. 19. The cross-examination of the said witness was also made but nothing could be elucidated which may help the defence by his cross-examination. 20. The trial court after examining the prosecution evidence and defence version has convicted and sentenced the accused for the aforesaid offences, hence the instant appeal by the appellant. 21. Heard Sri Ashish Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Archana Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 22. It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the only ground which has been argued by learned counsel for the appellant is that even if the prosecution case is taken on it's own face value, it was a sudden fight between the parties and the accused who is the maternal-uncle of the deceased had inflicted him a single blow by knife which hit on his chest by a vegetable knife which he appears to have taken from the place of occurrence to the house of the informant. He stated that from the prosecution evidence of P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.3 Arvind Singh who were the informant and his son have categorically stated that a threatening was given by the accused to P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur who is the wife of P.W.1 and mother of P.W.3 on phone that he is coming to kill her entire family as she is not signing the documents of the plot of his mother on which the P.W.2 Praveen Kaur asked the accused to come to her house and talk about the same. He further argued that from the evidence it appears that when there was a quarrel going on between the parties about signing of the said documents of the plot between the parties, scuffle also took place between them and the accused assaulted with knife on P.W.2 Praveen Kaur and in order to save her, her husband P.W.1 Devendra Singh and her son P.W.3 Arvind Singh and deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh intervened on which the accused Jitendra Verma @ Jaani assaulted on his chest who received injuries on his chest and fallen on the ground and he was rushed to the hospital where doctors declared him dead. It was next submitted that the deceased received one single injury on his chest and there was no repeated blow given by the accused and further the injuries which have been sustained by the two injured P.W.1 and P.W.2 are simple in nature and it would be caused during the scuffle and to say that the injury no.1 received by the injured P.W.2 Praveen Kaur on her elbow if taken to be of sharp-edged weapon, that too was simple in nature and from the evidence of the P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal, the said injury could not result into her death in any manner. Thus the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s 302 IPC is too severe and against the evidence on record and the case would not travel beyond Section 304 Part-2 IPC. The appellant has already served out five and a half years imprisonment in jail as he is in jail since 20.8.2013. 23. Thus the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s 302 IPC is too severe and against the evidence on record and the case would not travel beyond Section 304 Part-2 IPC. The appellant has already served out five and a half years imprisonment in jail as he is in jail since 20.8.2013. 23. The learned AGA on the other hand has opposed the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that from the FIR as well as the evidence of P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur who are injured witnesses and P.W.3 Arvind Singh who are an eye-witnesses of the occurrence have categorically stated That the accused-appellant had made a phone call to P.W.2 who is his sister threatening her that he is coming to wipe off his entire family as she is not signing the papers of the plot and thereafter he reached the place of occurrence with the knife in his hand and when the P.W.2 went to open the gate, the accused-appellant as soon as he entered the gate of the house, he pressed her neck and with the knife in his hand had assaulted her. In order to save the P.W.2, her husband and two sons intervened due to which her son Rana Jasdeo Singh was stabbed by the accused with the knife on his chest who fell on the ground and was rushed to the hospital by P.W.1 Devendra Singh, P.W.2 Praveen Kaur and P.W.3 Arvind Singh and he was declared dead by the doctors. The intention with which the accused had come at the house of the informant was to kill his wife and has done to death his son while intervening his mother, clearly shows that he had come with an intention to murder P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur but in her place her son Rana Jasdeo Singh was done to death. Thus the conviction of the appellant u/s 302 IPC is wholly justified and the trial court has rightly convicted him u/s 302 IPC for life imprisonment and further the two injured persons i.e. P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur also sustained injuries and the trial court has rightly convicted the accused for offence u/s 307 and 452 IPC also and as he entered in the house of P.W.1 and committed the crime. Hence appeal is devoid of merit and be dismissed. 24. Hence appeal is devoid of merit and be dismissed. 24. We have given our thoughtful consideration towards the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgement and order passed by the trial court as well as the record. 