Uttam Kumar vs State
2010 Latest Caselaw 2181 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                           Judgment Reserved on:5th April, 2010
                            Judgment Pronounced on:26thApril, 2010

+                              CRL.APPEAL No.433/2007

         UTTAM KUMAR                                  ..... Appellant
                 Through:          Mr.Anurag Jain, Advocate

                                   versus

         STATE                                    ..... Respondent
                       Through:    Ms.Richa Kapoor, Advocate

                               CRL.APPEAL No.747/2007

         STATE                                   ..... Appellant
                       Through:    Ms.Richa Kapoor, Advocate

                                   versus

         UTTAM KUMAR                                ..... Respondent
                 Through:          Mr.Anurag Jain, Advocate

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

1.       Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed
         to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.       Whether the judgment should be reported in the
         Digest?

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

1. Process of criminal law was set into motion when at

around 11.20 P.M. on 19.04.1999 ASI Dani Ram PW-4, noted

vide daily diary entry Ex.PW-4/A, that one Anil Garg r/o A-24,

Adarsh Nagar, Rama Road, Delhi has informed over

telephone that his daughter Priyanka (herein after referred

to as the "Deceased") has been forcibly confined in a

bathroom by her tutor; that the door of the said bathroom is

bolted from inside and that said person is not opening the

door of the bathroom inspite of repeated knocking at the

door.

2. Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill PW-18, was handed over a

copy of the afore-noted DD entry. Accompanied by

Const.Bhura Singh PW-13, Const.Giri Kumar PW-14,

Const.Mukesh PW-15 and SI Mukesh Kumar PW-17,

Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill reached the house in question

and what happened thereafter is recorded in the

endorsement (tehrir) Ex.PW-16/A made by Inspector Jeewan

Singh Gill PW-18, which reads as under:-

"Respected Duty Officer Police Station Adarsh Nagar it is humbly submitted that after receiving a copy of D.D. No.21A dated 19/4/99 I Inspector accompanied with SI Mukesh Kumar, Const.Giri Kumar No 2372/NW and Const.Bhura Singh No 1415/NW and Const.Mukesh Kumar 1634/NW reached H. No.A-24, Rama Road, Adarsh Nagar, where I met Anil Garg and his wife and children and told that the tutor of their children Uttam Kumar has locked their daughter Priyanka in a bathroom on the first floor of the house and that he is not opening the door of the bathroom inspite of repeated knocking at the door. When the door of the bathroom was not opened inspite of my knocking at the door the same was forcibly opened and broken upon which I saw that the dead body of Kumari Priyanka was lying in the pool of blood in the bathtub in the bathroom and that there were injury

marks caused by sharp weapon on the neck, chest and ear of Priyanka. Huge quantity of blood was lying in the bathtub and that there were drops of blood at various places in the bathroom. Accused Uttam Kumar s/o Hazari Lal who was holding a blood stained knife in his right hand was found standing in the bathroom The aforesaid police officers apprehended the accused. Thereafter the statement of Anil Garg was recorded and on the basis of the said statement and circumstances found at the spot it appears that an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC has been committed. Therefore the said endorsement is being handed over to Const.Giri Kumar No.2372/NW for registration of FIR. The FIR be registered and the number of the FIR be intimated to the undersigned. Crime Team and photographer be sent at the spot and special report be delivered. I am conducting investigation at the spot.

Time of Occurrence: 19/4/99 at 9.30 to 11.20 PM Place of Occurence: Bathroom first floor H. No. A 24 Rama Road Adarsh Nagar

Time of departure of endorsement: 20.04.99 at 1.30 A.M." (Translated Version)

3. The afore-noted endorsement on basis whereof the FIR

was registered was preceded by Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill

PW-18, recording the statement Ex.PW-2/A of Anil Garg, the

father of the deceased, gist whereof is that the deceased

was a student of second year, St. Stephen college and that

her marriage was to be solemnized on 28.04.1999. Accused

Uttam Kumar used to give tuitions to his son Vibhor at his

residence. On 19.04.1999 at around 09.30 P.M. the

deceased and her mother returned to the house after

shopping. At that time Uttam Kumar was teaching Vibhor in

a room on the first floor of the house. After keeping the

things purchased by her in the house the deceased went to

the room where the accused was teaching Vibhor. When the

deceased entered Vibhor‟s room, Vibhor went to the kitchen

to drink water. Thereafter he i.e. Anil Garg along with Vibhor

went to the room where the accused was teaching Vibhor.

When he i.e. Anil Garg did not find the accused in the room

he made inquiries from Vibhor about the whereabouts of the

accused upon which Vibhor told him that the accused might

be present in the bathroom attached to the said room.

Thereafter he inquired about the deceased as she was

nowhere to be seen in the house. When he and his family

members could not find the deceased anywhere in the

house a doubt arose in his mind that perhaps the accused

may have locked the deceased and himself in the bathroom.

The door of the bathroom was knocked and the accused

responded and on being asked to open the door, the

accused replied 'Since you are marrying the deceased with

some other boy I have murdered her and that I would not

open the door'. Thereafter he informed the police about the

aforesaid incident.

4. The statement Ex.PW-2/A on which the endorsement

Ex.PW-16/A was made by Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill was

forwarded at 01.30 A.M. on 20.04.1999 through Const.Giri

Kumar PW-14, to the police station for registration of an FIR

where HC Veer Sen PW-16, registered FIR No.235/1999,

Ex.PW-16/B.

5. As recorded in the endorsement Ex.PW-16/A, the

appellant was apprehended at the spot. In fact, if the

contents of the endorsement Ex.PW-16/A are correct, the

accused was caught red-handed. Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill

PW-18, seized the knife recovered from the possession of

the accused vide memo Ex.PW-2/4 as also prepared the

sketch Ex.PW-2/3 of the said knife. Thereafter Inspector

Jeewan Singh Gill seized the shirt and vest worn by the

accused when he was apprehended vide memo Ex.PW-2/5.

It may be noted that the seizure memo Ex.PW-2/5 records

that three buttons of the shirt worn by the accused when he

was apprehended were found to be broken. Inspector

Jeewan Singh Gill prepared the site plan Ex.PW-18/1 of the

house in question; recording therein at points „XA‟ and „XC‟

the spots where the body of the deceased was lying and the

accused was found standing in the bathroom respectively.

6. In the meantime, SI Ashok Kumar PW-11, Finger Print

Expert, and Const.Yashpal PW-12, a photographer, reached

the spot on being summoned. SI Ashok Kumar inspected the

spot and prepared his report Ex.PW-11/A. The report Ex.PW-

11/A records that four chance prints were found on a

washing machine kept in the bathroom in question. It is also

noteworthy that the report Ex.PW-11/A records that the time

of the occurrence of the murder of the deceased was about

09.15 P.M. on 19.04.1999.

7. Const.Yashpal PW-12, took the photographs Ex.PW-

12/8 to Ex.PW-12/13 of the body of the deceased as also the

bathroom where the body of the deceased was found;

negatives whereof are Ex.PW-12/1 to Ex.PW-12/7. (It may be

noted here that one photograph could not be developed).

The photographs Ex.PW-12/12 and Ex.PW-12/13 depict the

door from within the bathroom which opens into the

bedroom.

8. The body was seized and sent to the mortuary, where

on 20.04.1999, at about 11.35 A.M. Dr.Komal Singh PW-9,

conducted the post-mortem and prepared the report Ex.PW-

9/1. Following external injuries were found on the person of

the deceased as recorded in the post-mortem report Ex.PW-

9/A:-

"1. Incised, clean cut on right upper side of 1st intercostal space 2 cm x 1.2 cm in size, both angle obtuse

2. Incised, clean cut wound on right side of chest 2.8 cm x 1.8 cm in size just below and medial to No.1, both angles acute

3. Five small size incised wound over left lateral side of neck 0.8 cm x 0.1 cm, 0.4 cm x 0.1 cm, 0.6

cm x 0.2 cm, 0.4 cm x 0.1 cm, 0.5 cm x 0.1 cm. Clean cut, both angles acute

4. Cut throat on right to left side of neck. 8 cm x 4 cm in size at upper level of thyroid cartilage. All adjacent tissues stained with clotted blood.

5. Multiple adjacent wound lower down to No.4 injury 0.4 cm x 0.1 cm, 1 mm x 1 mm, 2 mm x 2 mm

6. Incised cut just below No.4 injury 6 cm x 1.2 cm in size

7. Cut incised wound on left lateral side 1.4 cm x 0.3 cm wound on neck just left to No.5 injury

8. Cut sickle shape, incised wound on lower side of chest 3 cm x 3 mm in size" (Emphasis Supplied)

9. The post-mortem report Ex.PW-9/1 further records that

the cause of death of the deceased was shock resulting from

injuries Nos.1 and 2 found on the person of the deceased;

that all the injuries found on the person were ante-mortem

in nature and that the death of the deceased had taken

place about 12 hours before the conduct of the post-

mortem.

10. The knife recovered from the possession of the

accused at the time of his arrest was also sent to the

mortuary along with the body of the deceased for purposes

of obtaining opinion of the doctor regarding the weapon of

offence. Dr.Komal Singh PW-9 examined the said knife and

gave his opinion Ex.PW-9/2 which inter-alia records that the

injuries Nos.1 and 2 found on the person of the deceased

could have been caused by the said knife. The opinion

Ex.PW-9/2 has been penned at the rear page of the post-

mortem report on which the sketch of the knife has also

been drawn by Dr.Komal Singh.

