Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajiv vs State U.T. Chandigarh on 13 November, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M)
Date of Decision:-13.11.2024
Rajiv.
......Appellant.
Vs.
State of U.T., Chandigarh.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. A.P. Kaushal, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Anil Kumar Lamdharia, Additional PP U.T., Chandigarh.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The present appeal has been filed against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence both dated 02.03.2010 passed by the
Sessions Judge, Chandigarh.
2. As per record, the FIR came to be registered on 14.05.2007.
The judgement of conviction was recorded on 02.03.2010. The appeal was
filed in 2010. This case has come up for hearing today after nearly 17 years
of the registration of the FIR.
3. The Counsel for the respondent-U.T., Chandigarh at the very
outset pointed out that the appellant was granted interim bail pending his
application seeking premature release vide order dated 08.08.2024.
Thereafter his prayer for premature release was rejected vide order dated
1 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #2#
21.08.2024. However, the appellant has till date not surrendered to serve out
his remaining sentence. Be that as it may, the appeal against his conviction
is being taken up for final hearing today.
4. The facts, in brief, are that on 14.05.2007 Inspector Ishwar
Singh of Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh, reached village Kajheri,
U.T., Chandigarh, on receipt of information regarding the murder where
Gurdeep Singh met him and made a statement (Ex. PM).
5. Gurdeep Singh stated that he was a resident of Village Attawa
and ran a milk dairy in Village Maloya. The son of the sister of his father,
named, Sucha Singh resided with his wife in Village Kajheri and had kept
buffaloes and sold milk. His children resided abroad. He had employed
Rajiv, Chhotu @ Sant Ram and one rickshaw puller Soni. He received
information on the morning of 14.05.2007 that no response was received
from the house of Sucha Singh. He reached there and found the dead bodies
of Sucha Singh and Chhotu in a room and of Balbir Kaur on the first floor.
The household articles were lying scattered. Cash was also missing. He
further stated that Rajiv had an altercation with Sucha Singh for settling the
accounts.
6. Inspector Ishwar Singh made his endorsement Ex.PM/1 and
sent the statement to the Police Station and a case was registered vide FIR
Ex.PM/2. He prepared the rough site plan Ex.PS. The mattresses, towel,
'khes' and a shirt stained with blood lying near the dead body of Sant Ram @
Chhotu were reduced into a parcel. Blood was removed from the face of
Sant Ram with cotton and was reduced into a parcel. Two blood stained
bricks, parna and tangli stained with blood were lying in a room, which were
reduced into a separate parcel. Blood was also lifted from near the dead
bodies of Sucha Singh and Balbir Kaur which was reduced into a separate
2 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #3#
parcel. All the articles were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PN.
7. Inspector Ishwar Singh also prepared inquest report Ex.PL of
Sucha Singh, Ex.PC of Sant Ram, and Ex.PH of Balbir Kaur and sent the
dead bodies for post mortem examination.
8. During investigation, statements of Gurdeep Singh, Balwinder
Singh and Anant Singh were recorded.
9. Balwinder Singh stated that he saw accused Rajiv along with
Santosh @ Soni and Amit @ Kunkun entering the house of Sucha Singh at
about 11.00 p.m on 13.05.2007.
10. Anant Singh made a statement that he saw the said persons
coming out of the house of Sucha Singh on 14.05.2007 at 3.15 a.m.
11. ASI Ghansham Dass arrested accused Rajiv on 06.08.2007 from
Railway Station Bhagalpur (Bihar) and recovered a gold ring bearing
inscription 'SS' and the same was identified by Balwinder Singh to be of
Sucha Singh before H.R.Nagra, Executive Magistrate.
12. Accused Rajiv was again taken to Bhagalpur on 11.08.2007 and
on the next day, his house was searched which led to the recovery of a lease
deed and a shirt. The shirt was found to be of Sucha Singh by Joginder
Singh-PW.
13. On completion of the investigation, accused Rajiv was
challaned whereas his co-accused Santosh @ Soni and Amit @ Kunkun
were declared proclaimed offenders. Pursuant thereto charges came to be
framed against the appellant under Section 459, 394 read with Section 397
IPC; 302 read with Section 34 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
14. In support of its case, the prosecution examined the following
witnesses: -
PW.1 Dr. Naresh Sharma;
3 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #4#
PW.2 Mrs. Tithi Dey;
PW.3 Dr. Deepak Sharma;
PW.4 Gurdeep Singh;
PW.5 Balwinder Singh;
PW.6 Anant Singh;
PW.7 Joginder Singh;
PW.8 Constable Ajay Kumar;
PW.9 Constable Rajesh Kumar;
PW.10 Head Constable Jaspal Singh;
PW.11 Constable Yash Pal;
PW.12 H.R. Nagra, Executive Magistrate;
PW.13 Sub Inspector Baldev Kumar;
PW.14 Sub Inspector Ghansham;
PW.15 Inspector Bhupinder Singh;
PW.16 Head Constable Brij Raj Singh; &
PW.17 Inspector Ishwar Singh.
