SUNIL CLIFFORD DANIEL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(SC)-2012-9-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on September 14,2012

SUNIL CLIFFORD DANIEL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

SUBIR DUTTA VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2013-11-2] [REFERRED TO]
GAGANDEEP SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-1-164] [REFERRED TO]
CHARANJEET @ CHATRA @ LAMBA, S/O HARBHAJAN SINGH VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-10-113] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. PADAM @ PARMOD AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2019-3-55] [REFERRED TO]
TUCHI @ BUDHRAM @ MOHAN PANDO S/O LATE MARTU PANDO VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-11-123] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. RAJ KUMAR [LAWS(HPH)-2016-4-52] [REFERRED TO]
GOPESH VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2023-7-50] [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2014-7-234] [REFERRED TO]
MOHINDER SHARMA VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-2-237] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-21] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. SHAHID VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-4-158] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV KUMAR VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2013-5-223] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ KUMAR VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2014-9-246] [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
PARVEZ VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-1-258] [REFERRED TO]
KHUSHALI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-1-193] [REFERRED TO]
VEERPAL VS. STATE OF U.P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-215] [REFERRED TO]
MAHAVEER SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-9-371] [REFERRED]
MUNISH MUBAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-2012-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
NIDHI SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-12-213] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND VS. SATYESH KUMAR [LAWS(UTN)-2024-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. MOHIT AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-9-46] [REFERRED TO]
ROOP KUMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2025-3-5] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK KUMAR GANESH RAI MANTO VS. STATE AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2020-10-352] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN RAM VS. STATE OF THE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2014-2-305] [REFERRED TO]
CHETRAM SAINI VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2016-1-302] [REFERRED TO]
YUNUSH AND ORS. VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2016-1-213] [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR SINGH VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2014-9-150] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2015-1-2] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP SONAR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-9-168] [REFERRED TO]
IN REFERENCE RECEIVED FROM 3RD ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SINGROULI HEAD QUARTER WAIDHAN (M.P. VS. RAMJAG BIND [LAWS(MPH)-2022-12-175] [REFERRED TO]
KOMAL TIWARI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2022-4-61] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2024-9-3] [REFERRED TO]
CHAKRA PAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-247] [REFERRED TO]
NARESH CHANDRA SHARMA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-3-13] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV KUMAR, S/O BUDDHU @ BUDHRAM MAHAR VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH P S DONGARGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-5-63] [REFERRED TO]
SAVITRI BAI VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(CHH)-2015-2-28] [REFERRED TO]
TIKESH SAHU VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-11-86] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH VS. DOLALAL [LAWS(CHH)-2022-5-107] [REFERRED TO]
RANJEET @ BIHARI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2016-7-179] [REFERRED TO]
PREM SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-357] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN & OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2016-9-180] [REFERRED]
SANJAY KUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-345] [REFERRED TO]
SEEMA ALIAS PRABHA VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2019-5-223] [REFERRED TO]
GURVINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2013-12-148] [REFERRED TO]
PREM BHUWAN SINGH VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2017-10-210] [REFERRED TO]
MUNSHILAL VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-104] [REFERRED TO]
POOJA SHARMA VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2015-2-631] [REFERRED]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. HAKIM SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-4-43] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND VS. ROHIT CHAUDHARY [LAWS(UTN)-2021-2-47] [REFERRED TO]
INDER SINGH VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2014-5-18] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH S/O SH. GANESH RAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-10-3] [REFERRED TO]
MAHAVIR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2019-9-141] [REFERRED TO]
SHAILENDRA THAKUR VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2019-5-89] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK VISHWAKARMA @ SURJI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-7-154] [REFERRED TO]
NARESH @ KOKI VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2013-7-360] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2013-5-582] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH CHAND VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-7-70] [REFERRED TO]
BIRU VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2014-7-160] [REFERRED TO]
PRATHVIPAL JAGDISH PANDEY VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(GJH)-2013-7-164] [REFERRED TO]
RAFIK YUSUF SHERANI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-11-68] [REFERRED TO]
DHARMESHBHAI KIRTIKUMAR SHAH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2014-7-156] [REFERRED TO]
RASHPAL SINGH AND OTHERS VS. RIMPI AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2015-9-163] [REFERRED]
NAGESH VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-9-454] [REFERRED TO]
RISHIPAL VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(SC)-2013-1-68] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE FOR NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS. [LAWS(SC)-2017-5-43] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN KUMHAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-1-82] [REFERRED TO]
ROSHANLAL SON OF BHERULAL MALI, RESIDENT OF AARNI POLICE STATION RASHMI, DISTRICT CHHITTORGARH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
DEVENDRA VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2024-2-106] [REFERRED TO]
SURINDER KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2014-7-98] [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV RAJ VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2014-7-120] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2017-12-69] [REFERRED TO]
SURAI MURMU VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2015-7-72] [REFERRED TO]
ABRAR VS. STATE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2015-5-146] [REFERRED TO]
STATE THROUGH REFERENCE VS. RAM SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2014-3-175] [REFERRED TO]
ILYASUDDIN VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-1-398] [REFERRED TO]
WASIM PAHARI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-9-51] [REFERRED TO]
MD SHAKEEL VS. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-1-369] [REFERRED TO]
MITHLESH KUMAR KUSHWAHA VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2015-9-421] [REFERRED TO]
BABUBHAI @ ZAVERCHAND HARJIVAN SHETH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-4-65] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH RABHA VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(MEGH)-2016-11-18] [REFERRED TO]