11. After conducting the post-mortem, Dr.Komal Singh

handed over the blood sample of the deceased on a gauze

and the clothes of the deceased to Const.Bhoora Singh PW-

13 and Const.Giri Kumar PW-14, and the same were seized

by the investigating officer vide memo Ex.PW-13/1 when the

two handed over the same to the investigating officer. For

record it may be noted here itself that on 12.07.1999

Dr.Komal Singh gave a second opinion Ex.PW-9/3 regarding

the weapon of offence; the opinion being that the injuries

nos.3 to 8 found on the person of the deceased could have

been caused by the knife recovered from the possession of

the accused.

12. The clothes and blood sample of the deceased; the

knife recovered from the possession of the accused and the

shirt and vest worn by the accused at the time when he was

arrested were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for

serological examination.

13. Vide FSL reports Ex.PW-18/9/(1-2), Ex.PW-18/9/3 and

Ex.PW-18/9/4, it was opined that the blood group of the

deceased was O; that human blood of „O‟ group was found

on the shirt worn by the accused at the time of his arrest;

human blood of the same group was detected on the clothes

of the deceased and the knife recovered from the possession

of the accused. It was further opined that human blood was

detected on the vest worn by the accused at the time of his

arrest, group whereof could not be determined.

14. The four chance prints found in the bathroom where

the body of the deceased was found dead and the specimen

finger prints of the accused were sent to the Finger Print

Bureau for comparison. Vide report Ex.PW-1/A it was opined

that one of the chance prints found in the bathroom in

question is identical with the finger print of the accused.

15. Statements of family members of the deceased

present in the house were recorded, all of whom inculpated

the appellant.

16. Armed with the aforesaid materials, the police filed a

charge sheet against the accused.

17. In a nutshell, the case set up by the prosecution

against the appellant was that the appellant who was the

tutor of the deceased and her brothers developed a liking for

the deceased. When the appellant learnt that the deceased

is getting married he got enraged and murdered the

deceased by indiscriminately stabbing her in the bathroom

in her house.

18. Before proceeding to note the evidence led at the trial,

it is most important to note certain facts which were pressed

into aid by learned counsel for the State to show, as per the

State, the crafty mind of the appellant.

19. During the trial, the appellant filed an application dated

06.09.2005 under Section 91 Cr.P.C. praying that the official

record maintained at Tihar Jail pertaining to the meetings

held between the jail inmates and the visitors between the

period 21.04.1999 to 09.05.2000 be summoned. Along with

the said application, written arguments were also filed by

the appellant detailing the reasons for summoning the said

record. (It may be noted here that the application dated

06.09.2005 is at page 1201 of the trial court record whereas

the arguments filed by the appellant in support of the said

application are at page 787 of the trial court record. It may

further be noted that the said two documents are not

drafted by the counsel of the appellant but are penned by

the appellant himself in his own hand).

20. It is significant to note that the written arguments filed

by the appellant in support of the application dated

06.09.2005 records that between the period 21.04.1999 to

09.05.2000 one Tinnu @ Tinny, the lover of the deceased,

accompanied by his two friends named Raj and Suresh

visited him in Tihar Jail. During the said visits, Tinny told him

that on 19.04.1999 he met the deceased in a market. Seeing

the deceased in the company of Tinny, the mother of the

deceased who was also present in the market got enraged

and forcibly took the deceased to her residence. On the

same day i.e. 19.04.1999 at about 08.10 P.M. Tinny received

a SMS from a servant employed at the house of the

deceased to the effect that the deceased tried to commit

suicide when her family members forced her to end her

relationship with Tinny. Tinny handed over the letters

Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 written by the deceased to him.

21. Relevant would it be to note that the order dated

03.12.2005 passed by the learned Trial Court records that

the jail meeting record sought to be summoned by the

accused has been weeded out by the jail authorities.

22. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to note the

contents of the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 referred by

the accused in the afore-noted written arguments filed by

him.

23. The relevant portion of the letter Ex.DW-4/1-2 reads as

under:-

"Dear Tinny

I am dying to meet you see again I started crying. But I know my life can never be happy. Something is always present to disrupt our happiness and conesien. Varun shall tell you many things which would prove that I forgot you completely over there, that I am wrong you will beat me, scold me. I have decided never to say anything to you. Because you are just a expectation box who just expects and never stand to the expectation of others

Tinnu now during these 18 days I have really made up my mind not to say anything to you. I know I am true and I love you and now I don‟t care whether you feel/realise it or not.

Actually he just told me what he is going to tell you so just a small truth is given below...." (Emphasis Supplied)

24. The relevant portion of the letter Ex.DW-4/3-5 reads as under:-

"....b) I felt there was no harm because when I stayed idle at home. I used to start crying just as I started sending you kisses. (Mamiji saw those tears, the very first day) (Emphasis Supplied)

25. The relevant portion of the letter Ex.DW-4/6 reads as under:-

"Our relations have become so much strained that I fear someday _______

My brain is not working.

Sorry Tinnu I am unable to write this letter. I am (complete)

crying for u babe"

26. The relevant portion of the letter Ex.DW-4/7 reads as under:-

"....You can never understand me. Really, I know you, my life would just end in making trials to get you completely....."

27. The relevant portion of the letter Ex.DW-4/8 reads as under:-

"...I am really fed up. Please give me freedom from this life and let me float free in that hell of my follies."

28. A reading of the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17

brings out that whosoever Tinnu @ Tinny was, if the letters

were in the hand of the deceased, the two were emotionally

involved at some point of time but relations had soured.

29. During the trial, the appellant wrote numerous letters

to the family members of the deceased including the letters

Ex.DW-5/PA and Ex.DW-5/PB which he admitted as having

written by him when he was cross-examined as DW-5;

appellant having chosen to examine himself as his own

witness.

30. The letter Ex.DW-5/PA is addressed to the mother of

the deceased i.e. Uma Garg. The said letter records that ten

under-trials got various reliefs from the courts due to the

written arguments prepared by him i.e. the appellant.

Relevant would it be to note the following portion of the

letter Ex.DW-5/PA:-

"You can receive at any time all the letters (about

50) written by the baby or other articles concerned with the baby from me as per your convenience." (Translated Version)

31. The letter Ex.DW-5/PB is addressed to the parents of

the deceased, namely Anil Garg and Uma Garg. The relevant

portion of the letter Ex.DW-5/PB reads as under:-

"...Thus, as I have been involved in great works, similarly you (Umaji) have validated your name by not presenting my acceptance of the crime in the honourable court. However, it is not sufficient for my release.... Anil ji, you please do not worry about the application (under section 91 Cr.P.C.). It is not very deep conspiracy. However, with a view to prove the case and for giving a gift of efficiency, ability and expertise of this Eklavaya to his respectable Guru Dronacharya (Shri R.N. Mittal), a confusing situation has been created. The truth is that I have managed to get this confidential information that whole records of the visits has been weeded out/destroyed. After this, I filed an application before the court of CJ-3 and CJ-4 Superintendent on 22.8.05 requesting for the visits records for verification....On 01.09.05, I received the same reply which I had obtained from some reliable sources. Then, on 05.09.2005, I filed an application in the honourable court in which I asked for the records (Tinnu @ Tinni).....In my view, you should now forgive me and get me released after contacting Shri K.C. Lohia. If you wish, I can address a letter to Lohia Saheb and confess my crime and you can get this letter read out to him at your personal level. However, Mittal Saheb can tell you the way to change the section 302 into 304, thus reducing the imprisonment period to 10 years. You should pray to him on my behalf.....With mutual discussion, beneficial circumstances can be created for both of us.....

Divya Uma ji,

.....I again repeat that for the tragic and untimely end of the baby, I am not the only person responsible but there are others also responsible for it. Certainly, there is no repentance for this severe sin....She is, like always, still alive in my personality, my existence. I still have full respect, affection, dedication and loyalty in my heart for you (all fours)

and its proof is that the baby is still my soul. ....Till this body or soul exists and till Priyanka rests in this soul, you are hundered per cent safe. I am sure that Priyanka will not only be an integral part of my soul till several life of the universe, but she will be my soul...." (Emphasis Supplied)

32. At the trial, the prosecution examined 19 witnesses.

33. Anil Garg PW-2, the father of the deceased, deposed on

the lines of the statement Ex.PW-2/A given by him to the

police. Additionally, he deposed that the police had seized

the knife recovered from the possession of the appellant and

the shirt and vest worn by the appellant when he committed

the crime.

