Kamaljit @ Jugnu vs State Of Punjab
2022 Latest Caselaw 11626 P&H

CRA-D-1502-DB-2013                                    -1-



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH.

                                           CRA-D-1502-DB-2013
                                           Reserved on: 14.09.2022
                                           Pronounced on: 19.09.2022

KAMALJIT @ JUGNU                                                .....Appellant


                                  Versus


STATE OF PUNJAB                                               .....Respondent


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S. SHEKHAWAT

Argued by: Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate
           for the appellant.

            Ms. Monika Jalota, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

                                ****

SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.

1. The learned Sessions Judge, Patiala through a verdict

drawn on 23.08.2013, upon SC No.28RT of 07.09.2011/13.08.2012,

proceeded to, hence convict the accused, in respect of a charge drawn

against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the

IPC.

2. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order drawn on

23.08.2013, the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to make the

hereinafter extracted sentence(s) upon the convict.

 Offence        Sentence                   Fine             In default


302 IPC     To      undergo Rs. 10,000/- (in In default of payment
            imprisonment for words     rupees of fine to further
            life.            ten thousands) undergo        rigorous
                                              imprisonment for three
                                              months.



                                 1 of 17

3. The convict becomes aggrieved from the verdict of

conviction (supra), and, also becomes aggrieved from the consequent

therewith sentence(s) (supra), as became imposed upon him by the

learned Convicting Court, resultantly he becomes led to institute

thereagainst the instant appeal before this Court.

INTRODUCTORY FACTS

4. Deceased Gurjant Singh @ Goldy @ Bunty, aged 19 years,

was working as a welder with Verma Welding Works, Partap Nagar,

Patiala. He had friendly relations with accused Kamaljit Singh @

Jugnu. On 06.05.2011, deceased Gurjant Singh @ Goldy @ Bunty had

come to his house at noon to take lunch, and, again went to the work

place but in the evening he did not return home. His father Darshan

Singh tried to contact him on mobile phone but his phone was lying

switched off. Therefore, his father searched for him. When he could not

locate the deceased, he lodged DDR No. 10 dated 06.05.2011 at about

1.00 P.M. with PP Model Town, Patiala, which is Exhibit PB, with

regard to missing of his son. On 12.05.2011, said Darshan Singh

suffered statement Exhibit PA before the police, and, he suspected that

both accused Jugnu and the deceased were not seen since 05.05.2011;

both were friends, and, their mobile phones were kept switched off,

and, he came to know that his son had been murdered by Kamaljit

Singh @ Jugnu who had concealed his dead body somewhere. On the

basis of his statement Exhibit PA, formal FIR Exhibit PW14/B was

registered between 11.05 A.M. to 12.05 P.M., its copy was sent to Area

Magistrate, who received it at 05.30 P.M., and, police swung into

action. Accused Kamaljit Singh was arrested on 12.05.2011.

2 of 17

INVESTIGATION PROCEEDINGS

5. During interrogation, accused Kamaljit Singh @ Jugnu

disclosed that he had committed murder of Gurjant Singh @ Goldy @

Bunty on 05.05.2011 in a room which is constructed in the plot in the

area of village Ablowal, and, he had buried the dead body in the plot

adjoining to the room, and, he has specific knowledge of the said place.

