Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. Date of Decision : 14.7.2009. Ombir alias Goli ...... Appellant Versus State of Haryana ......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GAREWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. R.S. Cheema, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. H.S. Sran, Addl. AG Haryana. for the respondent-State. NAWAB SINGH J. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated September 14th, 1998 passed by Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby, accused-appellant was convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. 2. The prosecution story is:- On May 10th, 1997 at about 11.30 AM, Om Parkash (PW-5), Sudesh (PW-6) husband and daughter respectively of Anaro (deceased) were present at their house situated in Sanjay Colony, Faridabad. Ombir alias Goli- accused-appellant armed with Sabbal (iron rod) (Exhibit P-1) entered the house of Om Parkash and made a grievance to him that his (Om Parkash's) wife had asked some persons to shadow him. In the meantime, deceased came from the bath-room. The accused took out chili powder from his pocket and threw it into the eyes of the deceased. The deceased sat down there and then. The accused Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 2 gave Sabbal blow on the head of the deceased. Om Parkash and Sudesh tried to intervene but the accused gave another Sabbal blow on the right temple of the deceased and thereafter a number of more blows were given on the person of the deceased. Both the witnesses could not succeed in rescuing the deceased. An alarm was raised. Many persons gathered on the spot. The accused was caught red handed at the spot with Sabbal in his hands and was locked inside a room by Om Parkash. Om Parkash left his daughter in the neighbourhood and proceeded to lodge the report to the Police. 3. The cause of occurrence was that deceased was a small time money lender. The accused was scrap vendor. Some amount was lent to the accused on interest by the deceased. Accused did not repay the amount. On which a few days prior to the occurrence, altercation had taken place between the deceased and the accused on two occasions but the matter was settled by Om Parkash. The accused threatened her with dire consequences. 4. On way to the Police Station, Om Parkash met Randhir Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station Mujessar (PW- 7) and made his statement (Exhibit PK). Randhir Singh appended his endorsement (Exhibit PK-1) on the statement and sent the same to Police Station Mujessar. First Information Report (Exhibit PK-2) was registered against the appellant. Randhir Singh reached the spot. The accused was arrested. The Sabbal and blood stained earth were taken into possession vide recovery memorandums (Exhibit PL and PM respectively). Rough site plan of the spot (Exhibit PN) and the inquest report (Exhibit PB/1) were prepared. 5. Post-mortem examination of the dead body was conducted at 4.15 PM by Dr. Sudhir Khurana (PW-1). 6. On completion of investigation and other formalities, the accused was arraigned for trial. 7. Charge, in respect of commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 IPC was framed against the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 8. In support of its case, prosecution examined seven Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 3 witnesses in all viz. Dr. Sudhir Khurana (PW-1), Sonu (PW-2), Nand Kishore (PW-3), Manoj Kumar Draftsman (PW-4), Om Parkash (PW- 5), Sudesh (PW-6) and Randhir Singh, Sub-Inspector (PW-7). 9. In his examination recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused denied the allegations and pleaded that he was implicated falsely. 10 The evidence on record, material circumstances of the case and the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State have been appraised. 11 Post Examination Report (Exhibit PA) on the dead body of Anaro was conducted by Dr. Sudhir Khurana (PW-1). He found the following injuries on her person:- 1. Lacerated injury 2-1/2 cm x 1 into bone fracture on the right side of face 2 cm anterior to right external antitory meatus, clotted blood was present. 2. Lacerated injury 3 cm X 1 cm into bone deep on the frontal region of scalp with clotted blood. Blood was present in left ear also. 3. Contusion 9 cm x 4cm on the epigastriac region and on lower part of chest in mid line. 4. Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on the anterior aspect of right knee. Clotted blood was present. 5 On dissection, the head, her right temporal, right rigometic and frontal bones were found fractured. On both sides sub arechnoid spaces contained blood. On dissecting the chest, her mediastinum bone was found fractured in its lower 1/3rd. Blood was present in mediastinum and both pleural spaces. In heart her ascending aorta was ruptured. Both chambers of heart contained very little blood. He opined that deceased died on account of injuries on vital part, that is, on the right side of face frontal region of Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 4 scalp. It was also opined by him that the injuries could be caused with Sabbal (Exhibit P-1). From the evidence of Medical Officer, it is proved that Anaro died on account of injuries received on her person with Sabbal (Exhibit P-1) which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 12. The eye witness account has been given by Om Parkash (PW-5) and Sudesh (PW-6). They have described the occurrence as narrated in paragraph No.2 of this judgment. To avoid repetition, the same is not being reproduced here. Both of them have