13. The brief testimony of the relevant PWs is as under:-
Gurdeep Singh (PW.4) is the person on whose statement the
case was registered. He reiterated the prosecution case and the broad
features of his testimony, have already been stated above. He further stated
that gold ornaments and a gold chain which Balbir Kaur was wearing and
two gold rings of Sucha Singh having inscription 'SS', 19 dollars and a sum
of Rs. 1,37,000/- were found stolen.
Dr. Naresh Sharma (PW.1) conducted the post mortem
examination of Sant Ram and opined that the deceased had suffered multiple
injuries and the cause of death was asphyxia due to ligature strangulation.
4 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #5#
Dr. Deepak Sharma, (PW-3) conducted the post mortem
examination of Balbir Kaur and opined that the cause of death was asphyxia
due to ligature strangulation. As regards deceased Sucha Singh he opined
that the cause of death was strangulation.
Balwinder Singh (PW-5) stated that Sucha Singh was his
maternal uncle and used to run a milk diary. He had kept Sant Ram @
Chhotu and Rajiv accused present in the Court as his servants. Soni
rickshaw puller also used to work with him. He went to the house of Sucha
Singh on the evening of 13.05.2007 for the check up of the blood pressure of
his wife. Sucha Singh told him that accused Rajiv asked to make him free
and was annoyed. On the same day at about 11.00 p.m. he was strolling in
the street and saw accused Rajiv present in the Court along with Santosh @
Soni and Amit kunkun entering the house of Sucha Singh and on the next
morning, he came to know about the murder of Sucha Singh, Balbir Kaur
and Chhotu.
He further stated that Sucha Singh used to wear gold rings. He
was summoned to the office of Executive Magistrate on 18.10.2007 and he
identified the gold ring (Ex.P15) having inscription 'SS' belonging to Sucha
Singh out of 5 rings lying on the table.
Anant Singh (PW.6) stated that he was the Sarpanch of Village
Kajheri and knew Sucha Singh. On 14.05.2007 he went to his outer house to
ease himself and when reached the house of Sucha Singh at about 3.15 a.m.,
he saw accused Rajiv along with Santosh and Amit coming out of the house
of Sucha Singh.
H.R. Nagra (PW.12) was posted as Tehsildar and stated that an
application (Ex.PP) was marked to him by the S.D.M. He asked ASI
Ghansham to bring Balwinder Singh. He opened the parcel and arranged
5 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #6#
similar gold rings. ASI Ghansham returned to his office along with
Balwinder Singh and Balwinder Singh identified the ring (Ex. P15)
belonging to Sucha Singh deceased.
He prepared the report Ex.PP/1. He further stated that on
29.10.2007 Sub Inspector Baldev Kumar came to his office along with
sealed parcel containing a shirt. He asked St Baldev Kumar to come at 3.30
p.m. along with Joginder Singh He arranged similar shirts and one of the
shirts was identified by Joginder Singh to be of Sucha Singh. He prepared
the report Ex.PP/2.
Sub Inspector Ghansham (PW.14) stated that on 04.08.2007 he
went to Bhagalpur (Bihar) along with other police officials where he reached
on 06.08.2007. He conducted the search of accused Rajiv who was arrested
from Railway Station Bhagalpur. From his search Rs.120/- and gold ring
bearing inscription 'SS' were recovered. A parcel of the ring was prepared
and taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PQ.
He again accompanied Inspector Bhupinder Singh to Bhagalpur
(Bihar) where the house of accused in Village Marwaha, District Bhagalpur
was searched on 12.08.2007 and therefrom a lease deed (Ex.P53) and a shirt
(Ex.P16) were recovered which were reduced into parcel and taken into
police possession vide memo Ex.PR. He also got conducted the
identification of the ring from H.R.Nagra, Executive Magistrate by moving
an application Ex.PP.
Head Constable Brij Raj Singh (PW.16) stated that he went to
Bhagalpur (Bihar) on 04.08.2007 where the accused was arrested from
Railway Station Bhagalpur on 06.08.2007 and from his search a gold ring
was recovered and the recovery memo Ex.PQ was attested by him.