In pursuance thereof, he led the police party as well as Executive

Magistrate Gurinder Singh Walia, and, pointed out the place where

dead body was concealed by him. At this instance, land was dug out,

and, dead body was excavated, and, the same was taken into possession

by the police. It was identified by father of the deceased. Inquest report

Exhibit PG was prepared, and, the dead body was sent for post mortem

examination, and, the same was conducted by the Board of doctors. On

12.05.2011, accused pointed out the room where he had murdered the

deceased Gurjant Singh @ Goldy @ Bunty. The spot was having blood

stains. The soil stained with blood was lifted from the spot, which was

put into parcel, and, sealed with the seal of the Investigating Officer,

and, was taken into possession vide memo Exhibit PR. Rough site plan

of the place of occurrence Exhibit PS was prepared. The wearing

clothes of the deceased were taken into possession vide memo Exhibit

PT. During investigation, PW-13 Lakhvir Singh had disclosed that on

05.05.2011, he had lastly seen accused and deceased together at about

2.00 P.M. in Gali No. 5, Gurdeep Colony, Patiala. On 14.05.2011,

accused suffered another disclosure statement Exhibit PC to the effect

that he had kept concealed the dagger vide which he had committed

murder of Gurjant Singh @ Goldy @ Bunty in street no. 5. In

pursuance of his disclosure statement Exhibit PC, dagger was recovered

3 of 17

from the disclosed place vide memo Exhibit PE and rough sketch

Exhibit PD of the dagger was prepared. Rough site plan Exhibit PU of

the place of recovery of dagger was prepared. During the investigation,

the dagger, the clothes of deceased and sample of blood stained soil

were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. On analysis it was reported

that all the above said articles were stained with blood.

6. After completion of investigations by the investigating

officer concerned, into the FIR (supra), he instituted an affirmative

report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., before the learned Committal Judge

concerned.

COMMITTAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

7. As the offence under Section 302 IPC was exclusively

triable by the Court of Session, therefore, the learned committal Court

vide order dated 24.08.2011, committed the case for trial, to the Court

of the learned Sessions Judge, Patiala.

TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

8. On finding a prima facie case, charge under Section 302 of

the IPC became framed, against the accused, and, to which he pleaded

not guilty, and, claimed trial.

9. In support of the prosecution case, the prosecution

examined sixteen witnesses. After completion of recording of the

depositions of the prosecution witnesses, the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Patiala drew proceedings, under Section 313 of the

Cr.P.C., but thereins, the accused claimed false implication, and,

pleaded innocence. However, no evidence in defence was adduced by

the accused.

10. After conclusion of the trial, as, became entered upon FIR

4 of 17

(supra), by the learned Sessions Judge, Patiala, the latter proceeded to

make the afore verdict of conviction, and, also made the consequent

therewith sentence(s) (supra), upon, the present appellant.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE CONVICT APPELLANT

11. The learned counsel appearing for the convict-appellant

has contended with vigor before this Court, that the verdict challenged

before this Court deserves to be quashed and set aside as it is based

upon gross misappreciation of evidence on record.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED STATE COUNSEL

12. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has argued

before this Court, that the judgment, as challenged before this Court, is

well merited, and does not warrant any interference.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL BASED EVIDENCE CASE.

Evidence of last seen (Deposition of PW-13)

13. PW-13 in his examination-in-chief has echoed that on

05.05.2011, at about 1.30 to 2.00 P.M., when he had gone to Gurdeep

Colony, Gali No. 5 for alighting the school children from the bus, that

then in front of one plot, he saw both the deceased Gurjant Singh @

Goldy and Jugnu. He identified the accused, who was then present in

Court. He has continued to depose that he shook hands with both of

them, and, thereafter went towards the back side of the Gurudwara for

leaving the children at their respective places. Gurjant Singh @ Goldy

is echoed by him to be working as a welder in Partap Nagar, and, since

he had been getting the repair work done from him, thus he deposed

that the deceased was known to him. Moreover, he has also deposed

that he met Jugnu at the shop of Gurjant Singh @ Goldy, and, was

5 of 17

known to him even prior to 05.05.2011. After a week elapsing, since

his last seeing both the accused, and, deceased together, he was

informed that the deceased was killed by accused Jugnu. He has been

very emphatic in the last portion of his examination-in-chief that since

he has last seen the accused, and, deceased together, thus, he had a

belief that the deceased had been murdered by the accused. Though, in

his examination-in-chief, he has emphatically deposed qua his last

seeing the deceased, and, accused together on 05.05.2011. Further,

though he has also made a candid echoing therein, that both the

accused, and, deceased were previously known to him, but yet despite

an exacting cross examination being made, upon him, to tear the

efficacy of the above deposition, but PW-13 remained unscathed in the

above ordeal. Thus, in respect of the above fact, his testimony is to be

assigned credibility.

14. Moreover, though there was a further rigorous cross

examination made upon him, to bely his testimony that rather at the

relevant date and time, he was not available at the relevant site, but

even the said suggestions became completely denied by him. Thus, his

presence at the relevant time, when he saw both the accused, and,

deceased together rather does acquire an aura of truth. Even though, he

has minimally digressed from his previous statement recorded in

writing, inasmuch as, despite his not recording therein that he had

shaken hands at the relevant place with both the accused and the

deceased, yet his making the above echoing in his examination-in-chief.