25. From the FIR which was lodged by P.W.1 Devendra Singh who is the father of the deceased and is also an injured witness and husband of P.W.2 Praveen Kaur who had also received injuries in the incident it is apparent that the accused-appellant Jitendra Verma @ Jaani had great ill-will in his mind that his sister i.e. P.W.2 Praveen Kaur was not signing the documents of the plot of his mother for which he had made a phone call to his sister and had uttered on her mobile phone no.9558160077 “Too mere plot ke kagazon pe sign nahi kar rahi hai, mai araha hoon. Aaj tujhe va tere pure parivaar ko jaan se maar doonga” and soon thereafter he went to the house of P.W.1 Devendra Singh with a knife in his hand and P.W.2 Smt. Praveen Kaur went to open the gate and the accused-appellant as per the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 had caught-hold of P.W.2 by her neck and with a knife in his hand, he made assault by it who received injuries on her right elbow. Seeing the appellant assaulting to P.W.2, her husband i.e. P.W.1 Devendra Singh, deceased Rana Jasdeo Singh and P.W.3 Arvind rushed to save the P.W.2 Praveen Kaur and intervened in which the accused-appellant stabbed the deceased on his chest with knife who had fallen on the ground and thereafter the witnesses also arrived on the alarm raised by the family members of the deceased. The deceased was carried to the Lokpriya Hospital by P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 on a car where he was declared dead. Thereafter, P.W.1 went to lodged an FIR at the police station Modinagar, Ghaziabad with a written report against the accused and the same was registered promptly on the same day i.e. 11.8.2013 at 23.40 hours for offence u/s 452, 307, 302 IPC. The two injured witnesses i.e. P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.2 Praveen Kaur were examined by P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal on 12.8.2013 at 8 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. who were sent by the police along with a constable after preparation of Chitthi Majroobi. The two injured witnesses i.e. P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.2 Praveen Kaur were examined by P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal on 12.8.2013 at 8 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. who were sent by the police along with a constable after preparation of Chitthi Majroobi. The injuries which were sustained by P.W.1 and P.W.2 out of which P.W.2 received one injury of incised wound on her right elbow joint as a result of sharp-edged weapon like knife and P.W.1 received injuries of hard and blunt object in the opinion of the doctor. The accused-appellant was arrested by the police on 20.8.2013 and at his pointing out a knife was recovered from the plot of Udaiveer Singh Nehra which was concealed under the shrubs and contained the blood-stain also and he has confessed that in the said night on 11.8.2013 at 10.30 he has committed the murder of the deceased. The knife was of stainless steel as it appears from the arrest memo/recovery memo i.e. Ext.Ka-17. The blood-stain clothes were recovered by the police on 12.8.2013 which he had worn at the time of incident and taken into the custody and recovery memo of the same was prepared by the police as Ext.Ka-4. The bloodstained and simple earth was also recovered from the place of occurrence where the deceased was murdered. The report of the Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala shows that the blood was found on the clothes of the deceased as well as the knife which was recovered at the pointing out of the accused-appellant. Thus from the entire evidence, it is evident that the accused had gone with an intention to kill the P.W.2 Praveen Kaur who also received injury of knife on her right elbow but her son Rana Jasdeo Singh intervened along with his father and brother who sustained one single blow on his chest which was inflicted by the appellant. It is apparent from the prosecution evidence that the appellant was addicted to drugs and liquor due to which his wife and minor child had left the accused and went to stay with her parents at Ambala. The wife of the accused was living there since three years prior to the incident having become fed-up of the conduct of the accused who was doing nothing and only some times used to ply the tempo and rest of the time he was in the bad company. The wife of the accused was living there since three years prior to the incident having become fed-up of the conduct of the accused who was doing nothing and only some times used to ply the tempo and rest of the time he was in the bad company. P.W.2 did not want that the plot of her mother be given to the accused as she had strong apprehension that the accused after selling the same would misuse the sale proceeds for his bad habits in taking liquor and drugs. Hence she wanted that the plot be given in the name of the wife and son of the accused. Hence she did not allow the accused to take the said plot. From the said fact and conduct of the accused it is evident that he was bearing a personal grudge in his mind against his sister i.e. P.W.2 Praveen Kaur who was objecting his evil design to take the plot and misusing it sale proceeds. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant that even if the prosecution case is taken to it's own face value, the case would not travel beyond Section 304 Part-2 IPC and the conviction of the appellant u/s 302 IPC by the trial court for life imprisonment does not have much substance after scanning the prosecution evidence though the accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C though has stated that he had gone to the house of the informant where a quarrel took place between the parties and P.W.1 and P.W.2 had assaulted him on his head with a hockey stick and stick of base-ball and he suffered injuries and in the scuffle, from amongst the informant party, the deceased received one single knife blow on his chest. The accused-appellant was implicated in the present case by the informant party to grab the property of his mother. The said defence version which has been taken by the accused though has also been discarded by the trial court who believed the prosecution case and has convicted him for offence in question as there appears to be no medical examination report of the accused which may support his case nor there was any defence evidence led in this regard. The said defence version which has been taken by the accused though has also been discarded by the trial court who believed the prosecution case and has convicted him for offence in question as there appears to be no medical examination report of the accused which may support his case nor there was any defence evidence led in this regard. While examining the prosecution case and it's entire evidence it is apparent from the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 as well as from the FIR also that no doubt a threatening call was made by the accused on the mobile phone of P.W.2 Praveen Kaur uttering “Too mere plot ke kagazon pe sign nahi kar rahi hai, mai araha hoon. Aaj tujhe va tere pure parivaar ko jaan se maar doonga” on which P.W.2 had asked the accused to come to the house and talk to her. Though from the evidence of P.W.2, there appears to be no evidence to show that it was she who called the accused on phone though there is a contradiction on the said issue in the evidence of P.W.2 Praveen Kaur on one hand and P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.3 Arvind. On the other hand P.W.1 and P.W.3 have stated that it was the P.W.2 who called to accused whereas P.W.2 does not say so, though the said fact is hardly of much significance but it is clear that the accused appellant had gone at the house of the informant with the intention to kill P.W.2 to whom he also inflicted the knife blow, hence she received incised wound on right elbow but her son Rana Jasdeo Singh, husband P.W.1 Devendra Singh and P.W.3 Arvind intervened and the accused inflicted single knife blow on the chest of the deceased who received injuries and was taken to the hospital and died. The recovery of knife which has been shown in the recovery memo as Ext.Ka-17 dated 20.8.2013 shows that it was a stainless steel knife of 5 inches, handle of which was made of plastic shows that the said knife appears to be of vegetable knife and could be easily found in the houses for cutting the vegetables and to say that it was the appellant who had brought the said knife in his hand while he came to the house of the informant appears to be doubtful. It appears that while the P.W.2 had called the appellant to talk about the matter when he called on phone, then there was a quarrel took place between the parties and in the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.3 it is stated that some scuffle took place between the parties and it appears that the appellant had inflicted the injured P.W.1 Devendra Singh with the said knife and also stabbed the deceased with it and ran away from the place of occurrence after the deceased was injured and taken to the hospital. From the post-mortem report of the deceased it appears that he received single injury on his chest and there appears to be no repeated blow injury. The deceased died on account of the said injury. The injuries which have been sustained by P.W.1 which is of hard and blunt object and are simple in nature. The injury of P.W.2 Praveen Kaur which is injury no.1 is incised wound and on right elbow and on non-vital part of the body. The P.W.4 Dr. Abhishek Jaiswal had also stated that the injuries sustained by P.W.2 were not of such a nature to cause her death but even if it is taken to be true that the appellant had gone with the knife in his hand with an intention to wipe of the entire family of P.W.2 who is real sister as she was not signing the papers of the plot of his mother, his intention to kill was clear but taking into account that the deceased who intervened received one single blow on his chest, it would be too harsh to sentence the appellant u/s 302 IPC for life imprisonment as has been awarded by the trial court and we find that it would meet the ends of justice if the appellant is convicted u/s 304 Part-1 IPC and sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment. 26. In view of the foregoing discussions, the appellant is convicted u/s 304 Part-I IPC and sentenced to ten years R.I rigorous imprisonment. It is stated that the appellant has already served out the sentence for five and half years in jail, hence the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s 302 IPC is hereby set-aside. The judgement and order passed by the trial court is modified to that extent only. The appellant is in jail. It is stated that the appellant has already served out the sentence for five and half years in jail, hence the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s 302 IPC is hereby set-aside. The judgement and order passed by the trial court is modified to that extent only. The appellant is in jail. He shall serve out the remaining sentence as has been modified by this Court. 27. The appeal stands partly allowed.