CRA-D-344-DB-2005 IN THE HIGH COURT Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku & another State of Haryana CORAM: Present: GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. 1. Appellants, judgment dated Judge (Ad hoc) of having committed offence and Section 394 IPC and sentenced as under: Under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC Under Section 394 IPC 2. The matter arises out of FIR No. Station Hodal, under Section 302/34 IPC lodged at the instance of none (O&M) ( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES AT CHANDIGARH CRA Date of Decision: Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku & another Versus State of Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Ms. Kashish Sahni, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae for the appellants. Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. namely, Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku and Dharampal dated 31.07.2003 passed by the learned (Ad hoc), Faridabad, whereby both of them of having committed offences under Section and Section 394 IPC and sentenced as under: Under Section read with IPC - To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for one year. Under Section - To undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for six months matter arises out of FIR No.387 dated 08.10.2000 registered at Police Station Hodal, under Section 302/34 IPC lodged at the instance of none FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-D-344-DB-2005 (O&M) ate of Decision: 17.03.2025 ……Appellants …...Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL JASJIT SINGH BEDI Kashish Sahni, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana. Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku and Dharampal, assail passed by the learned Additional Sessions both of them have been held guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 394 IPC and sentenced as under: To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of and in default of payment of fine to undergo further To undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a and in default of payment of fine to undergo 08.10.2000 registered at Police Station Hodal, under Section 302/34 IPC lodged at the instance of none VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 else, but appellant No.1 statement (Ex.PB) on the basis of which FIR ( Mukesh Kumar stated as under: “I am resident of Kabar, P.S. Sakit, District Eta (UP) working as a cleaner on and that Krishan Kumar was working as a driver for the said Yesterday i.e. on Mathura for transporting furnishing oil. The owner of the tanker namely Anil Kumar had given some amount to the driver for the purpose of purchasing oil which he had kept underneath the s near village Bamni Khera, we halted to have tea at Himachali Hotel and thereafter started again at about 12 mid night. When we reached at village vehicle upon which Krisha the driver started talking to the lady, I got down pressure of the tyres in the rear side. In the meantime, there out of which outside who were all holding iron rods and started giving beatings to Krishan Kumar, driver. They also tried to kill me, but I ran under the cover of darkness. After vehicles passing by foot where I met a person, who took me to Sarpanch of the village and then all three of us went back near the where we found Krishan Kumar lying d inflicted injuries on his head and face. When I check had been kept underneath the seat, the same was missing. I proceeding to lodge the report, but you met me. I have got my statement recorded, which 3. The aforesaid statement was recorded by ASI about 6.00 AM on sent to the Police Station (O&M) ( 2 ) else, but appellant No.1 – Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku statement (Ex.PB) on the basis of which FIR ( Mukesh Kumar stated as under: I am resident of Kabar, P.S. Sakit, District Eta (UP) working as a cleaner on tanker No.DL1GB0434 for the last one month and that Krishan Kumar was working as a driver for the said Yesterday i.e. on 07.10.2000 at about 10.00 PM, we left Delhi Mathura for transporting furnishing oil. The owner of the tanker namely Anil Kumar had given some amount to the driver for the purpose of purchasing oil which he had kept underneath the s near village Bamni Khera, we halted to have tea at Himachali Hotel and thereafter started again at about 12 mid night. When we reached at village Banchari near Express Factory, vehicle upon which Krishan Kumar, driver stopped the vehicle. While driver started talking to the lady, I got down pressure of the tyres in the rear side. In the meantime, there out of which two entered into the cabin and two kept on standing outside who were all holding iron rods and started giving beatings to Krishan Kumar, driver. They also tried to kill me, but I ran under the cover of darkness. After having fled away vehicles passing by, but none stopped. I went to village Banchari on foot where I met a person, who took me to Sarpanch of the village and then all