However, the above is not a gross or blatant improvement upon his

previously recorded statement in writing, rather is minimal. Moreover

when otherwise the factum, as deposed in his examination-in-chief

6 of 17

about his availability at the relevant place, at the relevant stage

when/where he both saw the accused, and, the deceased together when

rather does remain unshattered. Thus, also the above minimal

improvement made by PW-13 in his examination-in-chief, over his

previously recorded statement in writing, obviously does not have any

significance.

15. In consequence, through PW-13, the prosecution has been

able to prove that a week prior to the occurrence, both the accused, and,

the deceased were seen together in the vicinity of the site, wherefrom at

the instance of the accused, the body of the deceased was recovered.

INFERENCES   DRAWN    FROM                         THE        DISCLOSURE
STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED.

16. During the course of the convict suffering police custody,

he made a signatured disclosure statement to which Exhibit PC is

assigned. The contents of the disclosure statement are extracted

hereinafter.

".......That with which Chhurra he has murdered the deceased Gurjant Singh alias Bunty had kept concealed that Chhurra after cleaning it, he had warpped it in a polythene paper and thereafter kept it concealed under the grass in a water reservoir near the gate of street No. 5 and about which he has exclusive knowledge and can get the same recovered at his instance..."

17. A close reading of the above extracted signatured

disclosure statement, as made by the convict to the police officer

reveals that he had confessed his murdering the deceased with a

Chhurra, besides has echoed therein, that he is ready to ensure its

recovery from the place of his hiding it, as the relevant place of its

hiding was exclusively known to him. The above signatured disclosure

statement is not a bald simpliciter confession of crime by the convict to

7 of 17

the police officer who recorded it, as, it also resulted in the recovery of

Chhurra being made through recovery memo Exhibit PE. Thus, solemn

evidentiary worth is to be assigned to the signatured disclosure

statement of the convict to which Exhibit PC, is assigned. The reason

being that, he has neither ably denied the existence of his signatures

thereons, nor, has proven the apt denial. Moreover, since as stated

(supra), that Exhibit PC is not a bald confession, nor, obviously when

is not hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, especially

when stated (supra), it also led to the recovery of the Chhurra being

made at his instance, to the police officer, through recovery memo

Exhibit PE. Significantly, when the recovery of Chhurra was made

through recovery memo, to which Exhibit PE is assigned, besides when

the recovery of a Chhurra through memo Exhibit PE, has not been

proven to be a planted or an engineered recovery. Therefore, the

cumulative effect of the above discussion, is that, the valid recovery of

the crime weapon at the instance of the convict to the investigating

officer, obviously connects him in the commission of the charged

offence. Moreover, therethrough corroboration is also meted to the

theory of last seen, as becomes ably propagated by the prosecution

through PW-13.

RECOVERY OF BODY OF THE DECEASED THROUGH EXHIBIT PW-14/F AND EXHIBIT PP.

18. Further, vide memo Exhibit PW-14/F, the accused made a

signatured disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act,

contents whereof are extracted hereinafter.

" In the presence of below noted witnesses, disclosure statement was made by accused Kamaljit alias Jugnu during investigation, on 05.05.2011, Gurjant Singh alias Goldy alias Bunty son of Darshan Singh resident of Kalar Colony, Patiala was murdered by me in a room constructed 8 of 17

in a plot at Ablowal and dead body of said Gurjant Singh was buried by me by digging the earth on the vacant land in the same plot, about which I have the exclusive knowledge and can get the same recovered at my demarcation."

19. After the accused making the above signatured disclosure

statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, before the

police officer, with unfoldings thereins qua the declarant having the

exclusive knowledge of the relevant place where he had buried the dead

body of the deceased. Resultantly, the investigating officer concerned,

made a request letter to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Patiala, to which

Exhibit PW 14/G is assigned, for the granting permission to exhume the

dead body of the deceased. In consequence, the Sub Divisional

Magistrate, Patiala, deputed Gurinder Singh Walia, Naib Tehsildar to

visit the site for the relevant purpose. The dead body of the deceased

was exhumed in the presence of Gurinder Singh Walia, Naib Tehsildar,

Patiala, and, was taken into possession vide recovery memo Exhibit PP.

