Telangana High Court
Sugreev Kumar Rajbhar And 2 Others vs The State Of Telangana on 5 July, 2024
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.734 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
(Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu) The appellants herein are accused Nos.1,2 and 4 in S.C.No.327 of 2012 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast track Court), Ranga Reddy District. Assailing the Judgment dated 23.06.2014, whereunder the trial Court found them guilty for the offences under Section 302, 380 and 201 r/w 34 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') while convicting them under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C., sentenced them under the above said penal provisions, the appellants have filed this Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C.
2. As could be seen from the impugned Judgment, the trial Court sentenced the appellants herein to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- with default stipulation for the offence under Section 302 r/w 2 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 34 IPC with further sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six (6) months along with fine of Rs.100/- each for the offence under Section 380 r/w 34 IPC and also convicted them with one month simple imprisonment for the offense under Section 201 r/w 34 IPC.
3. As per the allegations made in the charge sheet that was filed against the appellants, these accused along with one D.Kumar Goud who was shown as accused No.3 in the charge sheet and against whom the case was separated because he was juvenile, used to attend work in La Gardenia Apartment, Pragathi Enclave, Miyapur, where one Anand Mole who was examined as PW1 was residing with his family. The prosecution has alleged that the accused have noticed that the family of PW1 was having gold and net cash and PW1 was leaving the flat at 08:30 a.m., for attending his office duties, and as his wife Smt.Nishita Mole (hereinafter be referred as deceased No.1) was alone at the flat, they hatched a plan to commit theft in the said flat. It is also alleged by the prosecution that on 31.01.2011 after PW1 left the house along with his 3 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 daughter for dropping her in a school, the accused Nos.1 and 2 went to the flat i.e., flat No.805 and knocked the door and when the deceased No.1 opened the doors, they have informed her that they came to the flat to attend mesh repair work, thereby she allowed them to the flat. Meanwhile, accused Nos.3 and 4 joined them. It is also alleged by the prosecution that accused No.1 hit her on the back of her head with a hammer, she fell down, raising hue and cry, which attracted her mother-in-law who is mother of PW1-Smt. Vimal Mole who hereinafter be referred as deceased No.2) and when she tried to catch hold of accused No.1, he beat her with hammer on the back portion of the head, accused No.2 stabbed deceased Nos.1 and 2 with a knife and when the knife was broken, he has used a screw driver and stabbed both the ladies and having confirmed their death, they have entered the bedroom and removed gold ornaments, net cash of Rs.30,000/- and a cell phone and escaped from the house.
4. On the same day at about 04:00 p.m., PW1 received a phone call from his neighbour i.e., PW4 and 4 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 came to know that his wife and mother were lying in a pool of blood in the kitchen room. Thereby, he rushed to the flat and found his mother and wife dead and lying in a pool of blood. Therefore, he has proceeded to the police station and presented a report, basing upon which the police have registered a case in Crime No.34 of 2011 for the offence under Section 302 IPC.
5. The police have visited the scene of offence. They have secured the clues team who could collect foot prints and finger prints from various places at the scene of offence. Dog squad was also pressed into service. The Investigating Officer has completed the other formalities viz., preparation of scene of offence panchanama, inquest, referring the dead bodies for post mortem examination. During the course of time, the Investigating Officer could know from PW5 who was supervisor of the La Gardenia apartments that these appellants have abruptly left the place without attending the remaining work, thereby he had a suspicion against the appellants and other accused. 5
PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 Thereby, police personnel were deployed for nabbing the suspects.
6. The prosecution has alleged that on 04.02.2011 accused Nos.1 to 4 i.e., appellants herein and accused No.3 were apprehended at Lingampally railway station and were brought to police station. They were interrogated in the presence of independent mediators and in pursuance of the confession made by them, the stolen property was recovered. Thereby, the appellants and the other accused were produced before the Court for judicial custody.
7. It appears from the material documents that though PW1 did not state anything about the loss of gold and net cash from the house, after completing the funeral of his mother and wife, he has verified from the house and having noticed the missing of gold ornaments, net cash from the house, he has informed the same to Investigation Officer.