three of us went back near the where we found Krishan Kumar lying d inflicted injuries on his head and face. When I check had been kept underneath the seat, the same was missing. I proceeding to lodge the report, but you met me. I have got my statement recorded, which is correct. Action be taken. The aforesaid statement was recorded by ASI about 6.00 AM on 08.10.2000. The aforesaid statement was immediately sent to the Police Station and FIR was recorded Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku himself. In his statement (Ex.PB) on the basis of which FIR (Ex.PB/2) was lodged, I am resident of Kabar, P.S. Sakit, District Eta (UP) and have been anker No.DL1GB0434 for the last one month and that Krishan Kumar was working as a driver for the said tanker. at about 10.00 PM, we left Delhi for Mathura for transporting furnishing oil. The owner of the tanker namely Anil Kumar had given some amount to the driver for the purpose of purchasing oil which he had kept underneath the seat. When we reached near village Bamni Khera, we halted to have tea at Himachali Hotel and thereafter started again at about 12 mid night. When we reached at actory, a lady signaled us to stop the n Kumar, driver stopped the vehicle. While driver started talking to the lady, I got down for checking the air pressure of the tyres in the rear side. In the meantime, four persons came two entered into the cabin and two kept on standing outside who were all holding iron rods and started giving beatings to Krishan Kumar, driver. They also tried to kill me, but I ran and escaped having fled away, I tried to stop , but none stopped. I went to village Banchari on foot where I met a person, who took me to Sarpanch of the village and then all three of us went back near the tanker in the car of Sarpanch where we found Krishan Kumar lying dead in the tanker, who had been inflicted injuries on his head and face. When I checked the bag, which had been kept underneath the seat, the same was missing. I was proceeding to lodge the report, but you met me. I have got my statement is correct. Action be taken.” The aforesaid statement was recorded by ASI Siri Kishan (PW-13) at foresaid statement was immediately was recorded accordingly. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 4. Thereafter, ASI was parked and the dead body of Krishan Kumar was found lying on the driver seat, which was having injuries. Anil Kumar, owner of the t as well as Dharam the spot. Apart from preparation of rough site plan, inquest proceedings were conducted by ASI Siri Kishan (PW statements of Dharam Singh were recorded. murder having been committed by Mukesh villager of Mukesh. The translated gist of the statement of Dharambir recorded in terms of Section 175 Cr.P.C. is reproduced hereinunder: “I am resident of the above said address and younger brother namely Krishan Kumar was working as driver No. DL Delhi. Distt. Eta (U.P.) is meet Kumar had given a sum of Rs.1,30,000/ up LD boy namely Dharam Pal S/o Tej Singh was also sitting. conne Dharam Pal were stopped talking. I Kumar got information that his driver Krishan Kumar has been murdered in the tanker Kumar and his brother Sunil Kumar reached on the spot and found that Krishan Kumar has been murdered his head and mouth. I murde so as (O&M) ( 3 ) Thereafter, ASI Siri Kishan (PW-13) proceeded to the spot where t was parked and the dead body of Krishan Kumar was found lying on the driver seat, which was having injuries. Anil Kumar, owner of the t as well as Dharambir, brother of the deceased Krishan Kumar Apart from preparation of rough site plan, inquest proceedings were conducted by ASI Siri Kishan (PW-13) statements of Dharambir, brother of the deceased and also of one Dari Singh were recorded. Dharambir (PW-5) expressed suspicion as regards murder having been committed by Mukesh of Mukesh. The translated gist of the statement of Dharambir recorded in terms of Section 175 Cr.P.C. is reproduced hereinunder: I am resident of the above said address and younger brother namely Krishan Kumar was working as driver DL-1GB-0434 belonging to Anil Kumar Bansal R/o Shastri Nagar, Delhi. Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku S/o Rajbir, Nai, R/o Kab Distt. Eta (U.P.) is employed as cleaner meet my brother for some work. On 0 Kumar had given a sum of Rs.1,30,000/ up LDO oil. The money was lying in a Jute bag. In the same tanker boy namely Dharam Pal S/o Tej Singh, a co was also sitting. I was also travelling in the same nection with my personal work. While on Dharam Pal were whispering with each other. When I tried to listen, they stopped talking. I got down at Faridabad. Today Kumar got information that his driver Krishan Kumar has been murdered the tanker parked on G.T. road. On Kumar and his brother Sunil Kumar reached on the spot and found that Krishan Kumar has been murdered in the tanker by causing injuries on his head and mouth. I strongly suspect murdered by his cleaner Mukesh Kumar so as to rob the money which had been proceeded to the spot where