The above validly drawn memo(s), do also firmly connect the accused

in the commission of the charged offence. Strengthened vigor to the

above inference becomes galvanised from the factum that neither the

convict has ably denied his signatures, as occur in Exhibit PW-14/F,

nor has ably proven the said denials besides when he has not proven

that the discovery of the relevant fact rather was engineered or planted.

Resultantly, the discovered fact (supra) is to be concluded to connect

him with the crime event.

INFERENCES DRAWN FROM THE MEMO OF RECOVERY OF THE BODY OF THE DECEASED.

20. The accused, as revealed by PW-14/C, was arrested on

12.05.2011. Further, as revealed by memo Exhibit PP, as became drawn

on 12.05.2011, contents whereof are extracted hereinafter, he led the 9 of 17

police officer to site where he had buried the body of the deceased

Gurjant Singh @ Goldy. Subsequently, from the apposite burial site, as

identified by the accused, the body of deceased Gurjant Singh @ Goldy

was exhumed from the relevant burial place. The above was done in the

presence of Gurinder Singh Walia, Naib Tehsildar, Patiala. The very

factum of the body of the deceased being buried, is but obviously

reflective of the burial site being exclusively known to the convict.

Therefore, if he led the police officer to the burial site, whereafter he

caused its exhumation, does spark an inference, that he had after

committing the murder of deceased had taken it to bury it, at the place

from where it became exhumed. Thus, the discovered fact (supra),

became caused at the instance of the accused. Since Exhibit PP is a

signatured document by the Naib Tehsildar, Patiala, and, who while

stepping into the witness box as PW-16, has proven the contents of

Exhibit PP. Thus, the discovery/exhumation of the body of the deceased

from the site where it was buried, and, which was but for reason

(supra), hence exclusively within the knowledge of the convict, results

in an inference, that the above discovered fact, at the instance of the

convict also corroborating the above memo(s), besides lending

corroboration to the deposition of PW-13.

" .... In the presence of below noted witnesses, accused Kamaljit alia Jugnu above said while in police custody, in accordance with his disclosure statement, led the police party to Gurdeep Colony Street No. 5 Ablowal Patiala, in the presence of Shri Gurinder Singh Naib Tehsildar, and pointed out the place lying vacant in front of the constructed room where dead body of deceased Gurjant Singh alias Goldy was concealed by him after his murder and at the instance of accused, land was dug out and dead body was excavated, and incised wound on both of the side of neck and on the chest, committed with sharp edge weapon was found. Dead body was taken into police possession vide memo as a piece of evidence."

10 of 17

NO RELEVANCE OF EITHER NO ATTRIBUTION OF MOTIVE OR PROOF THEREOF

21. Though, it is vehemently argued before this Court by the

learned counsel for the convict, that since the motive for the crime, has

neither emerged, nor, has been proven thus, the above links in the chain

of circumstantial evidence do not also acquire any evidentiary worth.

However, the above argument is extremely feeble, and, is rejected. The

reason becomes comprised in the factum, that the motive in a

prosecution case rested upon circumstantial evidence, though does

comprise a valid link in the chain of incriminatory circumstances, but it

may not become relevant, if the other incriminatory links, in the chain

of incriminatory circumstances rather are completely suggestive of the

incriminatory participation of the convict in the charged offence. Since

this Court for sustaining the challenged verdict of conviction, as made

upon the convict by the learned trial Judge, has rested the said

conclusion, upon, able proof emanating with respect to both the

accused, and, the deceased being last seen together, and that too in

almost immediate proximity to the body of the deceased being

recovered. Moreover, also when the drawings of memo (supra), is also

proven to be valid, besides their respective preparation(s) is taint free.

Thus, non attribution of motive if any, by the prosecution to the

convict, nor any non emanation of any proof in respect thereof, rather

does not leverage, the counsel for the convict, to argue that a verdict of

acquittal, be pronounced in respect of the charged offence.