RAM KUMAR BASNETT VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2016-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
MANISH CHAUDHARY VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2022-7-82] [REFERRED TO]
ANAND KUMAR ARYA VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2020-12-74] [REFERRED TO]
R. SHAJI VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(SC)-2013-2-4] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH DUBEY VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-2-164] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDRA KUMAR VERMA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-5-349] [REFERRED TO]
MD. RASHID VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-342] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. SURENDER @ SUNDER [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-369] [REFERRED TO]
VIKAS VS. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2016-12-61] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD & NANHE GUDDOO VS. STATE OF C.G. [LAWS(CHH)-2022-8-94] [REFERRED TO]
JAI VEER SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2013-7-233] [REFERRED TO]
DANIYEL MAHADUBHAI KAHADOLIYA KUKANA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2019-12-331] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL BARMAN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2022-6-71] [REFERRED TO]
DIVESH VAIDYA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-1-12] [REFERRED TO]
RAJIV SHARMA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2015-12-63] [REFERRED TO]
KEWAL KRISHAN AND ORS. VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2015-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
ASHUTOSH KAITHWAS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2022-11-108] [REFERRED TO]
BALVEER SINGH BUNDELA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2020-5-621] [REFERRED TO]
SOMNATH VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-23] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMAR PATEL AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-75] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMINARAYAN VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2017-6-42] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK @ NANHU KIRAR VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2020-2-8] [REFERRED TO]
NIZAM AND ORS. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(SC)-2015-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
PREM RAJ VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE BHADKE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2017-1-154] [REFERRED TO]
BAIJU KUMAR SONI VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(SC)-2019-8-10] [REFERRED TO]
LOCHAN SHRIVAS VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(SC)-2021-12-51] [REFERRED TO]
SADHU RAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-9-426] [REFERRED]
SANTOSH YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2022-7-107] [REFERRED TO]
NEERAJ VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2014-5-218] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH SUBBA VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2017-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDER AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2013-10-722] [REFERRED]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. JAISU @ BAIKUNTHA PUTEL AND ANR. [LAWS(ORI)-2016-6-57] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2015-12-80] [REFERRED TO]
M.H.FAISAL VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-5-8] [REFERRED TO]
HONYA ALIAS HONNAPPA ALIAS MOHAN SOMLYA RATHOD VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2016-7-36] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNBHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-137] [REFERRED TO]
SAHANA VS. STATE OF HIMCHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2016-4-100] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. KULDEEP SINGH & ANOTHER [LAWS(HPH)-2016-4-109] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. CHANDRABHAN SUDAM SANAP [LAWS(BOM)-2018-12-95] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P. (NOW C.G.) [LAWS(CHH)-2015-10-56] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U. P. VS. SAHAB SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2022-7-176] [REFERRED TO]
SUGALI DUNGAVATH LAKSHMA NAIK VS. STATE OF A.P. [LAWS(APH)-2019-6-18] [REFERRED TO]
AZIM KHAN VS. STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2016-5-217] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVEEN KHARI VS. THE STATE(GOVT OF NCT) DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-356] [REFERRED TO]
VISHAL YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(DLH)-2014-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
TENDERLYWELL HYNNIEWTA VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(MEGH)-2017-10-1] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-3-74] [REFERRED TO]
KISHAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-12-27] [REFERRED TO]
LALA @ RATAN LAL GODA @ KULDEEP @ GODA SINGH @ GODARAM S/O SHRI HEMRAJ @ PURAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-9-422] [REFERRED]
ROHTASH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-2013-5-71] [REFERRED TO]
PANKAJ THAKUR VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2014-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
PINTU KUMAR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2016-6-54] [REFERRED TO]
CHHABIRAM TOMAR VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-1-333] [REFERRED TO]
SAHIB @ AFZAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-42] [REFERRED TO]
GOPALAPPA @ HOOLYAPPA S/O LATE MEESE HONNURAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KUMSI POLICE STATION SHIMOGA [LAWS(KAR)-2018-5-40] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVNANDAN VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2023-7-130] [REFERRED TO]
UNPA VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-3-18] [REFERRED TO]
HARBANS LAL VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-3-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV OHLAN VS. STATE(NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2016-5-302] [REFERRED TO]
SALIG RAM AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-1-209] [REFERRED TO]
VAIBHAV JAIN AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-9-55] [REFERRED TO]
VAIBHAV JAIN VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
SANTANA ANTONIO EUGENIO PRESENTLY IN CENTRAL JAIL VS. STATE OF GOA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-12-68] [REFERRED TO: [2012 ALL SCR 2940]
SANTANA ANTONIO EUGENIO PRESENTLY IN CENTRAL JAIL VS. STATE OF GOA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-12-68] [REFERRED TO]
FIROZ AHMED @ GANDHI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2015-5-429] [REFERRED TO]
PINTOO BISWAS AND ORS. VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2015-12-222] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI @ SONU VS. STATE( NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2013-5-441] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 1.4.2009, passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 399-DB of 2000, by which it has affirmed the judgment and order dated 21.8.2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1996, convicting the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC'), and awarded him a sentence to undergo RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of this, to undergo further RI for a period of 3 months. The appellant has further been sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of this, to undergo further RI for a period of 2 months under Section 201 IPC. It has further been directed that the sentences would run concurrently.
(2.)The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under:
A. The appellant got married to Dr. Loyalla Shagoufta, deceased, on 29.10.1993. Both of them being qualified doctors, were working in the Christian Medical College (hereinafter referred to as 'CMC'), Hospital Ludhiana. The relationship between the husband and wife became strained and they have been living separately since June 1994.