tanker was parked and the dead body of Krishan Kumar was found lying on the driver seat, which was having injuries. Anil Kumar, owner of the tanker ir, brother of the deceased Krishan Kumar, reached at Apart from preparation of rough site plan, inquest proceedings 13) during the course of which , brother of the deceased and also of one Dariya expressed suspicion as regards murder having been committed by Mukesh alongwith Dharampal, a co- of Mukesh. The translated gist of the statement of Dharambir recorded in terms of Section 175 Cr.P.C. is reproduced hereinunder: I am resident of the above said address and am into agriculture. My younger brother namely Krishan Kumar was working as driver for tanker ging to Anil Kumar Bansal R/o Shastri Nagar, Mukesh Kumar @ Tinku S/o Rajbir, Nai, R/o Kabar P.S. Sakit as cleaner for said tanker. I had come to 07.10.2000 at about 10 PM, Anil Kumar had given a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- to the driver and cleaner to fill oil. The money was lying in a Jute bag. In the same tanker, one , a co-villager of Mukesh Kumar, travelling in the same to go to Faridabad in While on the way, both Mukesh and each other. When I tried to listen, they down at Faridabad. Today during night Anil Kumar got information that his driver Krishan Kumar has been murdered T. road. On getting this information, I, Anil Kumar and his brother Sunil Kumar reached on the spot and found that in the tanker by causing injuries on strongly suspect that Krishan Kumar has been red by his cleaner Mukesh Kumar and his co-villager Dharam Pal which had been taken by them. I and my uncle VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 (Tau) Dariya Singh S/o Mansa Ram have Krishan Kumar. This dead body is of my brother Krishan Statement has been heard, which 5. After the inquest proceedings had been conducted at the spot included recording of was sent by ASI Siri Kishan (PW which was conducted on the same very day. 6. The matter was thereafter investigated by Inspector Naveen Kumar 8), who arrested Mukesh on during the course of interrogation, Mukesh (Ex.PG) pursuant to which he got recovered a bushes and the same is taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PH. It is further the case of prosecution that Mukesh also got recovered his blood stained shirt, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PJ. Accused Dharampal was also arrested on residence i.e. Nangloi Veena Enclave Delhi and pursuant to his disclosure statement (Ex.PK), he got bag containing an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ possession vide recovery memo Ex.PL prosecution that Dharampal also got recovered a blood stained shirt, which was taken into possession vide recov 7. The blood stained disclosure statements were sent for chemical examination and as per the report of FSL (Ex. (O&M) ( 4 ) (Tau) Dariya Singh S/o Mansa Ram have rishan Kumar. This dead body is of my brother Krishan Statement has been heard, which is correct. After the inquest proceedings had been conducted at the spot recording of aforesaid statement of Dharambir, the dead body was sent by ASI Siri Kishan (PW-13) for post which was conducted on the same very day. The matter was thereafter investigated by Inspector Naveen Kumar , who arrested Mukesh on 09.10.2000. It is the case of prosecution that during the course of interrogation, Mukesh (Ex.PG) pursuant to which he got recovered a bushes and the same is taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PH. It is further the case of prosecution that Mukesh also got recovered his ned shirt, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Accused Dharampal was also arrested on residence i.e. Nangloi Veena Enclave Delhi and pursuant to his disclosure statement (Ex.PK), he got bag containing an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ possession vide recovery memo Ex.PL. It is further the case of prosecution that Dharampal also got recovered a blood stained shirt, which was taken into possession vide recov The blood stained ‘panna’ (spanner) and shirts recovered pursuant to disclosure statements were sent for chemical examination and as per the report of FSL (Ex.PF), the same were found to be stained with blood. (Tau) Dariya Singh S/o Mansa Ram have identified the dead body of rishan Kumar. This dead body is of my brother Krishan Kumar. is correct.” After the inquest proceedings had been conducted at the spot which statement of Dharambir, the dead body 13) for post-mortem examination, which was conducted on the same very day. The matter was thereafter investigated by Inspector Naveen Kumar (PW- 09.10.2000. It is the case of prosecution that during the course of interrogation, Mukesh made a disclosure statement (Ex.PG) pursuant to which he got recovered a ‘panna’ (spanner) from the bushes and the same is taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PH. It is further the case of prosecution that Mukesh also got recovered his ned shirt, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Accused Dharampal was also arrested on 09.10.2000 from his residence i.e. Nangloi Veena Enclave Delhi, where he was interrogated and pursuant to his disclosure statement (Ex.PK), he got recovered a jute bag containing an amount of Rs.1,10,000/-, which was taken into . It is further the case of prosecution that Dharampal also got recovered a blood stained shirt, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PM. (spanner) and shirts recovered pursuant to disclosure statements were sent for chemical examination and as per the ), the same were found to be stained with blood. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 8. Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against accused in the Court of 20.11.2000, who dated 06.12.2000 framed charges against pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 9. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 1 witnesses. The gist of PW-1 Dr. examination on the dead body of various injuries found on the dead body and mortem report as Ex. multiple injuries sustained by the deceased, which w sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. PW-2 Daryao Singh, who had identified the dead body of the deceased, stated regarding the said fact. He Dharambir had also accompanied him. PW-3 ASI Virender Singh stated that on ASI in Police Station Hodal (Ex.PB) through Constable Sarjeet FIR (Ex.PG/1) PW-4 Constable Om Parkash stated that on submitted reports to the Illaqa Magistrate and to other higher officials. PW-5 Dharambir, brother of the deceased, stated that his younger brother Krish Bansal for driving (O&M) ( 5 ) Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, 20.11.2000, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order 06.12.2000. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, framed charges against both the accused on pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 1 The gist of their statements is briefly referred to hereinunder: Dr. Rishi Rah Sharan, who had conducted post examination on the dead body of various injuries found on the dead body and mortem report as Ex.PA. He opined that the cause of death multiple injuries sustained by the deceased, which w sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Daryao Singh, who had identified the dead body of the deceased, stated regarding the said fact. He Dharambir had also accompanied him. ASI Virender Singh stated that on ASI in Police Station Hodal and that upon receipt of ruqa (Ex.PB) through Constable Sarjeet FIR (Ex.PG/1). Constable Om Parkash stated that on submitted reports to the Illaqa Magistrate and to other higher officials. Dharambir, brother of the deceased, stated that his younger brother Krishan Kumar was employed as dri Bansal for driving tanker No. DL1GB0434 Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against both the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Palwal on committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, the accused on 09.02.2001 to which they The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 13 ts is briefly referred to hereinunder:- who had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Krishan Kumar, described various injuries found on the dead body and proved the post- He opined that the cause of death was multiple injuries sustained by the deceased, which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Daryao Singh, who had identified the dead body of the deceased, further stated that his nephew Dharambir had also accompanied him. ASI Virender Singh stated that on 08.10.2000, he was posted as and that upon receipt of ruqa (Ex.PB) through Constable Sarjeet Singh, he recorded formal Constable Om Parkash stated that on 08.10.2000, he had submitted reports to the Illaqa Magistrate and to other higher Dharambir, brother of the deceased, stated that his younger an Kumar was employed as driver with Anil Kumar DL1GB0434 and that Mukesh VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 Kumar was working as a conductor on the said that on Krishan the Krishan Kumar and to the conductor of the LDO oil and that the said amount had been kept in a jute bag. He further stated that getting LDO oil in the said sitting and that he was traveling in the truck in order to go to Faridabad. He stated that Dharampal is co Kumar and that during th Dharampal overhear them, they stopped whispering. He stated that when the tanker reached Faridabad, he got down from the further stated that on the next day i telephonically informed him that his brother (Krishan Kumar) had been murdered at G.T.Road and asked him to accompany him Kumar and his brother saw his brother and that he strongly suspected that his brother has been murdered by Mukesh Kumar and Dharam stated that he alongwith D body of his brother. PW-6 HC Ishwar Singh, evidence his affidavit Ex.P 08.10.2000, he was that on the same day duly sealed case property had been deposited with him in the malkhana. He further deposed that on 14.11.2000, he had handed over the case property to