MEDICAL EVIDENCE/POST MORTEM REPORT

22. The post-mortem report is comprised in Exhibit P1, and,

and is jointly authored by Dr. S.S.Oberoi, Additional Professor,

11 of 17

Department of Forensic Science, Government Medical College, Patiala,

and by Dr. D.S.Walia. Dr. S.S.Oberoi upon stepping into the witness

box, as PW-7 has proven his authoring the same, and, has also proven

the existence thereons of the signatures of the co-author one Dr.

D.S.Walia.

23. PW-7 in his examination-in-chief, has testified that on his

making an autopsy on the body of the deceased, Gurjant Singh @

Goldy, his observing thereons the hereinafter extracted appearances.

1. Incised wound size 3 x 1 cm, muscle deep, obliquely placed was present in uppermost part of the neck on front and was spindle shaped.

2. Incised wound size 2.5 x 1 cm spindle shaped, horizontally placed on the front of neck in its upper most part 0.2 cm to the left of injury no. (1). It was muscle deep.

3. Incised wound 3 x 1 cm spindle shaped and muscle deep was present on the left side of front of neck 0.4 cm lateral to injury No. 2.

4. Stab wound with sharp margins size 7 x 2.5 cm was present on left side of back of chest in its lower part starting from midline and going upwards and laterally. It was placed obliquely.

5. Stab wound with sharp margins size 4.5 x 1.5 cm was present on right side of back of chest in its lower part - 5.0 cm to the right of middle and was placed obliquely.

6. Stab wound with sharp margins size 6 x 3 cm was present below the right axilla was obliquely

they were found making corresponding cuts in the respective ribs and entering the chest cavity. On examination of lungs, cuts corresponding to the injuries described above were present with presence of about 200 ml of blood in each pleural cavity. Both the lungs were partially collapsed.

7. Incised wound, spindle shaped measuring 1'2 x 5 cm muscle deep was present on the flexoral surface of right upper arm.

24. He has also pronounced therein, that the cause of demise of

the deceased was hemorrhage, and, shock as a result of the above

extracted ante mortem injuries, which become testified by him to be

sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Furthermore, 12 of 17

he has also testified that the probable duration of time that elapsed

between the injuries and death was immediate, and, that the duration of

time between death, and, postmortem was about a week. Therefore,

with PW-13 last seeing the deceased, and, accused together on

05.05.2011, thus, the deposition of PW-7 speaking about the probable

duration of time inter-se death, and, postmortem being also a week,

does also suggest that PW-13, has spoken the truth about his last seeing

both the accused, and, the deceased together on 05.05.2011, a date

which is but obviously a week prior to an autopsy being made on the

body of the deceased. Resultantly, the deposition of PW-13 acquires

corroboration from the deposition of PW-7. Moreover, the above ante

mortem injuries are reflective of theirs' becoming caused through users'

of a sharp edged weapon, on the relevant portions of the body of the

deceased. Thus, when the relevant incriminatory weapon is a sharp

edged weapon, and, when valid recovery thereof became caused

through recovery memo Exhibit PE. Therefore, when the cause of

demise of the deceased as ascribed by PW-7, is to incised ante mortem

injuries and are but causable through a sharp edged weapon, hence also

relates the validly recovered sharp edged Chhurra, to its user on the

person of the deceased. In sequel, corroboration therethrough is

acquired by memo Exhibit PE wherethrough Chhurra became

recovered besides also corroboration is acquired by the theory of last

seen, as becomes ably propagated by PW-13.

FSL REPORT

25. Though the collected blood stain incriminatory items

besides the blood stained incriminatory weapon of offence, became

transmitted through Reference No.19755/C3 dated 03.06.2011, to the

13 of 17

FSL concerned. However, as revealed by the report of FSL to which

Exhibit PX is assigned, rather on their respective examinations, resulted

in the hereinafter extracted opinion.

"FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY PUNJAB SAS NAGAR

Report No. 432/2011/FSL/Pb/Bio/Exam, dated 09.06.2011

Case Reference FIR No. 100, dated 12/5/2011, U/S 302 IPC, P.S., Civil Lines, Patiala.

Parcel 'A' contained- Chhurra alleged to be stained with blood. Parcel 'B' contained- Soil alleged to be stained with blood. Parcel 'C' contained- The following exhibits alleged to be stained with blood:-

i) T-Shirt marked C-1 in the laboratory.

ii) Pant marked C-2 in the laboratory.

iii) Underwear marked C-3 in the laboratory.