34. During cross-examination, on being questioned about

the inmates of the house, he stated (Quote): 'Sunil Garg and

Satish Garg are my real brothers. It is correct that my

brother Satish Garg has been living on the ground floor of

the H.No.A-24 while other brother Sunil Garg has been living

in H.No. A30 in Rama Road. Vol. On that day they had gone

to distribute marriage cards....My younger brothers Satish

and Sunil had not come at the spot vol. they had gone to

distributed the marriage invitation card in respect of

marriage of deceased.' On being questioned about the time

of the confinement of the deceased in the bathroom, he

stated (Quote): 'My wife Uma Garg and my daughter

Priyanka had gone for shopping on that day at about 5 pm in

a car with the driver. It took about 30/45 minutes after

arrival of my wife and daughter from the shopping in the

incident of confinement of my daughter in the bathroom

came to my notice'. On being questioned about the door of

the bathroom, he stated (Quote): 'Myself and my family

members tried for about 20/30 minutes to open the door of

the bathroom and thereafter I informed he police. We did not

try to brake open the door at our level before arrival of the

police....All the police officials together forced the door to

break open and in this process inside bolt of the bathroom

were broken and the door was open.' On being questioned

about the relations between the accused and his family, he

stated (Quote): 'Uttam Kumar accused started teaching

children in my house 8/10 years back. My daughter Priyanka

and my elder son Varun together taking teaching from

accused Uttam Kumar.' We had only relationship of teaching

my children and had no other family intimacy with him.' On

being questioned about the relations between the deceased

and the accused, he stated (Quote): 'We had no reason to

have suspicion of any kind of relation between the accused

and the Priyanka and it is correct that accused used to treat

Priyanka as his daughter.' On being confronted with the

letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17, he denied that the said

letters were in the handwriting of the deceased. He denied

the suggestion that the deceased was having an affair with a

boy named Tinnu @ Tinny and that his family objected to the

said relationship; that on 19.04.1999 the deceased met said

boy in the market; that when the deceased refused to end

her relationship with Tinny he and his son Varun committed

the murder of the deceased in a fit of fury; that thereafter

they called the appellant from his residence and asked him

to take the blame for the murder of the deceased; that when

the appellant refused to oblige them he and his son Varun

forcibly pushed the accused in the bathroom and locked him

there; that the buttons of the shirt worn by the appellant

broke during the struggle; that they called M.R.Singhal who

was his maternal uncle and M.L.A. and that the police falsely

implicated the appellant at the instance of M.R. Singhal.

35. Varun PW-3, the brother of the deceased, also deposed

on the lines of the statement Ex.PW-2/A of Anil Garg.

Additionally, he deposed that the police had seized the knife

recovered from the possession of the appellant and the shirt

and vest worn by the accused when he was arrested.

36. On being questioned about the relations between the

appellant and his family, he stated (Quote): 'Accused Uttam

Kumar had been giving the tuition for last about 8/10 years

in our family. It is incorrect to suggest that we were having

family relations with accused Uttam Kumar. It is correct that

Uttam Kumar had been treated myself, my brother and my

deceased sister like children'. He denied the suggestion that

the appellant used to come to his house at 5-6 P.M. to teach

Vibhor. On being questioned about the door of the

bathroom, he stated (Quote): 'We did not make any effort to

break open the door of the bathroom before reaching the

police on spot.' On being confronted with the letters Ex.DW-

4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17, he denied that the said letters were in

the hand of his sister. The suggestions pertaining to false

implication of the appellant which were put to Anil Garg

were also put to him and the same were categorically

denied by him.

37. ASI Dani Ram PW-4, deposed that the DD entry Ex.PW-

4/1 was prepared by him. SI Gyaninder Singh PW-8, deposed

that the report Ex.PW-1/A was prepared by him. SI Ashok

Kumar PW-11, deposed that the report Ex.PW-11/A was

prepared by him. Const.Yash Pal Singh PW-12, deposed that

the photographs Ex.PW-12/8 to Ex.PW-12/13 were taken by

him; negatives whereof are Ex.PW-12/1 to Ex.PW-12/7. HC

Veer Sen PW-16, deposed that the FIR Ex.PW-16/B was

registered by him.

38. Dr.Komal Singh PW-9, deposed that the post-mortem

report Ex.PW-9/1 and the opinions Ex.PW-9/2 and Ex.PW-9/3

were prepared by him. On being questioned about the

weapon of offence, he stated (Quote): 'It is correct that

injury No.8 is sickle shape. It is wrong to suggest that this

injury is possible by the sickle shape of weapon only. It is

correct that dimension of the injuries No.1 to 8 are all

different. It is possible that these injuries are possible by

more than one weapon of offence'. On being questioned

about the opinion Ex.PW-9/3 written by him, he stated

(Quote): 'On 12.07.99 at the time of subsequent opinion I

had gone through the P.M. report but I had not seen the

dagger. No new effect was brought to my notice from

20.04.99 to 12.7.99 when my subsequent opinion was

obtained.'

39. Uma Garg PW-10, the mother of the deceased, also

deposed on the lines of the statement Ex.PW-2/A of Anil

Garg. Additionally she stated that the goods purchased by

her and the deceased from the market were got off-loaded

from the car, brought in the house and checked before the

deceased went to the room where the appellant was

teaching her son Vibhor. She further deposed that the police

had seized the knife recovered from the possession of the

appellant and the shirt and vest worn by the appellant when

he was arrested. On being confronted with the letters

Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17, she denied that the said letters

were written by her daughter. She denied the suggestion

that the appellant used to come to her house at 5-6 P.M. to

teach Vibhor. The suggestions pertaining to false implication

of the appellant which were put to Anil Garg were also put

to her and the same were categorically denied by her.

40. Const.Bhoora Singh PW-13, Const.Giri Kumar PW-14,

Const. Mukesh PW-15 and SI Mukesh Kumar PW-17 deposed

that on the receipt of the information about the incident they

accompanied Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill PW-18 to the

house in question where they learnt that the deceased has

been forcibly confined in a bathroom by her tutor and that

the door of the said bathroom has been bolted from inside.

When the door in question was not opened inspite of

repeated knocking at the door, they and the other police

officers present at the spot broke open the door upon which

they saw that the deceased was lying dead in the bathtub

kept in the bathroom and that the appellant who was

holding a knife in his hand was standing in the corner of the

bathroom. Additionally, Const.Bhoora Singh, Const.Giri

Kumar and SI Mukesh Kumar deposed that Inspector Jeewan

Singh Gill seized the knife recovered from the possession of

the appellant and the shirt and vest worn by the appellant at

the time of his apprehension in their presence. Const.Bhoora

Singh PW-13, also deposed that when he and the other

police officers applied pressure on the door in question to

break it, the bolt on the inside of the door got broken.

Const.Giri Kumar PW-14, also deposed that he had taken the

endorsement Ex.PW-16/A to the police station for the

purposes of registration of an FIR. It may be noted here that

neither any questions were put nor any suggestions were

given to the witnesses Const.Bhoora Singh PW-13 and

Const.Giri Kumar PW-14 and Const. Mukesh PW-15 regarding

the presence of M.R. Singhal at the spot at the time when

they participated in the spot investigation. SI Mukesh Kumar

duly identified the shirt and vest worn by the appellant when

he was apprehended.

41. Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill PW-18, deposed that on

receipt of the information about the incident accompanied

by SI Mukesh Kumar PW-17, Const.Mukesh PW-15,

Const.Bhoora Singh PW-13 and Const.Giri Kumar PW-14 he

went to the house in question where he learnt that the

deceased has been forcibly confined in a bathroom by her

tutor and that the door of the said bathroom had been

bolted from inside. When the door in question was not

opened inspite of repeated knocking at the door, the police

officers present at the spot broke open the door upon which

he saw that the deceased was lying dead in the bathtub kept

in the bathroom and that the appellant who was holding a

knife in his hand was standing in the corner of the bathroom.

He seized the knife recovered from the possession of the

appellant and the shirt and vest worn by the appellant when

he was apprehended vide memos Ex.PW-2/4 and Ex.PW-2/5

respectively. He recorded the statement Ex.PW-2/A of Anil

Garg and made the endorsement Ex.PW-16/A on the said

statement. He prepared the sketch Ex.PW-2/3 of the knife

recovered from the possession of the appellant.

42. On being questioned about the door of the bathroom,

he stated (Quote): 'I along with the staff i.e. SI Mukesh

Kumar, Const.Mukesh Kumar, Const.Bhura Singh and

Const.Giri Kumar had broken the door of the bathroom. The

door of the bathroom was not seized by us. It is wrong to

suggest that the door of the bathroom was not seized by the

police because it was not broken'. On being questioned

about the photographs of the place of occurrence, he stated

(Quote): 'The photographer had gone inside the bathroom

before the crime team had gone inside the bathroom and

had taken the photographs. The photographer was from the

police department.....Another photographer of the crime

team had come along with the crime team. That

photographer of the crime team had also taken the photos

of the place of occurrence. I did not obtain positive or the

negative photographs from the photographer of the crime

team.' On being questioned about the buttons of the shirt

worn by the appellant when he was apprehended, he stated

(Quote): 'It is correct that I did not find any of the three

button of the shirt in the bathroom of the complainant'. A

suggestion was given to him that Anil Garg gave money to

him in the presence of the appellant for the purposes of

false implication of the appellant in the present case. No

suggestion was given to him that M.R.Singhal was present

at the spot.

43. Vibhor Garg PW-19, the brother of the deceased, also

deposed on the lines of the statement Ex.PW-2/A of Anil

Garg. Additionally, he deposed that the police had seized

the knife recovered from the possession of the appellant in

his presence. On being questioned about the time of the

occurrence, he stated (Quote): 'It is correct that I have

stated in my examination-in-chief that the occurrence took

place at 9.30 pm on 19-4-99. (Confronted with statement

recorded u/s 161 on 20-4-99 in which the witness had stated

about the occurrence at 9.30 pm on 20-4-99).' On being

confronted with the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 he

denied that the said letters were written by his sister. The

suggestions pertaining to false implication of the appellant

which were put to Anil Garg were also put to him and the

same were categorically denied by him.