8. PW13-the then Inspector of Police, Miyapur having completed the investigation, filed charge sheet again the appellants herein. As could be seen from the charge 6 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 sheet, it shows that the Investigation Officer has referred the material objects to Forensic Science Laboratory (for short 'FSL') where PW12 analyzed the material objects and forwarded her report.
9. The charge sheet that was filed against the appellants herein was registered as S.C.No.327 of 2012 and after furnishing the copies of charge sheet and other record, the trial Court examined them and framed charges under Section 302 r/w 34, 380 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 IPC.
10. To prove the case, the prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 13 and marked Exs.P1 to P21 and also marked MOs 1 to 12. The accused have examined one Ramesh Prasad as DW1 and Exs.B1 to B5 were also marked. The trial Court after appreciation of the entire evidence produced before it, came to the conclusion that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of accused Nos.1,2 and 4 for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34, 380 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC beyond all reasonable 7 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 doubt and convicted them under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C., and sentenced them as indicated above.
11. The appellants have filed this appeal challenging the said conviction. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is no eye witness to the alleged offence. The prosecution wanted to prove the guilt of the appellants on the basis of circumstantial evidence. In such a case, the prosecution must be able to establish complete chain of circumstances which would prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. In this case, even as per the complaint which was presented by PW1, soon after the death of his wife and mother, it is silent about the theft of gold ornaments and cash from his house. Therefore, it creates any amount of doubt whether really there was theft at the house and whether the said stolen property was actually recovered from the appellants herein, or the same was planted by the prosecution.
12. Learned counsel for the appellants further argued that the evidence of PW5, basing upon which the 8 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 Investigation Officer said to have deployed the police personnel for the apprehension of the accused, creates any amount of doubt whether in the absence of any record maintained by him, really he was able to identify the alleged missing of appellants from the flat, on that particular day.
13. Admittedly, there was no record maintained by PW5 about the details of the workers who attended the work at that particular flat. Therefore, it would be highly difficult for such a person to notice the missing of any employee/worker. Therefore, it creates any amount of doubt whether the Investigation Officer really apprehended the accused with the stolen property or a false case has been foisted. Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that since two household women were killed in a broad daylight, the police might have planted the gold ornaments and cash as a link to connect the appellants with the case and filed false case against the appellants, but there is no acceptable evidence to connect the appellants with the alleged crime and the appellants are 9 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 entitled to benefit of doubt. Thus, prayed for setting aside the impugned judgment and sought for acquittal of the appellants.
14. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that there is no dispute about the death of deceased Nos.1 and 2 i.e., wife and mother of the defacto complainant while they were alone at the flat in a day light.
15. According to the averments made in the complaint lodged by PW1 and as per the evidence of other material witnesses, it is very clear that these ladies were killed in the house. Therefore, one can easily guess the reason for the said murders. There is nothing in the cross examination of PW1 or other witnesses to accept that somebody killed them due to any dispute. Therefore, the murders were committed for gain.
16. The investigation Officer was able to collect the finger prints from the wardrobe and refrigerator of the house which were tallied with the finger prints of the appellants herein. She has also argued that when PW1 who 10 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 went to the office in the morning hours, after coming to know about the death of his wife and mother and having found them in a pool of blood, must have received shock and he must have presented the report even without verifying whether there was any theft. It is in the evidence of PW1 that only after completion of post mortem, funeral of his mother and wife at his native place, he was able to verify about the missing of the property and immediately he has intimated the same to Investigation Officer. The same property was recovered from the accused/appellants in pursuance of their confession before the independent mediators. Therefore, the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the appellants by complete chain of circumstances, as such sought for dismissal of the appeal.
17. As per the entire record including the evidence of material evidence, it is quite clear that in the absence of PW1 who had been to his office, and when his wife and mother were alone at the house along with small kid, there was an attack on these two ladies and their dead bodies were found in a pool of blood, by the maid servant who 11 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 picked up the daughter of PW1 from school and reached the house in the evening time, The contention of PW1 that he did not verify whether there was theft of any property cannot be suspected perhaps he must have received a great shock after seeing his wife and mother in a pool of blood. PW1 categorically stated before the Court that only after completion of funeral of his mother and wife, he could notice the missing of gold ornaments and cash, he has informed the same to the Investigation Officer.