stated in one voice that accused caused injuries to the deceased with Sabbal. Their presence on the spot was natural as they are husband and daughter of the deceased. Both of them were cross- examined by learned defence counsel quite at length but nothing material could be elicited from their sworn testimony which could create doubt on their veracity. Learned counsel could not point out any discrepancy in their statements. The only submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant to disbelieve the prosecution case was that the occurrence did not take place at 11.30AM as stated by the eye witnesses because it has been opined by the Medical Officer that rigor mortis was present when he examined the dead body and at the time of inquest (Exhibit PB/1) it was mentioned by the Investigator in column No.11 that blood was clotted on the injuries sustained by the deceased. Per prosecution case, occurrence took place at 11.30 AM. Post mortem examination was conducted at 4.30 PM, that is, after 5 hours of the occurrence. Normally, rigor mortis commences after one to two hours after the death and the entire body gets stiffened within five to six hours but the definite time since death cannot be estimated with the aid of the time of commencement of rigor mortis. It depends on the nature of the injuries received on the person of the deceased, climatic and other factors. As per Medical Jurisprudence & Texicology 22 nd Edition of Modi, the time when rigor mortis sets in varies greatly in different cases, but the average period of its onset may be regarded as three to six hours after death in temperate climates and it may take two to Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 5 three hours to develop. In India, it usually commences after one to two hours after death. Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Ram Pal 1999(1) RCR (Criminal) 810, observed that a reading of the extract from the text book of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology would make it clear that rigor mortis may set in between one to two hours and would spread over within 12 hours. One cannot be definite as to the time when rigor mortis set in and particularly, in summer the deterioration of the body would be much faster and hence one cannot rule out the possibility of rigor mortis setting in less than 12 hours and therefore, medical evidence cannot be stated to be inconsistent with the evidence tendered by the eye witnesses. The occurrence in this case took place on May 10th, 1997, that is, the peak of the summer season. In view of this, there is no force in the submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellant. 13. Next circumstance which was highlighted by learned counsel for the appellant is that during inquest, it was found that blood was clotted on the injuries received on the person of the deceased which suggests that the occurrence did not take place at 11.30 AM. The inquest was prepared after about three hours of the occurrence. In Modi's Jurisprudence (supra), it has been mentioned that it is impossible to give the exact time at which the blood begins to coagulate after death. This being so, the point raised is of no consequence and it cannot be held that occurrence did not take place at 11.30 AM. 14. Another clinching piece of evidence in this case is that the accused was caught red handed at the spot with a Sabbal in his hands and was locked inside a room by Om Parkash. The Sabbal was blood stained. The Sabbal, Petticot and Blouse worn by the deceased were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal for analysis. The FSL vide its report (Exhibit PH and PH/1) opined that the Sabbal contained human blood of group 'O' and similarly, Petticot and Blouse of the deceased contained human blood of group 'O'. It shows that the Sabbal which was recovered at the spot at the time of arrest of the accused was used Crl. Appeal No. 527-DB of 1998. 6 by him for committing the murder of Anaro. Not only that, the Medical Officer has also opined that the injuries on the person of Anaro could be caused with the Sabbal (Exhibit P-1). 15. One cannot lose sight of the fact that the accused was arrested by the Investigator from the room where he was locked and during his arrest, chili powder was found in the pocket of his pant as stated by the Investigator which further proves the story of the prosecution to the hilt. 16. For the reasons aforesaid, the veracity of Om Parkash (PW-5) and Sudesh (PW-6) could not be doubted. The account given by the witnesses is thoroughly consistent and convincing. The medical evidence also supports the story propounded by the witnesses. The arrest of the accused on the spot, the Sabbal used in committing the murder of deceased having the same blood group which the deceased had, proves that the accused used Sabbal for causing the murder of deceased. All these factors establish the complicity of the accused in committing the murder of the deceased. 17. Learned trial Judge has correctly appreciated the evidence and delivered an elaborate and well reasoned judgment discussing all the aspects of the matter and arrived at a just and legal conclusion in convicting the accused-appellant. 18. As the inevitable result, the appeal is dismissed. 19. Ombir alias Goli accused-appellant was released on bail by this Court during the pendency of the appeal. His bail/surety bonds are cancelled. He be arrested and sent to jail to undergo the remaining part of sentence. Learned trial Judge is directed to comply with this order forthwith under intimation to this Court. (NAWAB SINGH) (K.S. GAREWAL) JUDGE JUDGE 14.7.2009. SN