44. It is significant to note here that save and except

giving general suggestions pertaining to the false

implication of the appellant and that the appellant used to

give tuition to Vibhor at 5-6 P.M. during the days of the

murder of the deceased, Vibhor has not been subjected to

any cross-examination with respect to essential portion of

his testimony and in particular his statement that the

appellant was giving him tuition in the night at around 9:00

PM.

45. In his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the

appellant denied everything and pleaded false implication.

The defence put forward by the appellant was that he was

teaching the deceased and her brothers Varun and Vibhor

since last ten years and that he used to treat them as his

own children. He had helped the father of the deceased i.e.

Anil Garg when an income-tax raid was conducted at his

house and also when he got involved in connection with a

case registered under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.

He had extremely close relations with the family of the

deceased. On one occasion the deceased told him that she

was having an affair with a boy named Tinny @ Tinu upon

which he advised her to disclose the said fact to her parents.

He further claimed that the deceased told him that she had

married Tinny. He claimed that on 19.04.1999 the deceased

met Tinny in the market and that the said fact came to the

knowledge of her family. On the same day i.e. 19.04.1999

between 05.00 P.M. to 06.00 P.M. he was present in the

house of the deceased to give tuitions to Vibhor and

thereafter he returned to his house. He claimed that at

about 09.30 P.M. the security guard of the family of the

deceased came to his house and told him that father of the

deceased has called him to his house, upon which he went

to the house of the deceased. On reaching there, the father

of the deceased told him that he and his son Vibhor had

murdered the deceased in a fit of fury as she refused to end

her relationship with Tinny and marry the boy of their

choice. The father of the deceased asked him to take blame

for the murder of the deceased and that when he refused to

oblige him he got angry and pushed him inside the

bathroom where the deceased was lying dead and closed

the door of the bathroom from outside. With the help of M.R.

Singhal, M.L.A. and the DGP of the area, the family of the

deceased got him falsely implicated in the present case.

While he was lodged in jail, Tinny accompanied by some

persons came to meet him and handed over the letters

Ex.DA to Ex.DH written by the deceased to Tinny.

46. In support of his defence, besides examining himself,

the appellant examined four witnesses.

47. The appellant examined himself as DW-5. In his

testimony, the appellant reiterated the defence taken by him

in his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Additionally, he

deposed that he used to give tuitions to the children of the

brother of the deceased namely Udit and Niati and many

other children of the relatives of the family of the deceased.

Mr.Mangat Ram Singhal who was the M.L.A. of Adarsh Nagar

constituency was the maternal uncle of the father of the

deceased. Two months prior to the incident, Mangat Ram

Singhal requested him to teach the children of his household

but he declined to do so because of shortage of time.

Mangat Ram Singhal also requested him to help him in the

elections held in the year 1998 but he refused to do so. Due

to the said two reasons, Mangat Ram Singhal was annoyed

with him. At the time when he reached the house of the

deceased on being called by her father, besides the parents

and brothers of the deceased, other family members of the

deceased namely Darshana Garg, Shish Pal Garg, Satish

Garg, Sunil Garg, Sangeeta Garg, Anita Garg, Udit, Niati,

Ashotush, Soni and Siddharth were present there. Besides

the aforesaid family members, servants employed at the

residence of the deceased namely Manoj, Sita Ram, Raju and

Hari were also present there. When he was lodged in jail,

Tinny @ Tinnu along with his two friends Raj and Suresh

visited him and told him that on 19.04.1999 he i.e. Tinnu

had met the deceased in the market. When the mother of

the deceased saw the deceased in his company, she got

very annoyed and forcibly dragged the deceased from the

market. After sometime Tinny received a telephonic call

from a servant employed at the house of the deceased who

told him that the family members of the deceased had killed

the deceased when she refused to end her affair with Tinny.

Tinny assured him that he would help him in getting

acquitted in the present case but since that day he has not

heard a word from Tinny. He apprehends that Tinny has

been kidnapped or murdered by the family of the deceased.

The police falsely implicated him in the present case at the

instance of Mangat Ram Singhal. On 19.04.1999 he

witnessed Mangat Ram Singhal handing over bundle of notes

to Inspector Jeewan Singh Gill at the residence of the

deceased. The door of the bathroom which was bolted from

outside was opened by Mangat Ram Singhal. When he was

lodged in jail, he was forced to write letters addressed to

family members of the deceased.

48. On being confronted with the letters Ex.DW-5/PA and

Ex.DW-5/PB the appellant admitted that the same were

written by him.

49. Gautam Sharma DW-1, the elder brother of the

appellant, deposed that the appellant used to go to the

house of the father of the deceased to teach his children. On

19.04.1999 he saw that a servant employed at the house of

the deceased told the accused that the father of the

deceased had called him immediately to his house upon

which the appellant left for the house of the deceased. In the

early morning of 20.04.1999 he left Delhi in connection with

his business. When he returned to Delhi after four days he

came to know that the appellant has been implicated in a

murder case. The relations between him and the appellant

were strained. On being questioned about the servant who

had come to call the appellant, he stated (Quote): 'I never

accompanied Uttam Kumar to the house of Anil Garg nor I

ever separately visited that house.... The person who had

come to call accused Uttam Kumar at earlier also came to

call Uttam Kumar on 3 to 4 occasions to go to his house.‟

50. Raghunath Prasad DW-2, Administrative Officer,

St.Stephen‟s college, produced the admission form Ex.PW-

2/A of the deceased and deposed that the said form is

required to be filled by the student in his/her own

handwriting.

51. Marianus Jojo DW-3 deposed that in response to the

summons issued by the Court to the Principal of Mont Fort

School, Ashok Vihar, he was directed to submit the letter

Ex.DW-3/A which was signed by the Principal. It appears

that the appellant had wanted production of some record

pertaining to the deceased from the said school, which was

not available with the school.

52. Dr.Deepa Verma DW-4, Senior Scientific Officer, FSL

deposed that she had compared handwritings contained in

the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 with the admitting

handwriting of the deceased and that the handwriting

contained in the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/10, Ex.DW-

4/12 and Ex.DW-4/13 is that of the deceased.

53. Holding the fact that the appellant was found standing

in the bathroom where the deceased was found dead with a

knife in his hand when the door of the said bathroom was

broken coupled with the fact that the prosecution has been

able to establish that the appellant had a motive to murder

the deceased, for there was evidence on record to show that

the appellant had a lust for the deceased and that he could

not fathom that the deceased was getting married to

someone else, vide impugned judgment and order dated

07.03.2007 the learned Trial Judge has convicted the

appellant of having committed the murder of the deceased.

In coming to the conclusion that the appellant had a lust for

the deceased, the learned Trial Judge has held that the fact

that the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 were produced by

the appellant and that his explanation as to how he came

into possession of the said letters was unsatisfactory, for the

appellant failed to establish the existence of Tinny @ Tinnu

and the fact claimed by him that Tinny @ Tinnu handed over

the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 to him, leads to a

conclusion that Tinny @ Tinnu is no one else but the

appellant himself. The learned Trial Judge rejected the

defence taken by the appellant on the ground that it is

highly improbable that the father and brother of the

deceased would have murdered the deceased in such a

brutal and gruesome manner. Vide order dated 15.03.2007,

the learned Trial Judge had sentenced the appellant to

undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine in sum of

Rs.5,00,000/-; in default to undergo simple imprisonment for

a period of five years for committing the offence punishable

under Section 302 IPC. Conscious of the fact that life

convicts are entitled to be considered for premature release

after serving an actual sentence of 14 years, the learned

Trial Judge has held that as and when the issue of premature

release of the appellant is to be considered by the Board,

the brutality of the murder and the pollution of the pious

relationship between the teacher and the taught be brought

to the notice of the Board. It is apparent that the purport of

the order of sentence is that the appellant should remain for

the entire life in jail and not be released premature.

54. Conscious of the fact that the appellant has transposed

his defence into the citadel of the prosecution i.e. by

claiming entrapment, the appellant has ostensibly tried to

get away to explain his presence in the house when the

police came and his fingerprint being detected inside the

bathroom where the dead body of deceased was recovered.

The central issue, on which the debate has to take place, is

whether the defence of entrapment has to succeed or the

witnesses of the prosecution have to be believed.