Constable Ramras for the purpose of depositing the same in the office of FSL Ma same day itself. (O&M) ( 6 ) Kumar was working as a conductor on the said that on 07.10.2000, he had come to Faridabad to meet his brother Krishan Kumar and that on 07.10.2000, Anil Kumar, owner of the tanker, had handed over an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ Krishan Kumar and to the conductor of the LDO oil and that the said amount had been kept in a jute bag. He further stated that at about 10.00 PM, they had getting LDO oil in the said tanker in which Dharampal was also sitting and that he was traveling in the truck in order to go to Faridabad. He stated that Dharampal is co Kumar and that during the course of journey, Mukesh and Dharampal were whispering in the ear and that when he tried to overhear them, they stopped whispering. He stated that when the anker reached Faridabad, he got down from the further stated that on the next day i telephonically informed him that his brother (Krishan Kumar) had been murdered at G.T.Road and asked him to accompany him (Anil Kumar). He further stated that thereafter he, Anil Kumar and his brother Sunil Kumar reached a the spot where he saw his brother lying dead having injuries on his head and face and that he strongly suspected that his brother has been murdered by Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal for stealing the money. He stated that he alongwith Dariya Singh body of his brother. HC Ishwar Singh, who is a formal witness, tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PE, wherein he deposed that 08.10.2000, he was posted as MHC in Police Station that on the same day duly sealed case property had been deposited with him in the malkhana. He further deposed that on 14.11.2000, he had handed over the case property to Constable Ramras for the purpose of depositing the same in the office of FSL Madhuban, Karnal, which was accordingly deposited on the same day itself. Kumar was working as a conductor on the said tanker. He stated , he had come to Faridabad to meet his brother 07.10.2000, Anil Kumar, owner of anker, had handed over an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- to Krishan Kumar and to the conductor of the tanker for getting LDO oil and that the said amount had been kept in a jute bag. He at about 10.00 PM, they had proceeded for anker in which Dharampal was also sitting and that he was traveling in the truck in order to go to Faridabad. He stated that Dharampal is co-villager of Mukesh e course of journey, Mukesh and were whispering in the ear and that when he tried to overhear them, they stopped whispering. He stated that when the anker reached Faridabad, he got down from the tanker. He further stated that on the next day i.e. 08.10.2000, Anil Kumar telephonically informed him that his brother (Krishan Kumar) had been murdered at G.T.Road and asked him to accompany He further stated that thereafter he, Anil Sunil Kumar reached a the spot where he lying dead having injuries on his head and face and that he strongly suspected that his brother has been murdered al for stealing the money. He a Singh had identified the dead who is a formal witness, tendered into , wherein he deposed that on HC in Police Station Hodal and that on the same day duly sealed case property had been deposited with him in the malkhana. He further deposed that on 14.11.2000, he had handed over the case property to Constable Ramras for the purpose of depositing the same in the office of , which was accordingly deposited on the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 PW-7 Dori Lal, Photographer, stated that on photographs of the place of occurrence on the asking of the police and proved the same as Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 and nega thereof as Ex.P4 to Ex.P6. PW-8 Inspector Naveen Kumar, who had taken over investigation of the case on He stated with regard to the arrest of both the accused on 09.10.2000 and also as regards the disclosure statements made by them and the recoveries effected pursuant thereto including recovery of jut bag containing Rs.1,10,000/ PW-9 Constable Ram Raj stated general duty at Police Post Mundkati, P.S. Hodal and upon directions of the body of Krishan Kumar to the hospital for getting post examination conducted. PW-10 Insp SI/SHO Police Station Hodal and investigation, he had prepared the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. under his signatures. PW-11 Anoj Kumar, Draftsman, Draftsman Constable was also a Draftsman in Haryana Police and that the site plan Ex.PN had been prepared by A accident and that he identified the signatures of A the said site plan. PW-12 Anil Bansal stated that he is proprietor of M/s A.S.Roadlines and owns several him as a No.DL1GB0434 (O&M) ( 7 ) Dori Lal, Photographer, stated that on photographs of the place of occurrence on the asking of the police and proved the same as Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 and nega thereof as Ex.P4 to Ex.P6. Inspector Naveen Kumar, who had