http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: RAI SINGH

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       23/08/1996

BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) KURDUKAR S.P. (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCALE  (6)119

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T M.K. MUKHERJEE,      Rai Singh,  the appellant  before us,  stands convicted and sentenced  under Section  302 IPC  and Section 25 of the Arms Act,  1959 read  with Section  6 of  the Terrorist  and Disruptive Activities  (Prevention) Act, 1985 for committing the murder  of Smt.  Parkashi, wife  of Attar  Singh, with a country made pistol. 2(a) According to the prosecution case in the early hours of January 30,  1987 when  Smt. Parkashi  was sleeping  in  her house in  village Chhajpur under Panipat Police Station with her two  children -  her husband being away to Panipat where he worked as a Chowkidar in a factory - she heard a knock on the door. After lighting an earthen lamp when she opened the door she  found the appellant standing outside. He asked her as to  her husband  s whereabout and gave out that he wanted to take  revenge as  he  (her  husband)  had  assaulted  him afortnight ago.  When she  replied that  he had gone Panipat the appellant  told Smt. Parkashi to accompany him. When she refused he started dragging her out In course of the scuffle that ensued, the appellant brought out a pistol and fired at Smt. Parkashi, as a result  of which she fell down dead. The appellant then ran away with the postol.Attar Singh was then sent for and after his arrival their son Mohan Singh (P.W.3) went to the police station and lodged a report. (b) S.I.  Mehar Singh  (P.W.7) took  up investigation of the case and went to the spot along with other police officials. He held inquest upon the dead body of Smt. Parkashi and sent it for  post mortem  examination. He  then prepared  a rough site plan  and seized  some blood soaked earth from the spot which he Packeted and sealed. (c) During  investigation the  appellant  was  arrestee  and pursuant to  his Statement  that he had concealed the Pistol and a  live cartridge  under a tree near Sanauli barrier the same were  recovered. The  pistol and  the Pellets which had earlier been  recovered from inside the body of the deceased

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

by P.W. 1 at the time of autopsy, were sent to the Directors Forensic  Science   Laboratory  (FSL)   Madhuban  for  their examination. In their reports FSL opined that the pistol was in working  order and the pellets recovered from the body of the deceased could be parts of the empty cartridge case that was found embedded in the barrel of the pistol. On receipt of those reports and completion of investigation the Investigating  Officer  submitted  chargesheet  against  the appellant. (d) As  regards the  motive for the murder it was alleged by the  prosecution   that  the   deceased  and  the  appellant originally hailed  from two  neighbouring  villages  in  the State of  Uttar Pradesh  and that  they were  close to  each other. After  her marriage  to Attar Singh the deceased came to  reside   with  him  at  Chhajpur.  The  appellant  still continued to  visit her  and an  illicit  relationship  grew between them.  A fortnight  before her  murder the appellant had again  come to  meet her when her husband turned him out after assaulting him with a lathi. 3. Though  the appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge of murder  levelled  against  him,  he  admitted  that  he  had developed illicit  intimacy with  Parkashi and  that about a fortnight prior  to the  incident Attar Singh had found them in a compromising position. He also admitted his presence in the house  of the-  deceased on the fateful night. According to him,  he was  called by the deceased herself and when her husband returned early in the morning he (her husband) tried to kill  him but somehow he made good his escape. He did not know what happened thereafter. 4.   That Smt.  Parkashi met  with hor  death on being fired from a  pistol stands conclusively proved by the evidence of Dr. Gupta  (P.W. 1) who held the post mortem examination and found a  lacerated  wound  over  the  sternum  and  multiple metallic pieces embedded inside, which he extracted. He also found multiple  lacerated wounds  over the posterior wall of the pericardium.  He opined  that the  injuries found by him were sufficient  to cause  death in  the ordinary  course of nature and that those injuries were caused by firearm. 0 5.  To  prove  that  the  appellant  was  the  culprit,  the prosecution relied  upon the eye witnesses’ account given by Mohkar Singh  (P.W.3), son and Usha (P.W.4), daughter of the deceased and  the evidence  adduced in proof of the recovery of the  pistol along  with an empty cartrige pursuant to the statement mag by the appellant. 6. Having  gone through  the entire evidence on record we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Since the murder took place inside the house of the deceased and that  to at  an unearthly  hour, the son and daughter of the deceased  were the  most natural and probable witnesses. Besides,  we   find  that   in  spite  of  Searching  cross- examination, the  defence could  not discredit  them. On the contrary, we  find, their evidence stands amply corroborated by the fact that the body of their mother was found in their house with  firearm injuries,  which According to the report of the FSL could be caused by the pistol which the appellant kept  concealed   beneath  R   tree,  a  fact  which  stands established by the evidence of the Investigating Officer and the witnesses to the recovery. 7.   We, therefore,  find no  merit in  this appeal.  It  is accordingly dismissed.