55. At the hearing of the appeal filed by the appellant,

following arguments were advanced by the learned counsel

for the appellant:-

A Firstly, unlike the burden upon the prosecution to

prove the guilt, the accused has only to probablize the

defence. In the backdrop of the above legal position,

learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there are

several discrepancies in the case of the prosecution which

strongly "probablize" the defence of the appellant that he

was entrapped. (i) With reference to the seizure memo

Ex.PW-2/5 which records that the shirt worn by the appellant

which was seized when he was arrested was minus 3

buttons, learned counsel urged that from said fact it could

be gathered that a scuffle had taken place during which 3

buttons of the shirt of the appellant broke and fell down. No

attempt being made to recover the broken buttons was a

deliberate act of Insp.J.S.Gill for the reason if the buttons

were found outside the bathroom it would have established

a scuffle outside the bathroom which would be as per the

claim of the appellant that when he was summoned to the

house, the father and the brother of the deceased requested

him to own up for the crime and take money and when he

refused, they pushed him inside the bathroom where the

dead body of the deceased was lying. (ii) Secondly, with

reference to the testimony of the police officers namely

Const.Bhoora Singh PW-13, Const.Giri Kumar PW-14,

Const.Mukesh PW-15, SI Mukesh Kumar PW-17 and Inspector

Jeewan Singh PW-18, as also the family members of the

deceased namely Anil Garg PW-2, Varun Garg PW-3, Uma

Garg PW-10 and Vibhor Garg PW-19 it was urged that all of

them claimed that the door of the bathroom was broken

into. If this be so, learned counsel urged that it was

unexplainable that neither the broken door nor the broken

bolt was seized. Referring to the photographs Ex.PW-12/12

and Ex.PW-12/13 which depicted the door of the bathroom

from inside the bathroom, learned counsel pointed out that

the door as also the latch/bolt was intact. Therefrom,

counsel urged, an inference could be drawn that the door

was locked from outside as claimed by the appellant after he

was pushed inside and when the police came, the outside

lock was removed and the appellant was apprehended after

being entrapped. (iii) Thirdly, it was submitted that there

was a mismatch between the shirt and the vest pertaining to

the place where the two were stained with blood. It was

urged that most of the stains on the vest were at places

where corresponding staining of the shirt was not to be

seen. Thus, it was a case of deliberately plating stains on

the shirt and the vest of the appellant. (iv) Fourthly, it was

urged that the opinion Ex.PW-9/3 was obtained from

Dr.Komal Singh under duress, who admittedly gave opinion

Ex.PW-9/2 at the first instance only with reference to injury

No.1 and 2 and opined that the two could be caused by the

knife in question. For the reason, the other 6 injuries were

not possibly caused by the knife in question, Dr.Komal Singh

deliberately did not give, on being so pressurized, any

opinion. Surprisingly, while giving the opinion Ex.PW-9/3

Dr.Komal Singh opined without even looking to the knife.

Further, injury No.8 which was sickle shaped could not be

caused by the knife in question. It was submitted that it was

apparent that two weapons were used and this probablized

the defence that the father and the brother of the deceased

inflicted the injuries on her. (v) Fifthly, it was urged that the

father of the deceased admitted during cross-examination

that Satish Garg, his brother, resided on the ground floor.

Counsel urged that in the peculiar facts of the instant case it

was apparent that material witnesses were withheld. (vi)

Lastly, on the issue it was urged that since the family

members of the deceased knew that it was a case of

entrapment and a local MLA was related to them, using

political influence, a thoughtful plan was conceived of which

could be evidenced by the fact that as against the normal

practice of sending two or three police officers when

information is received about a crime being committed, in

the instant case 6 police officers went to the spot for the

obvious reason it was all pre-planned.

B The second submission advanced by learned counsel

for the appellant was that the conduct of the parents and

brothers of the deceased at the time of the occurrence was

most unnatural and that the same casts a serious doubt on

the veracity of their evidence. The first instance pointed out

by the learned counsel was that Vibhor PW-19, deposed that

the incident in question occurred at about 09.30 P.M.

Counsel also drew attention of the court to the recording

contained in the crime team report Ex.PW-11/A that the time

of occurrence was 9.30 P.M. Counsel drew attention of the

court to the fact that the police was informed about the

incident at 11.10 P.M. as recorded in DD entry, Ex.PW-4/1.

Counsel submitted that the fact that the parents and

brothers of the deceased took about 1 hour 40 minutes to

inform the police about the incident strongly suggests that

they bought time to cook up a false story before informing

the police. Taking the argument a little further, counsel

pointed out that the fact that when the parents and brothers

of the deceased knocked the door of the bathroom in

question as claimed by them and the appellant informed

them as claimed by them that he had murdered the

deceased as they were getting her married to someone else,

said fact should have found mention in DD entry Ex.PW-4/1

and the absence thereof shows that the story cooked up by

them is false. The second instance of the alleged unnatural

conduct pointed by the learned counsel was that Anil Garg

PW-2 and Varun Garg PW-3, deposed that they did not make

an attempt to break open the door of the bathroom where

the deceased was locked and that there was a gap of 20-30

minutes between the time when the factum of locking of the

deceased in the bathroom came to their knowledge and the

time of arrival of the police at the spot. According to the

counsel, despite the fact that the parents and brothers of the

deceased knew that the life of the deceased was in great

danger, for according to them the appellant had told them

that he had murdered the deceased as they were getting her

married to someone else, their conduct of not attempting to

break open the door of the bathroom in question for a period

of 20-30 minutes and instead keep waiting for the police is

most unnatural. The third instance of the alleged unnatural

conduct pointed out by the learned counsel was that the

parents and brothers of the deceased did not lock the door

of the bathroom in question from outside to prevent the

appellant from escaping, for how would they know that the

appellant would not try to break free.

C The next submission advanced by the learned counsel

for the appellant was that the case of the prosecution is

marred by many improbabilities arising therein. The first

improbability pointed out by the learned counsel was that as

many as eight injuries were found on the person of the

deceased as recorded in the post-mortem report Ex.PW-9/1.

According to the counsel, had the appellant inflicted eight

injuries on the person of the deceased, the deceased would

have cried or shrieked and the same would have attracted

the attention of her parents and brothers. However, as per

the prosecution, they did not even hear a whisper of cry of

the deceased and that they came to know about the incident

in question when they looked for the deceased when they

could not find her anywhere in the house. The second

improbability pointed out by the counsel was that the

weapon allegedly used by the appellant to murder the

deceased was an ordinary kitchen knife. Counsel pointed out

that the appellant could have picked up said knife only from

the kitchen of the house. Counsel submitted that Vibhor PW-

19, deposed that when the deceased arrived in the room

where he i.e. Vibhor was being taught by the appellant, he

i.e. Vibhor went to the kitchen to drink water and that

thereafter when he came back to the room he did not find

the appellant there and noticed that the door of the

bathroom attached to the room was locked. Counsel

submitted that in such circumstances, Vibhor would have

seen the appellant picking up from the kitchen the knife

used to murder the deceased, which was not the position in

the instant case. It was highlighted that it was just

impossible for the appellant to have picked up the knife from

the kitchen when Vibhor went to the kitchen and returned. It

was submitted that the two i.e. the appellant and Vibhor

would have crossed each other and Vibhor not so deposing

means that the knife was never with the appellant. The third

improbability pointed out by the learned counsel was that no

tutor would teach a child at 09.30 P.M. in the night.

D The next submission advanced by the learned counsel

for the appellant was that there are manifest errors in the

impugned judgment. (i) The first error pointed out by the

learned counsel was that the learned Trial Judge has

committed a patent illegality in holding that the

circumstance that the appellant failed to prove that Tinny @

Tinnu came to visit him in jail and that Tinny @ Tinnu

handed over the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 to him

leads to a conclusion that the accused is Tinny @ Tinnu and

that the deceased had written the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to

Ex.DW-4/17 to the appellant. According to the counsel, the

only conclusion which could have resulted from the said set

of circumstances was that the appellant failed to prove the

existence of Tinny @ Tinnu. In said regards, the learned

counsel drew attention of the court to the fact that the

parents and brothers of the deceased falsely denied that the

letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 do not contain the

handwriting of the deceased. According to the counsel, had

the appellant been Tinny @ Tinnu, the parents and brothers

of the deceased would not have denied that the letters

Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 were written by the deceased for

the said fact would have gone a long way in proving the

guilt of the appellant. Counsel submitted that the fact that

the parents and brothers of the deceased denied that the

letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 were written by the

deceased strongly suggests that the appellant was not Tinny

@ Tinnu. Counsel then drew the attention of the court to the

following recording contained in the letters Ex. Ex.DW-4/1-2

and Ex.DW-4/3-5 respectively: - (a) Varun shall tell you

many things which would prove that I forgot you completely

over there, that I am wrong you will beat me, scold me; (b) I

used to start crying just as I started sending you kisses.

(Mamiji saw those tears, the very first day); According to the

counsel, the aforesaid writings goes to show that Varun, the

brother of the deceased, and the maternal aunt of the

deceased knew about the affair between the deceased and

Tinny @ Tinnu. Counsel submitted that had the appellant

been Tinny @ Tinnu, the family of the deceased would have

ended all their relations with the appellant the moment it

came to their knowledge that the deceased is having an

affair with the appellant. As a limb of the aforesaid

submission, counsel further contended that the learned Trial

Judge has committed an illegality in heavily relying upon the

circumstance that the defence taken by the appellant was

false, to infer the guilt of the accused. Counsel submitted

that it is settled legal principle that the circumstance of a

false defence taken by an accused is a circumstance which,

after the chain of the circumstances appearing against an

accused is complete, can be added to the said chain to

reinforce the guilt of the accused. In support of the said

contention, the counsel relied upon the decision of Supreme

Court reported as Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v State of

Maharashtra AIR 1984 SC 1622. (ii) The second error

pointed out by the learned counsel for the accused was that

the learned Trial Court wrongly came to the conclusion that

the appellant had a lust for the deceased, for there was no

evidence on record which could support said conclusion.

Learned counsel pointed out that none of the family

members of the deceased deposed that the appellant had a

lust for the deceased. On the contrary, Anil Garg PW-2 and

Varun Garg PW-3, the father and brother of the deceased

respectively, deposed that the appellant used to treat the

deceased like his own daughter.