taken over investigation of the case on 09.10.2000, stated in detail in respect of the same. He stated with regard to the arrest of both the accused on 09.10.2000 and also as regards the disclosure statements made by them and the recoveries effected pursuant thereto including recovery of ‘panna’ (spanner) and blood stained shirts and also a jut bag containing Rs.1,10,000/-. Constable Ram Raj stated that on general duty at Police Post Mundkati, P.S. Hodal and upon directions of the Investigating Officer, he had taken the dead body of Krishan Kumar to the hospital for getting post examination conducted. Inspector Lekh Raj stated that on 11.01.2000, he was working as SI/SHO Police Station Hodal and investigation, he had prepared the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. under his signatures. Anoj Kumar, Draftsman, stated that he was Draftsman Constable in Haryana Police and that A was also a Draftsman in Haryana Police and that the site plan Ex.PN had been prepared by Ashok Kumar accident and that he identified the signatures of A the said site plan. Anil Bansal stated that he is proprietor of M/s A.S.Roadlines and owns several tankers and that Krishan Kumar was employed by him as a driver on his No.DL1GB0434 and Mukesh Kumar was working as a Dori Lal, Photographer, stated that on 08.10.2000, he had taken photographs of the place of occurrence on the asking of the police and proved the same as Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 and negatives Inspector Naveen Kumar, who had taken over investigation of 09.10.2000, stated in detail in respect of the same. He stated with regard to the arrest of both the accused on 09.10.2000 and also as regards the disclosure statements made by them and the recoveries effected pursuant thereto including (spanner) and blood stained shirts and also a that on 08.10.2000, he was posted on general duty at Police Post Mundkati, P.S. Hodal and upon Investigating Officer, he had taken the dead body of Krishan Kumar to the hospital for getting post-mortem 11.01.2000, he was working as SI/SHO Police Station Hodal and that upon completion of investigation, he had prepared the report under Section 173 stated that he was working as in Haryana Police and that Ashok Kumar was also a Draftsman in Haryana Police and that the site plan shok Kumar, who had met with an accident and that he identified the signatures of Ashok Kumar on Anil Bansal stated that he is proprietor of M/s A.S.Roadlines and ankers and that Krishan Kumar was employed by river on his tanker bearing registration and Mukesh Kumar was working as a 09.10.2000, stated in detail in respect of the same. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 conductor tanker had been sent to Mathura Refinery for bringing petroleum products and that he had handed over Rs.1,30,000/ Kumar, bee Delhi at about 7.00 PM and that on the morning of next day, he received information that the driver Krishan Kumar had been murdered. PW-13 ASI Siri Kishan stated about the same. He further stated that he had conducted inquest proceedings and that after the same w dead body was sent for post He further stated that the CIA staff. 10. The prosecution tendered into evidence report of FSL as Ex.PF and thereafter closed the evidence. the entire evidence was put to the accused, who prosecution in toto and pleaded false implication. The accused, however, did not lead any evidence in their defence. 11. The learned trial Court, upon that the evidence led by the prosecution against both charges framed against them vide challenge in 12. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that it is a case where the accused have been falsely implicated and as a matter of fact it is the (O&M) ( 8 ) conductor on the said tanker. He stated that on anker had been sent to Mathura Refinery for bringing petroleum products and that he had handed over Rs.1,30,000/ Kumar, driver for purchasing the same and that the amount had been put in a jute bag. He stated that the Delhi at about 7.00 PM and that on the morning of next day, he received information that the tanker had been looted and the river Krishan Kumar had been murdered. ASI Siri Kishan, who had recorded the statement/ruqa (Ex.PB), stated about the same. He further stated that he had conducted inquest proceedings and that after the same w dead body was sent for post-mortem examination to the hospital. He further stated that the further investigation was conducted by the CIA staff. The prosecution tendered into evidence report of FSL as Ex.PF and thereafter closed the evidence. Upon closure the entire evidence was put to the accused, who prosecution in toto and pleaded false implication. The accused, however, did not lead any evidence in their defence. The learned trial Court, upon marshalling that the evidence led by the prosecution substantiated the charges framed both the accused and accordingly held charges framed against them vide impugned judgment challenge in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants while assa