Inspector Bhupinder Singh (PW-15) stated that he went to
6 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #7#
Bhagalpur (Bihar) on 11.08.2007 and on the next day they went to Village
Marwaha where Baldev Singh met them and was joined in the investigation.
The house of accused was searched from where a shirt and lease deed were
recovered.
14. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the
accused as required under Section 313 Cr.PC was recorded and the
circumstances appearing in evidence against him were put to him. He
controverted the allegations and pleaded that a false case was planted upon
him. He was working at his village on the day of incident.
15. The accused was called upon to enter upon his defence and he
examined Amar Chaudhary (DW-1) who stated that he along with Rajiv and
others was taking meal at about 8.00 pm when police came and arrested
accused Rajiv. Nothing was recovered from the house of the accused.
Accused Rajiv used to work with the head of the village.
16. Based on the evidence led as described above the accused was
convicted by the court of Sessions Judge, Chandigarh vide judgment dated
02.03.2010.
17. It is the aforementioned judgment which is under challenge in
this appeal.
18. The Counsel for the appellant contends that the case is based on
circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has not proved its case beyond
reasonable doubt. PW-4 & PW-5 have been erroneously believed despite
the fact that they were interested prosecution witnesses being relatives of the
deceased Sucha Singh. They had substantially improved their statements
while deposing in the Court. The recoveries of gold ring, lease deed and
Shirt had been planted upon the appellant. Material prosecution witnesses
including one Baldev Singh a witness of the recovery of a ring had not been
7 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #8#
examined. He, therefore, contends that the judgment of conviction was
liable to be set aside and the appellant ought to be acquitted of the charges
framed against him.
19. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand contends
that the case is of a triple murder. The prosecution witnesses were consistent
in their testimonies. They could not be disbelieved only on the basis of
minor inconsistencies in their statements or because some of them were
related to the deceased. The defence could not shatter their versions during
the course of their cross examination. The recovery of gold ring, lease deed
and shirt stood established on the basis of the evidence led. He, therefore,
contends that the present appeal was liable to be dismissed.
20. We have heard the counsels for the parties and gone through the
record.
21. There is no eye-witness in the present case and the prosecution
case rests upon the following circumstantial evidence:-
i) Accused Rajiv along with others was seen entering
into the house of Sucha Singh on 13.07.2007 at
about 11.00 p.m.
ii) He was again seen coming out of the house on the
next early morning at 3.15 a.m.
iii) A gold ring, shirt and lease deed belonging to Sucha
Singh were recovered from his possession.
22. It is settled law that when the prosecution case rests upon
circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the following tests:-
(1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is
sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly
established;
(2) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency
unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused;
8 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #9#
(3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively should form a
chain so complete that there is no escape from the
conclusion that within all human probability the
crime was committed by the accused and none else;
and
(4) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain
conviction must be complete and incapable of
explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the
guilt of the accused and such evidence should not
only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but
should be inconsistent with his innocence.
23. Gurdeep Singh (PW.4) stated that accused Rajiv along with
others was working as a servant with Sucha Singh who told him that accused
Rajiv asked him to make him free.
24. Balwinder Singh (PW.5) and Anant Singh (PW.6) also deposed
that accused Rajiv was working with Sucha Singh. There is no ground to
dis-believe their statements and to hold that accused Rajiv was not working
with Sucha Singh deceased on 13/14.05.2007 when the incident took place.
25. Accused has taken a definite stand that he was not present in
Village Kajheri where the occurrence took place and he was working in his
village at Marwaha, District Bhagalpur (Bihar) and also examined Amar
Chaudhary (DW.1) who stated that the accused was working with the Head
of the village when he was arrested by the police. But he did not disclose the
name of the person who was the Head of the village. He did not agitate the
matter anywhere except appearing in the witness box that the accused was
taken by the police from the village. The type of evidence he has given is not
hard to procure and he cannot be relied upon. To the contrary reliance is to
be placed on prosecution witnesses to hold that accused Rajiv was actually
working with Sucha Singh and was present in Village Kajheri when the
incident took place.
26. Balwinder Singh (PW.5) stated that he went to the house of
Sucha Singh in the evening of 13.05.2007 where Sucha Singh told him that
9 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #10#
accused Rajiv was annoyed. On the same day at about 11.00 p.m when he
was strolling in the street, he saw accused Rajiv along with Santosh and
Amit entering the house of Sucha Singh. His house was at a distance of 200
feet from the house of Sucha Singh and therefore, his presence near the
house of Sucha Singh is probable. He was cross-examined at length but his
version could not be shattered. Thus, it stood established that the accused
was seen entering the house of Sucha Singh on the night of 13.05.2007.