56. Keeping in view the defence taken by the appellant, in

the instant case it would certainly be relevant whether the

defence succeeds. The reason is obvious. The appellant has

admitted his being arrested on being found inside the same

bathroom in which the dead body of the deceased was found

after the police reached the scene of the crime. Whereas

the prosecution alleges that the appellant killed the

deceased inside the bathroom and locked himself inside the

bathroom, the defence alleges that after the deceased was

killed, the appellant was entrapped to come to the house

and was pushed inside the bathroom and kept confined till

the police arrived.

57. Suffice would it be to state that where a person is

murdered at a spot and the accused is apprehended at the

spot itself, the accused has to render an explanation as to

how the deceased was killed and if not such explanation is

rendered, the accused must admit the guilt. This is plain

logic. The appellant has well understood the same and

hence the defence of entrapment.

58. Thus, it can be safely be said that the instant case is

akin to two trains running on parallel lines and the diversions

for the destination being towards the fag end of the journey

and hence a close look at the competing claims of the

prosecution and the defence. Instant case is not of a kind

where the defence is of alibi and hence the principle of law

that irrespective of the proof of alibi, the prosecution has to

prove its case of guilt beyond reasonable doubt being

proved.

59. The most crucial aspect of the defence of the appellant

is the mysterious Tinny @ Tinnu to whom the deceased has

written numerous letters, proved to be in the hand of the

deceased by the testimony of DW-4.

60. It is but apparent that the deceased was emotionally

involved with somebody whom she referred to as Tinny and

sometimes Tinnu. It is true that the parents of the deceased

and her brother have denied the letters in question being

written by the deceased, but the said denial has to be

understood in the context of the traditional Indian society

where premarital affair with a person of the opposite sex is

considered as bad character and a dishonour to the

reputation of the family. We read nothing more in the false

denial by the family members of the deceased that the said

letters were in the hand of the deceased.

61. Now, the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17 could be

with the appellant only under two circumstances. One, on

being written and handed over by the deceased to the

appellant or as claimed by the appellant when Tinny visited

him in jail along with two friends Raj and Suresh.

62. As is to be noted from para 19 above, in his application

filed under Section 91 Cr.P.C., the appellant claimed that

Tinny had met him in jail during visitors hours on a date

between 21.4.1999 to 9.5.2000 and hence prayer was made

to summon the jail record containing record of visits made

by visitors to the jail inmates during said period.

63. It appears to be very innocent, but is rooted, in our

opinion in a wicked mind, that the said application was filed

on 6.9.2005 when the appellant knew that the jail records

have been weeded out. We say so for the reason in the

letter Ex.DW-5/PB written by the appellant to the parents of

the deceased he has posted of his crafty skills by writing

that he has created enough confusion and he is making a

prayer to summon the jail record knowingfully well that the

same has been weeded out.

64. The fact that the appellant had these letters with him

from the very beginning is evidenced by the fact that he

confronted Anil Garg PW-2 with these letters on 8.5.2002.

65. The fact that nobody gave these letters to the

appellant can be inferred from the fact that had they been

so handed over to the appellant as claimed by him when

Tinnu met him in the jail, the appellant would have

immediately moved an application to preserve the jail record

recording Tinnu‟s visit to the jail. The appellant did not do

so. We reiterate that the contents of the letter Ex.DW-5/PB

written by the appellant to the parents of the deceased are a

reflection of his crafty mind. His claim that he was

compelled and forced to write the letters Ex.DW-5/PA and

Ex.DW-5/PB is preposterous keeping in view the sublime

language, richness of content and the phraseology of the

two letters which no jail inmate can compel another to write.

The literary and the intellectual skill of the appellant is

evidenced not only by the said two letters but even from the

well-penned written arguments filed by the appellant in

Court in his own handwriting and the fact that those whom

he taught as a private tutors got admissions in IITs and MBA

Institutes of repute as claimed by the appellant himself.

66. Having held that the appellant failed to prove that a

person named Tinny @ Tinnu met the appellant in jail and

handed over the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to Ex.DW-4/17, the

question which arises is how come letters written by the

deceased to Tinny @ Tinnu came in possession of the

appellant.

67. Was it that the appellant is none else but Tinny @

Tinnu?

68. The name of the appellant is Uttam. Remove the letter

„U‟ from Uttam and one is left with „ttam‟. Lovingly, it is

easy to transform Uttam to Tinny and Tinny to Tinnu.

69. The letters Ex.DW-5/PA and Ex.DW-5/PB written by the

appellant to the family members of the deceased also

provide a clue regarding the identity of Tinny @ Tinnu.

70. The letter Ex.DW-5/PA records that the mother of the

deceased can collect letters written by the deceased, 50 in

number, from the appellant. The appellant only produced 17

letters written by the deceased. What about the remaining

33 letters? Why did the appellant withhold remaining 33

letters written by the deceased?

71. The letter Ex.DW-5/PB written by the appellant to the

parents of the deceased records that the deceased was the

"soul" of the appellant. This is an expression used by lovers

for each other.

72. Love songs and love letters are best comprehended

only by the lovers. They carry scuttle messages and

meanings. Code words and code language is used. The

metaphors are intended to convey signals which only the

opposite can receive and download. Unless assisted by

linguistic and psychology experts it may be difficult for a

Court to fathom the real meaning of such letters. But, what

is relevant for us is the fact that the deceased has expressed

not only her love for Tinny but even the anguish that she

would never be able to be his.

73. In paras 23 to 27 above, we have noted extracts of

some of the letters written by the deceased to Tinny @

Tinnu and they show that the deceased realized the mess in

which she was. It shows that she was conscious of the fact

that her relationship with Tinnu would just not be acceptable

to anyone.

74. The young girl was a student of the IInd year

undergoing her graduation course. As claimed by the

appellant and not denied by the family members of the

young girl, the appellant had been her tutor for years

together and thereafter for the younger siblings. The young

girl was obviously besmitten by the intelligence of her tutor

and so was the tutor. Whereas the young girl realized that

she was helpless and hence allowed herself to be drifted,

hoping that the currents would anchor her, the appellant

acted coldly and with precision.

75. The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted at

about 11.35 A.M. on 20.04.1999 as recorded in the post-

mortem report Ex.PW-9/1 of the deceased. The post-mortem

report Ex.PW-9/1 records that the death of the deceased had

taken place 12 hours prior to the conduct of post-mortem.

Therefore, as per the post-mortem report, the deceased died

at about 11.35 P.M. on 19.04.1999. It is a recognized fact

that an error of plus or minus 2 hours could be taken in the

instant case in fixing the time of death. In that view of the

matter, it has to be taken that the deceased died any time

between 09.35 P.M. on 19.04.1999 to 01.35 A.M. on

20.04.1999.

76. The daily diary entry Ex.PW-4/A shows a call made at

the police station at 11:20 in the night pertaining to the

incident and thus we have empirical evidence wherefrom it

can safely be said that the deceased was killed prior to

11:20 PM. Thus, the probable time of death could be any

time between 9:30 PM to 11:20 PM. It was urged that as per

Vibhor and the other family members the crime took place

at 9:30 PM, which is the time recorded as that of occurrence

even in the rukka. Thus, there is empirical evidence of the

crime being committed at 9:30 PM. Submission made was

that the family has taken 1 hour and 50 minutes time to

inform the police and this means that something was being

brewed. Obviously, the suggestion was that what was being

brewed was: whom to entrap.

77. Now, the family members have deposed that the

deceased returned to her house with her mother after

shopping at 9:30 PM. Thereafter, as deposed to by them,

the various articles purchased during shopping were

removed from the car and were kept inside a bedroom in the

house. The shopping was not ordinary shopping and was not

that of only one or two articles. The deceased was to get

married shortly and the shopping was of her dowry articles.

Nobody has spoken as to how many articles were purchased,

but presumably they were many. Thus, time would be

consumed to bring the purchases inside the bedroom.

Nobody has said that the deceased immediately walked up

to the room of Vibhor. Nobody has said that they looked at

their watches to identify the time being 9:30 PM. It is

apparent that as is usually to be noted in most cases, the

time 9:30 PM got fixed on rough estimates by all as time

when the deceased returned home with the mother and not

taking into account the time spent in removing the

purchases from the car and bringing the same inside the

bedroom and ignoring the fact that may be the deceased

went after sometime to the room where Vibhor was taking

tuition. Further, as deposed by the family members, when

Vibhor and his father went to the room where Vibhor was

taking tuition and saw neither appellant nor the deceased in

the room, they thought that the appellant was in the

bathroom and the deceased may have walked away. Only

when the deceased was nowhere to be seen in the house

and the appellant remained inside the bathroom, was the

suspicion raised that something was amiss. Apparently,

further time was consumed in this process, removing the

said event further away from 9:30 PM. But, freezing the

time at 9:30 PM, everybody started talking of the crime

being committed at 9:30 PM. This got reflected even in the

rukka dispatched from the house.

78. Thus, it would be useless to predicate an argument as

if 9:30 PM was the time when the crime was detected.

79. Returning to the time when the deceased returned

home with her mother at 9:30 PM, and the same being a

simple estimation, well, the time of return could well be

around 9:45 PM. Giving time of 5 to 10 minutes to unload

the purchases from the car and bring them inside and

further 10-15 minutes time for the deceased and her mother

to check that everything was brought inside and discounting

sometime for the deceased to walk to the room where

Vibhor was being taught by the appellant, discounting

further time for Vibhor and his father searching for the

deceased and then realizing that something was amiss in

the appellant continuing to be in the toilet and then

detecting as to what had happened, it is possible that by the

time the crime was detected it was around 10:45 or 11:00

PM.