RESULT OF EXAMINATION

" The exhibits contained in the parcels A, B and C are stained with human blood."

26. Though, in the wake of the prosecution cogently

establishing, the charge drawn against the convict, through the stepping

into the witness box of a credible witness PW-13, who had evidently

last seen the convict and deceased together immediately before the

occurrence or in the almost immediate proximity to the occurrence.

Moreover, also though the prosecution has been able to prove the

charge through validly drawn memos (supra), besides from the medical

evidence (supra). However, the result of the examinations, as made on

the blood stained items sent to the FSL concerned, may have also lent

further fortifying corroboration to the evidence (supra), as became

adduced by the prosecution. However, the above extracted results, as

made upon the blood stained items as sent to the Serologist concerned,

rather are inapt for establishing that the blood stains carried on the

14 of 17

relevant items hence belonging to the blood group of the deceased

concerned. Thus, there is no conclusivity of opinion by the Serologist

about the human blood carried on the relevant items belonging to the

blood group of the deceased concerned. The above inconclusivity of

opinion may have been overcome only if the investigating officer

concerned, had been more apt through his ensuring the collection, of

the relevant FTM cards, from the family members of the deceased

concerned, so that they could have been sent along with the relevant

blood stained items, to the Serologist concerned, for his making the

ablest best apposite comparisons thereof. It is only in the wake of the

above ineptitude of investigations that the above event occurs, that too

despite the above investigational infirmity becoming earlier also

highlighted by this Court.

27. Be that as it may, it is also apparent on a reading of the

reports of the FSLs concerned that in some cases, some of the items as

sent to the FSL, for there respective examinations there, they become

opined to be not amenable for any able analysis thereons, nor an able

opinion is thus made, rather only for the reason that the relevant

items/materials becoming disintegrated or deteriorated. The above is a

result of either delays in the despatches of the relevant sample cloth

parcels to the FSL concerned, or is a result of tardiness of examinations

being made upon them at the FSLs concerned.

28. The FSLs provides the best forensic evidence to the Courts

of law. Therefore, if there is any delay on the part of the laboratories

concerned, to make an analyses on the items sent there for

examinations, it is for the Director(s) of the FSLs concerned, to assign

responsibility to the Serologist concerned or to the other experts

15 of 17

concerned.

29. For ensuring that the investigating officers concerned

hereafter, do not omit to collect the relevant FTM cards from the family

members of the deceased or of the injured concerned, besides they do

not omit to forthwith send the said FTM cards hence along with the

blood stained relevant recoveries, to the FSLs concerned. Thus, it is

deemed fit to direct the Director General of Police, Punjab to draw

batch wise training sessions for the investigating officers in the State of

Punjab. The trainings be imparted, in the above regard, and, also with

regard to all the relevant despatches being made promptly to the FSLs

concerned. Consequently, the Registry of this Court is directed to

forthwith circulate a copy of this verdict to the Director General of

Police, Punjab. Compliance qua the above directions be ensured to be

communicated to the Registry of this Court, on a bimonthly basis by the

Director General of Police, Punjab.

30. In addition, all the Directors of the FSLs Punjab, are also

directed to ensure that there is the promptest examinations made on the

materials despatched to the FSLs concerned, by the Experts working

there, so that never hereafter any report is made that there is any

disintegration or deterioration of the materials/items sent to the FSL. A

copy of this verdict be also sent to them.

CONCLUSION

31. In aftermath, no conclusion other than the one, as became

drawn earlier by the learned convicting Court, rather is to be also drawn

by this Court.

32. The result of the above discussion, is that, this Court does

not find any merit in the appeal, and, is constrained to dismiss it.

16 of 17

FINAL ORDER BY THIS COURT

33. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned

verdict of conviction, and, the consequent therewith sentence(s)

(supra), as become imposed upon the convict-appellant, by the learned

convicting Court, are affirmed and maintained.

34. The case property, if any, be dealt with in accordance with

law, but after the expiry of period of limitation for the filing of an

appeal. The records be forthwith sent down.

(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE

(N.S. SHEKHAWAT) JUDGE 19.09.2022 kavneet singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

17 of 17