18. According to the evidence placed before this Court, it is quite clear that the death of deceased Nos.1 and 2 occurred on 31.01.2011. The investigation Officer visited the scene of offence immediately after receiving the complaint and obtained the photographs with the help of PW6. He could obtain finger prints and foot prints from the scene of offence on the same day with the help of PW9.
19. According to the evidence of PW7, he was present when the police conducted panchanama at flat No.805. PW5 categorically deposed before the Court that the police have seized a knife from the place of offence. 12
PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 Whereas according to PW9, a fingerprint expert from Finger Prints Bureau, DGP Office, Hyderabad, on 31.01.2011 on receipt of information from Inspector of Police, Miyapur, he rushed to flat No.805 and he along with clues team, developed (3) chance prints from the place of offence. They found two chance prints on refrigerator and one chance print from ward robe. He has also deposed before the Court that on 21.02.2011 they have received finger prints and palm prints of accused Nos. 1 to 4 which were forwarded by Inspector of Police, Miyapur and on comparison, he found photo chance print marked as "A" is identical with left middle finger print impression marked S1 on the finger print slip marked "S" of accused No.1. The photo chance print marked is identical with left hand palm print marked "P1". He has prepared the comparison charts and forwarded his report. He was of the opinion that photo chance prints marked as A is identical with specimen left middle finger impression of accused No.1 and chance print marked C is identical with specimen left hand palm print of accused No.2.
13
PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
20. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the evidence of PW9 cannot be believed and there is a chance of Investigation Officer obtaining the finger prints of the appellants on the wardrobe and refrigerator before showing their arrest in the records.
21. In fact, in the present case, as per the record and as per the evidence of material witnesses soon after registration of the case, the police have conducted a panchanama at the scene of offence and could collect the chance prints on refrigerator and wardrobe. By that time the police have no clue about the identity of the culprits. The evidence of Investigation Officer clearly shows that after they had some information through PW5 and some police personnel were deployed for the apprehension of suspects and suspects were apprehended on 04.02.2011. Therefore, there was no chance for the Investigation Officer to take the suspects to the scene of offence and to see that they affix their finger prints at the scene of offence.
22. In addition to this important evidence of PW9, the evidence of mediator who deposed about the recovery of 14 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 stolen property and seizure of the weapon used by the appellants in the commission of offence further proves the involvement of the appellants in the commission of the offence. The recovery of the stolen property coupled with the presence of the finger prints of these appellants at the scene of offence, is further corroborated by the evidence of PW5 who found the unexpected absence of appellants from the place of work, clearly established their involvement and also established the complete chain of circumstances proving their guilt for the offence under Section 302, 380 and 201 r/w 34 IPC.
23. Therefore, the above stated oral and documentary evidence would show that on 31.01.2011 PW1 left the house in the morning along with his daughter and by that time his wife and mother along with his other child were present in the house. In the evening the maid servant who picked up the daughter of PW1 from school came to the said flat and found the dead bodies of deceased Nos.1 and 2 with injuries on vital parts and in a pool of blood. PW1 was informed about this fact. He rushed 15 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 to his house and presented a report to police. PW13 along with clues team reached the scene of offence immediately and scene of offence mahazar was prepared. PW9 collected chance prints from the scene of offence on 31.01.2011 it self. On 03.02.2011, PW1 after completing funeral at his native place, returned to his house and verified from the flat and then only he could realize the missing of gold etc., and informed the same to PW13. In the meanwhile PW13 could know from PW5 about the abrupt absence of these appellants from the flat where they were supposed to have attended the work till evening. The arrest of the appellants while they were in possession of stolen property has been proved through the independent mediator and seizure of weapon from the appellants was also proved. The evidence of PW9 coupled with the evidence of PW13 proved that the finger prints of appellants at the scene of offence, is also proved. Therefore, all these circumstances would prove the complete chain of circumstances that proves the involvement of the appellants. Therefore, the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of appellants beyond all 16 PSK,J & SSRN, J Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014 reasonable doubt. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
24. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The Judgment of the trial Court is confirmed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY ___________________________________ JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU Date: 05.07.2024 PSSK