80. Thus, it is apparent that the crafty appellant is building

a defence picking up a nut here and a bolt there.

81. If the defence of entrapment is considered, it would

mean that the deceased was killed by her father and her

brother out of anguish and frustration and having realized

what they did, obviously an escape had to be found. The

two and the remaining family members put their heads

together to think a way out. Could the body be disposed of?

If yes, how? If not, why? If not, what to do? Whose help can

we take? Can we bribe somebody to accept the guilt? If

yes, who? Would not all such alternatives being discussed

require time? We think it would. What would be the

reasonable time? Well, keeping in view that respectable

persons had murdered their daughter, it would be troubled

and puzzled minds; minds under fear which would be

thinking. These minds would have no focus, much less a

logic. To arrive at a consensus, these troubled minds would

not be expected to arrive at a solution within reasonable

dispatch.

82. Now, assuming that these troubled minds arrived at a

solution to falsely entrap somebody, it had to be further

pondered over as to who should be ensnared. Various

alternatives of ensnaring and the person to be ensnared had

to be discussed. He had to be an easy target. Is it

believable that these troubled minds would have contrived

to design that let appellant be the victim. It is preposterous

to so believe and accept. For this to have happened would

mean that the family members of the deceased were cock

sure that the appellant would be in his house and would

immediately come on being summoned. What is the

material before us that the family members were sure that

the appellant was in his house and would immediately come

on being summoned? None.

83. As per the appellant and even as per the parents of the

deceased, the appellant was a man of their confidence and

they believed that he treated their children as his own. It is

difficult to believe that sharing such relationship of trust and

confidence the family members of the deceased would strike

a wicked plan to falsely entrap the appellant.

84. That leads us to another scenario. The police arrived in

the house by around 11:40 PM and admittedly the appellant

was inside the bathroom with the dead body of the deceased

inside. Though no witness has so stated and there is no

evidence on record, but learned counsel for the appellant

and the State informed us that the house where the

appellant resided was at a distance of about 10 minutes

drive from the house of the deceased. Thus, at least 20

minutes would be consumed to make a visit to and fro from

the house of the deceased to that of the appellant and back.

Given the fact that the appellant would have spent a

minimum of minute or two in his house before embarking on

his journey to reach the house of the deceased, on being

summoned by her parents, about 22 minutes further time

needs to be added while adding up the time to probablize

what could have happened. That by 11:20 PM information

was passed on to the police means that the family members

of the deceased had entrapped the appellant inside the

bathroom in their house by 11:20 PM and this means that

the process of sending somebody to fetch the appellant had

commenced by around 10:50 PM. Going backwards, the

process to think about all the alternatives and rule out the

worst and pick on the best needs to be over within less than

30 minutes and under the circumstances we hold the same

to be most impractical and unreasonably less for a

conspiracy of the magnitude to be hatched.

85. Was it not easy for the family members to entrap any

servant in the house? Why pick on the appellant?

86. It is true that Insp.J.S.Gill PW-18 ought to have tried to

ascertain as to what happened to the buttons on the shirt of

the appellant which had broken. It would have been

advisable to have searched for the buttons and picked them

up. But, for a lapse committed by the investigating officer, it

cannot be said that a case otherwise proved should be

thrown out.

87. Insofar as the argument that the photographs Ex.PW-

12/12 and Ex.PW-12/13 show the door of the bathroom in

question in an intact condition and hence the claim of the

family members of the deceased and the police officers that

the door was broken into is false and this probablizes that

the door was never locked from inside; relevant would it be

to note that Anil Garg PW-2 and Const.Bhoora Singh PW-13

deposed that the bolt on the inner side of the door in

question got broken when the police applied pressure to

break open the said door. Thus, the testimony of aforesaid

witnesses clarifies the position that it was the bolt on the

inner side of the door which got broken. As already noted

herein above, there are two photographs of the door in

question; being Ex.PW-12/12 and Ex.PW-12/13. The

photograph Ex.PW-12/13 shows the inner side of the door in

question i.e. the position of the door when photographed

while standing inside the bathroom, while the photograph

Ex.PW-12/12 shows the outer side of the door in question i.e.

photographed while standing inside the bedroom.

Therefore, it is the photograph Ex.PW-12/12 which is

relevant for the purposes of the present argument. The bolt

is at the top of the door. A minute look at the photograph

Ex.PW-12/12 shows that the bolt-hole is present on the

beading of the door. A bolt-hole is affixed to the wooden

frame on the side whereof the door is hinged. The

photograph Ex.PW-12/12 shows the bolt-hole on the inner

side of the door in question in a dislodged condition. What

appears to have happened is that when the door was pushed

from outside the bolt-hole gave way as the screws which had

secured the same to the frame gave way and the bolt-hole

remained embracing the bolt and when the door was shut,

along with the bolt, the bolt-hole came back to the same

position where it originally was, creating an elusion of it

being at the same place. Now, this could not have

happened for the obvious reason where the bolt is moved

upwards to secure it inside the bolt-hole, it is only then that

a door gets locked. If the bolt was secured inside the bolt-

hole on the door in the side of the bathroom, nobody could

have entered inside as the door would not have opened.

88. We wonder as to what is the factual basis for the

argument that there is mismatch at the place where the vest

of the appellant which was seized when he was arrested got

stained with blood vis-a-vis the shirt. There is no material

for us to discuss said argument and thus we reject the same

as also the argument of planting.

89. Is the learned counsel for the appellant right in

contending that the opinion Ex.PW-9/2 implies that only

injuries Nos.1 and 2 found on the person of the deceased

were caused by the knife recovered from his possession and

that the remaining injuries found on the person of the

deceased was caused by another weapon? We do not think

so. Since only injuries Nos.1 and 2 found on the person of

the deceased were responsible for the death of the

deceased, Dr.Komal Singh PW-9, thought it proper to give

his opinion with respect to the weapon of offence only in

respect of said two injuries. Realizing that the opinion Ex.PW-

9/2 does not give an opinion with respect to the weapon of

offence regarding all the injuries found on the person of the

deceased, the investigating officer rightly thought it proper

to obtain further opinion in respect of the remaining injuries

on the person of the deceased. In that view of the matter,

we find nothing suspicious in two opinions Ex.PW-9/2 and

Ex.PW-9/3 being obtained from Dr.Komal Singh regarding

the weapon of offence.

90. Regarding the argument that Dr.Komal Singh gave the

opinion Ex.PW-9/3 without even looking at the knife

recovered from the possession of the appellant, suffice

would it be to note that Dr.Komal Singh penned the opinion

Ex.PW-9/2 on the back page of the post-mortem report

Ex.PW-9/1 and he also drew the sketch of the knife in

question on the said page. Dr.Komal Singh deposed that he

perused the post-mortem report while giving the opinion

Ex.PW-9/3. It is thus apparent that Dr.Komal Singh gave the

opinion Ex.PW-9/3 after examining the sketch of the knife in

question. In that view of the matter, nothing turns upon the

fact that Dr.Komal Singh did not look at the knife recovered

from the possession of the appellant when rendering the

opinion Ex.PW-9/3.

91. The argument that the sickle shaped injury found on

the person of the deceased i.e. injury No.8 could not have

been caused by the knife recovered from the possession of

the accused requires it to be noted that the knife in

question, sketch whereof is Ex.PW-2/3, is a knife tapering

towards the tip. Total length of the knife is 12.6 cm. The

length of the blade is 7.6 cm. Therefore, the tapered portion

of the knife could have caused the sickle shaped injury found

on the person of the deceased. We find that Dr.Komal Singh

was not given any suggestion that injury No.8 could not

have possible been caused from the knife in question.

92. Regarding non-joining of Satish Garg and his family

members when the police came to the spot, suffice would it

be to state that the father of the deceased deposed that

Satish Garg was not present in the house at the time of the

occurrence as he had gone to distribute the invitation cards

for the marriage of the deceased. Thus, merely because

Satish Garg resided on the ground floor of the same building

is an irrelevant fact and cannot be used as a ground to urge

that a material witness has been withheld.

93. That as many as six policemen accompanied Inspector

J.S. Gill to the spot being used as an argument to urge that

usually three police officers leave the police station when a

crime is reported, it is important to note the contents of DD

entry Ex.PW-4/1. As already noted herein above, DD entry

Ex.PW-4/1 records that the father of the deceased informed

that the appellant has locked the deceased in a bathroom

and that he is not opening the door inspite of repeated

knocking at the door. Considering the fact that the deceased

was locked in a bathroom by the appellant and thus he

would require manpower to break open the door, Inspector

J.S. Gill must have thought it proper to take more policemen

with him to the spot. Therefore, there is nothing suspicious

in the fact that six policemen accompanied the investigating

officer to the said spot.

94. No question was put to Insp.J.S.Gill as to why he took

six policemen along with him. Had one been asked, an

answer would have come and then we would have found

some scope for a debate, whether the answer was

convincing. It is settled law that without questioning a

witness on a point of controversy and eliciting a response,

no argument can be built on said controversy by hinging the

controversy on surmises and conjectures.