B. As per the appellant, a petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed on 20.2.1996, under Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 in the Court of the District Judge, Ludhiana, and both parties therein, appeared before the District Judge, Ludhiana on the first motion of the case. However, they were asked to wait for the second motion.

C. On 9.3.1996, the appellant handed over a set of blood stained clothes to Dr. B. Pawar, the Medical Superintendent, (PW.1), stating that when he came to his room that day, the same were found therein. Dr. B. Pawar (PW.1), informed the police about the said incident on the same date.

D. Dr. Loyalla Shagoufta, wife of the appellant, had informed her mother Smt. Victoria Rani (PW.2), who was living in Jagadhari, District Yamunanagar, by way of a telephone call on 6.3.1996, that she would visit her on 8.3.1996. However, she did not reach Jagadhari on 8.3.1996. Victoria Rani (PW.2), then came to Ludhiana on 10.3.1996, and found that her daughter was missing. Smt. Victoria Rani (PW.2) then lodged FIR No. 16 of 1996 on 10.3.1996, at 9.40 p.m. wherein being the complainant, she expressed her apprehension that the appellant herein, had abducted her daughter with the intention of killing her.

E. In the meanwhile, Dr. Namrata Saran, one of the residents of the hostel in which the deceased resided, also informed Dr. B. Pawar (PW.1), Medical Superintendent that the deceased had in fact been missing from the hostel since 9.3.1996. After an enquiry it came to light that the deceased was on leave from 9.3.1996 to 16.3.1996.