27. Anant Singh (PW.6) stated that he saw accused Rajiv along
with others coming out of the house of Sucha Singh on 14.05.2007 at about
3.15 am and his outer house was 100 meters from the house of Sucha Singh.
He further stated during cross-examination that he daily got up at about 3.30
a.m or 4.00 a.m. Therefore, his presence can not be doubted. He is not
related to Sucha Singh and has no reason to depose falsely.
28. The statements of Balwinder Singh (PW.5) and Anant Singh
(PW.6) are believable and clearly point out that accused Rajiv entered the
house of Sucha Singh on the night of 13.05.2007 and left along with others
early next morning at about 3.15 a.m., as stated above. The defence taken by
him that he was not present in the village is not believable. He did not give
any explanation as to why he had entered the house of Sucha Singh and why
he left the house in the early morning of 14.05.2007. Therefore, apparently
it was during this period that Sucha Singh, his wife Balbir Kaur and their
servant Sant Ram @ Chhotu were murdered. The statements of the
witnesses clearly establish the presence of the accused in the house at the
relevant time and his denial that he was not present in the house cannot be
accepted.
29. Inspector Bhupinder Singh (PW.15) proved the recovery of a
shirt (Ex.P16) and lease deed (Ex.P53) by stating that they had searched the
10 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #11#
house of the accused on 12.08.2007 and the said articles were found in a box
lying in a room, but it cannot be said that the said articles were in the
exclusive possession of the accused as the same were not recovered in
pursuance of the disclosure statement made by him and the house was not
exclusive owned by him. Therefore, the recovery of shirt (Ex.P16) and lease
deed (Ex.P53) do not inculpate the accused in the crime. Even otherwise
there was no need for the accused to retain a lease deed or short in his
possession after committing the offence.
30. However, there are clear statements of SI Ghansham (PW.14)
and HC Brij Raj Singh (PW.16) that the accused was arrested from the
Railway Station Bhagalpur on 06.08.2007 and from his search a gold ring
bearing inscription SS was recovered which was reduced into parcel and
taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PQ. This ring was identified to
be of Sucha Singh by Balwinder Singh (PW.5) before H.R.Nagra, Executive
Magistrate (PW.12).
31. The Recovery was effected by SI Ghansham (PW.14) in the
presence of HC Brij Raj Singh (PW.16) and Baldev Singh. The prosecution
examined two of the witnesses, namely, St Ghansham (PW.14) and HC Brij
Raj Singh (PW.16) and if Baldev Singh was given up as un-necessary, no
adverse inference is to be drawn against the prosecution.
32. A perusal of the cross-examination of St Ghansham (PW.14)
and HC Brij Raj Singh (PW. 16) does not show that they gave any
contradictory statements regarding the recovery. Quite to the contrary they
were unanimous that the gold ring was recovered from the accused which
was later on found to be of Sucha Singh as deposed to by Balwinder Singh
(PW.5).
33. The evidence on the file establishes that the accused along with
11 of 12
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:148432-DB
CRA-434-DB-2010(O&M) #12#
others entered the house of Sucha Singh on the night of 13.05.2007 and left
the same in the early hours next morning and the gold ring belonging to
Sucha Singh was recovered from his possession. The circumstances proved
on the file unerringly point that he participated in the commission of crime
whereby Sucha Singh. his wife Balbir Kaur and their servant Sant Ram were
murdered. The witnesses had stated that accused Rajiv had some altercation
with Sucha Singh but none of them were present when such thing had
happened. However, mere absence of a motive is of little consequence once
the offence otherwise stands established from the evidence on record.
34. The contention that the prosecution case rests upon the
testimonies of the relatives is also without any force as Gurdeep Singh
(PW.4) who is relative to Sucha Singh has simply lodged the report. Though
Balwinder Singh (PW.5) who saw the accused entering the house of Sucha
Singh and also identified gold ring to be of Sucha Singh is his nephew, but
no ground is made out to discard his statement simply on the ground that he
is related to the deceased.
35. In view of the aforementioned discussion, we find no merit in
the present appeal and the same stands dismissed.
36. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Sessions Court,
Chandigarh as well as to the office of SSP, Chandigarh for necessary
compliance regarding serving of sentence in terms of the judgment dated
02.03.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Chandigarh.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI ) ( SUDHIR SINGH )
JUDGE JUDGE
November 13, 2024
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
12 of 12