95. The submission that it was unnatural conduct for the

family members of the deceased to not break the door of the

bathroom when they knew that the appellant was inside the

bathroom with the deceased, though attractive at first blush,

ignores that as deposed to by the family members, the

appellant had told them from inside that he had killed their

daughter and thus, overcome by grief, fear and anxiety they

could think of no better than to inform and summon the

police and do no more. We do not think that so unnatural is

the conduct that it renders the family members without any

merit of credit. The argument that this fact does not find

mention in the DD entry Ex.PW-4/A, it is sufficient to note

that DD entries are always cryptic and not descriptive.

96. The argument that it was highly improbable that the

parents and the brothers of the deceased did not hear even

a whisper of cry of the deceased when the appellant

assaulted her ignores the possibility of the appellant taking

the deceased by complete surprise and inflicting injuries

Nos.1 and 2 on her person before she could react and by

said time she was rendered speechless. Being a male, the

appellant could have muffled her voice with his hand placed

on her mouth.

97. Do we not come across cases day after day where

brutal crimes are committed with victims beaten to pulp and

yet nobody in the vicinity has heard their cries? We have. It

is also not unknown for victims to be rendered speechless

when suddenly placed in a hostile situation.

98. The argument that the appellant could not have picked

up the knife used by him for murdering the deceased from

the kitchen of the house of the deceased without Vibhor

noticing the same is premised on the assumption that the

knife was picked up from the kitchen. No suggestion has

been given by the appellant to any family member that the

knife belonged to them or was in the kitchen. It is possible

that the appellant took the knife with him hoping to get an

opportunity to do what he did. It is possible that the knife

was already in the bedroom. It is a kitchen knife no doubt.

Such kinds of knives are placed in the dining room and are

sometimes carried inside the bedroom to cut or peel fruit.

Thus, the argument anchors itself nowhere.

99. The argument that nobody takes tuition at 9:30 PM is

neither here nor there for the reason Vibhor the person who

claims as being taught by the appellant has not even been

given a suggestion that he has falsely deposed that the

appellant was imparting tuition to him at 9:30 PM when his

sister and mother returned after shopping from the market.

Thus it stands established that the appellant was already in

the house at 9:30 PM. If this be so, the version of false

entrapment falls flat.

100. The argument predicated on the denial by the family

members of the deceased that the letters Ex.DW-4/1 to

Ex.DW-4/17 were not in the handwriting of the deceased,

denials which were proved to be false through the testimony

of DW-4, takes the case of the appellant not an inch forward

for the reason in a conservative Indian society, as already

opined by us hereinbefore, an affair with the opposite sex is

considered by some families as unchaste behaviour; it is

thought to be shame upon the family and hence the desire

to suppress the truth. It is obvious that the family members

of the deceased were saving their perceived family honour.

101. Do the contents of the letters Ex.DW-4/1-2 and Ex.DW-

4/3-5 show that the brother of the deceased i.e. Varun and

the maternal aunt of the deceased were aware of the fact

that the deceased was having an affair with the accused?

102. The argument was advanced to bring home what? We

do not understand.

103. Had they known so, the fact that the appellant is a

married person and was more than twice the age of the

deceased would have immediately led the family members

of the deceased to declare the appellant a persona non

grata in their house, which they did not do. It is obvious

that neither Varun nor his aunt know anything about the

liking which the appellant had for the deceased and vice

versa.

104. We have already commented hereinabove the

intricacies involved in understanding the subtle

undercurrents in love letters and especially when the writer

has to hide his/her true feelings. Save and except to gather

that the writer of the letters i.e. the deceased was torn apart

as a result of her love for the addressee (the appellant) of

the letters, we can read no further except that the deceased

realized that her brother Varun and her maternal aunt had

sensed out something amiss in the joy of life of the

deceased; but what that was has not surfaced. Surely not

the fact that Varun and his aunt knew about the relationship

between the appellant and the deceased.

105. The fact that the parents of the deceased have

deposed that the appellant used to treat the deceased as

their daughter shows that they believed that as a teacher

the appellant was as good as a parent to their child. This

itself establishes the fact that nobody suspected anything

and it is a case of a crafty man warming and worming into

the heart of a young girl and emotionally and may be

physically exploiting her.

106. The testimony of the parents Anil Garg PW-2 and Uma

Garg PW-10, and the brothers Varun Garg PW-3 and Vibhor

Garg PW-19 of the deceased, as also the police officers who

participated in the spot investigation namely Const.Bhura

Singh PW-13, Const.Giri Kumar PW-14, Const.Mukesh PW-15

and SI Mukesh Kumar PW-17 and Inspector Jeewan Singh

Gill PW-18 establishes that the appellant was found standing

in the bathroom which was locked from inside and where

the deceased was found dead and that he was holding a

knife in his hand at that time. The aforesaid witnesses were

cross-examined in extenso by the defence but nothing could

be brought out which could cast a blemish on their

evidence.

107. There is yet another significant fact which needs to be

noted. As already stated herein above, save and except

giving suggestion to Vibhor that the appellant used to

impart tuitions to him between 5.00 P.M. to 6.00 P.M. and

general suggestions pertaining to false implication of the

appellant Vibhor was not cross-examined with respect to

essential portion of his testimony. Thus, the essential

portion of the testimony of Vibhor has virtually gone

unrebutted.

108. In the decision reported as M/s. Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath

Vs. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. AIR 1958 Punjab

440 it was observed as under:-

"It is a well established rule of evidence that a party should put to each of his opponent's witnesses so much of his case as concerns that particular witness.

If no such questions are put, the Courts presume that the witness' account has been accepted. If it is intended to suggest that a witness was not speaking the truth upon a particular point, his attention must first he directed to the fact by cross-

examination so that he may have an opportunity of giving an explanation. In Browne v. Dunn, (1893) 6 R 67 (A), Lord Herschell observed :

"I cannot help saying, that it seems to me to be absolutely essential to the proper conduct of a cause, where it is intended to suggest that a witness is not speaking the truth on a particular point to direct his attention to the fact by some questions put in cross-examination showing that that imputation is intended to be made, and not to take his evidence and pass it by as a matter altogether unchallenged, and then, when it is impossible for him to explain, as perhaps he might have been able to do if such questions had been put to him, the circumstances which, it is suggested, indicate that the story he tells ought not to be believed, to argue that he is a witness unworthy of credit,

I have always understood that if you intend to impeach a witness, you are bound, whilst he is in the box, to give him an opportunity of making any explanation which is open to him; and, as it seems to me, that is not only a rule of professional practice in the conduct of a case, but it is essential to fair play and fair dealing with the witnesses."

109. From the above conspectus of facts, the only

conclusion which results is that the appellant is the

murderer of the deceased.

110. It assumes some significance to note that the letter

Ex.DW-5/PB written by the appellant to the parents of the

deceased has traces of admission of guilt, but we do not use

the same as an extra judicial confession for lack of clarity of

admission in unequivocal terms thereof.

111. We conclude by recording that the written submissions

filed by the appellant in his own handwriting and the letters

written by him to the parents of the deceased show a very

crafty and a very fertile mind. The intelligence quotients of

the appellant is of the highest order and as indeed bragged

by him in one of his letter he has given a run for the money

to a seasoned criminal lawyer of the stature of Shri

R.N.Mittal, Senior Advocate who was appointed as a Special

Public Prosecutor in the instant case. It is apparent that the

appellant has near successfully built a defence around the

lapses committed by the prosecution on two points, firstly in

not searching for the three buttons which were broken from

the shirt of the appellant and secondly the investigating

officer not seizing the bolt-hole with the screws coming

loose when the door of the bathroom was pushed open. It is

obvious that entry into the bathroom could not be effected

without the door being opened and this was possible in the

instant case when due to the push the bolt-hole came off

from the door frame as the screws gave way when pressure

was applied on the door. It was common sense for the

investigating officer to have seized the bolt-hole and the

screws. But, with pain and anguish we must write that in 4

out of 10 cases we are seeing errors of stupidity committed

by the investigating officers which have to be overlooked as

aberrations by us for the reason it is the duty of the Court to

balance public interest in the administration of justice

requiring the exception to be applied to the exclusionary

rule of excluding from consideration the investigation which

is otherwise without taint. Indeed, it is time for the police to

think and find an answer as to why in 4 out of 10 movies in

India where there is some role of a policeman in the theme,

the policeman is shown as a BUFFFON.

112. We dismiss Crl.Appeal No.433/2007 filed by the

appellant Uttam Kumar.

113. As regards the Cross Appeal filed by the State, noting

that the prayer made therein is to enhance the sentence,

noting that the learned Trial Judge has himself directed that

the appellant shall undergo imprisonment for life and while

exercising the power to commute or remit the sentence the

decision of the learned Judge, which brings out in the very

first paragraph the evilness and depravity in the crime,

would be placed before the Executive, meaning thereby the

appellant would not earn his freedom on completing 14

years imprisonment, we feel that no case is made out to

enhance the sentence by awarding death penalty.

114. Thus, Cross Appeal filed by the State is also dismissed.

115. Both appeals are dismissed.

116. Since the appellant Uttam Kumar is in jail we direct

that a copy of this decision be sent to the Superintendent,

Central Jail Tihar to be supplied to the appellant.

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE

(SURESH KAIT) JUDGE

APRIL 26, 2010 mm / dk