F. Piara Singh, ASI (PW.13), took up the investigation of the case and went to the appellant's hostel, however, his room No.2010, was found to be locked. A police party searched for the appellant, among several other places, in the house of Mr. Rana, one of his relatives, but he could not be traced/found anywhere. Dr. B. Pawar (PW.1) handed over the blood stained clothes given to him by the appellant, to the I.O.

G. On 11.3.1996, Vir Rajinder Pal (PW.14), SHO, Police Station, Ludhiana received a wireless message at 9.00 a.m., from the Police Chowki at Lalton Kalan, which is about 20 k.m. away from the main city, informing him that the dead body of a female had been found, lying in the bushes, near the main road. The Investigating Officer took Victoria Rani (PW.2) with him, while accompanied by other police personnel, and recovered the body of the deceased from the said place.

H. Immediately after the recovery of the dead body, Vir Rajinder Pal (PW.14), visited the room of the appellant in the hostel and conducted a thorough search of the same, in the presence of Dr. B. Pawar (PW.1), Medical Superintendent.

I. The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted by a Medical Board consisting of three doctors, including Dr. U.S. Sooch (PW.11), on 11.3.1996. He opined that the deceased had died by way of strangulation and a corresponding ligature mark was found on her neck. She also had several grievous injuries to her head.

J. On 11.3.1996, the Investigating Officer came to know, in the course of interrogation that, the appellant had used the car of one Dr. Pauli (CW.2), and that a blood stained mat was lying in the dicky of the said car. The police hence took possession of the said car and mat, and sent the mat for preparation of an FSL report.

K. The appellant was arrested on 11.3.1996, and his room in the hostel was searched yet again, by one Ashok Kumar, Head Constable from the Forensic Department, who scraped some blood stained earth from the floor of the room. He also found a pair of blood stained white V-shaped, Hawaii chappals. Photographs of the said room were also taken. During interrogation, the appellant made a disclosure statement on 13.3.1996 to the effect that he would be able to help in the recovery of some relevant material from a place where he had hidden it. The appellant then led the police party to a place behind Old Jail, Ludhiana. From there, after removing some garbage etc., one blood stained gunny bag, a blood stained dumb-bell and one blood stained tie, were recovered.

L. The said recovered articles alongwith the clothes etc., found on the body of the deceased at the time of the post-mortem, and the blood stained clothes given by the appellant to Dr. B. Pawar (PW.1), which were subsequently handed over to the Investigating Officer, were sent for FSL report.

M. The FSL and serological report was then received, and it revealed that, all the articles recovered by the police during investigation, including the blood stained floor of his room, a part of the Hawaii chappals, and the recovered tie, contained human blood, with the sole exception of the mats found in the dicky of the car. The blood stains herein, had dis-integrated and it was therefore not possible to ascertain whether the same also contained human blood.

N. The police completed the investigation of the case and submitted a charge sheet against the appellant. The case was converted from one under Section 364, to one under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. The appellant was thus charged, but as he pleaded not guilty, he claimed trial. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and two court witnesses were also examined under Section 311 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter called as 'Cr.P.C.').

O. After the conclusion of the trial and appreciation of the evidence in full, the learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment and order dated 21.8.2000 found the appellant guilty on both counts and hence awarded him the aforementioned punishments.

P. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No.399-DB of 2000 before the High Court, which was dismissed by the impugned judgment and order dated 1.4.2009.

Hence, this appeal.

(3.)Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the investigation was not conducted fairly. She stated that the appellant herein, had no motive whatsoever to commit the murder of his wife, and that they were going to separate very soon, as both parties had filed an application seeking divorce, by mutual consent. Further, no recovery was made from the room of the appellant in the hostel, rather the objects recovered had been planted. The appellant did not make any disclosure statement. Thus, even the recovery made from the place in close vicinity of the Old Jail, was not made in accordance with law, as there was no independent witness with respect to the said recoveries, and the recovery memo also, was never signed by the appellant. It is therefore, a case of circumstantial evidence. The courts below failed to appreciate that the chain of circumstances is not complete. Hence, the appeal deserves to be allowed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.