submitted that it is a case where the accused have been falsely implicated and as a matter of fact it is the appellant He stated that on 07.10.2000, the anker had been sent to Mathura Refinery for bringing petroleum products and that he had handed over Rs.1,30,000/- to Krishan river for purchasing the same and that the amount had n put in a jute bag. He stated that the tanker started from Delhi at about 7.00 PM and that on the morning of next day, he anker had been looted and the river Krishan Kumar had been murdered. had recorded the statement/ruqa (Ex.PB), stated about the same. He further stated that he had conducted inquest proceedings and that after the same were conducted, the mortem examination to the hospital. the further investigation was conducted by The prosecution tendered into evidence report of FSL as Ex.PF and losure of the prosecution evidence, the entire evidence was put to the accused, who denied the case of prosecution in toto and pleaded false implication. The accused, however, marshalling the evidence on record, held substantiated the charges framed the accused and accordingly held the accused guilty of the impugned judgment, which is under while assailing the impugned judgment submitted that it is a case where the accused have been falsely implicated appellant Mukesh, who had lodged the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 FIR, but subsequently tables were turned on him and he was arrayed as an accused. It has been submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and that although the police claims that the accused of the looted amount of Rs.1,30,000/ recovery is rendered doubtful on account of PW A turned hostile, it cannot even be said with the same amount, which had been handed over by the owner of the i.e. Anil Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar). submitted that even the allegations of recovery of blood stained (spanner) and clothes would not be of much advantage to the case of prosecution inasmuch as the report of FSL on ‘panna’ under these circumstances, the conviction of the appellants cannot sustain and is liable to be set aside and they deserve to be acquitted of the charges framed against them. 13. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that the circumstantial evidence collected in the present case is strong and cogent enough to subst existence of a motive, which is robbing the deceased of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ recovered on the the accused. Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the appeal. (O&M) ( 9 ) FIR, but subsequently tables were turned on him and he was arrayed as an It has been submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and that although the police claims that the accused Dharampal had got recovered an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ of the looted amount of Rs.1,30,000/-, but ap recovery is rendered doubtful on account of PW A turned hostile, it cannot even be said with certainty that the said amount is the same amount, which had been handed over by the owner of the Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar). submitted that even the allegations of recovery of blood stained and clothes would not be of much advantage to the case of prosecution inasmuch as the report of FSL shows that a (spanner) were disintegrated. Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances, the conviction of the appellants cannot sustain and is liable to be set aside and they deserve to be acquitted of the charges inst them. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that although it is a case based on circumstantial evidence, but the circumstantial evidence collected in the present case is strong and cogent enough to substantiate the charges, which is supplemented by existence of a motive, which is robbing the deceased of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- out of which an amount of Rs.1,10,0 recovered on the very next day of occurrence from the residence of one of the accused. Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the FIR, but subsequently tables were turned on him and he was arrayed as an It has been submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and that although the police claims that Dharampal had got recovered an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- out , but apart from the fact that said recovery is rendered doubtful on account of PW Anil Kumar having certainty that the said amount is the same amount, which had been handed over by the owner of the tanker Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar). It has further been submitted that even the allegations of recovery of blood stained ‘panna’ and clothes would not be of much advantage to the case of shows that alleged blood stains Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances, the conviction of the appellants cannot sustain and is liable to be set aside and they deserve to be acquitted of the charges On the other hand, learned State counsel, while opposing the appeal, although it is a case based on circumstantial evidence, but the circumstantial evidence collected in the present case is strong and antiate the charges, which is supplemented by the existence of a motive, which is robbing the deceased of an amount of out of which an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- was in fact very next day of occurrence from the residence of one of the accused. Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 14. We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and with the assistance of learned counsel h case. 15. As far as the factum of homicidal death of deceased Krishan Kumar is concerned, the same is not seriously disputed. The prosecution has examined PW examination on the dead body of Krishan Kumar. PW the MLR as Ex.PA Krishan Kumar as “1. Lacerated wound 2 2" above eye brow on exploring fractured. 2. Lacerated wound 1 of the wound on frontal bone 4 underlying wound was fractured and brain matter was damaged. 3. Lacerated wound 2 All the lateral incispor canine were broken with fracture of left mandible 4. Lacerated wound xx 1 1/4" x 1/2" over right cheek and underlying bone was fractured. 16. PW-1 Dr. Rishi Rah Shar injuries sustained by the deceased, which were sufficient to cause death. The witness was briefly cross nothing substantial could be there is hardly any reason to doubt the fact that it is a case of homicidal death wherein the deceased died on account of by him on his head including fractures (O&M) ( 10 ) We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and with the assistance of learned counsel have also perused the record of the As far as the factum of homicidal death of deceased Krishan Kumar is concerned, the same is not seriously disputed. The prosecution has examined PW-1 Dr. Rishi Rah Sharan, who had conducted post ation on the dead body of Krishan Kumar. PW the MLR as Ex.PA described the injuries found on the Krishan Kumar as follows: Lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 3/4" x bone dee 2" above eye brow on exploring the wound underlying wound was fractured. Lacerated wound 1-1/2x1/2" x bone deep of the wound on frontal bone 4 underlying wound was fractured and brain matter was damaged. Lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 1" x bone deep on left side of upper lip. All the lateral incispor canine were broken with fracture of left mandible and macillary bone. Lacerated wound xx 1 1/4" x 1/2" over right cheek and underlying bone was fractured.” Rishi Rah Sharan opined that the cause of death was multiple injuries sustained by the deceased, which were sufficient to cause death. The witness was briefly cross-examined on behalf of the accused, but nothing substantial could be elicited so as to doubt there is hardly any reason to doubt the fact that it is a case of homicidal death wherein the deceased died on account of on his head including fractures. We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and ave also perused the record of the As far as the factum of homicidal death of deceased Krishan Kumar is concerned, the same is not seriously disputed. The prosecution has Dr. Rishi Rah Sharan, who had conducted post-mortem ation on the dead body of Krishan Kumar. PW-1 while proving described the injuries found on the dead body of 1/2" x 3/4" x bone deep in left side of forehead the wound underlying wound was 1/2x1/2" x bone deep-grey matter protruding out of the wound on frontal bone 4-1/2" above right eye brow underlying wound was fractured and brain matter was damaged. 1" x bone deep on left side of upper lip. All the lateral incispor canine were broken with fracture of left Lacerated wound xx 1 1/4" x 1/2" over right cheek and underlying an opined that the cause of death was multiple injuries sustained by the deceased, which were sufficient to cause death. examined on behalf of the accused, but so as to doubt his opinion. As such, there is hardly any reason to doubt the fact that it is a case of homicidal death wherein the deceased died on account of multiple injuries sustained injuries sustained by the deceased, which were sufficient to cause death. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 17. Admittedly, there is no eye prosecution mainly banks upon the (i) The admitted factum of alongwith Krishan Kumar (deceased) in the murder regarding murder of Krishan Kumar by some unknown persons having been statement denied the factum of handing over of Rs.1 Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar, (ii) Recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ residence of accused Dharampal. (iii) Recovery of blood stained instance of the accused. (iv) Motive i.e. robbing the deceased of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ 18. It is a case where the FIR was in fact lodged by accused Mukesh (appellant No.1) himself, wherein he when he alongwith Krishan Kumar getting oil, (Mukesh Kumar) had got down and was checking the rear tyres pressure, 4 unknown persons armed with Kumar driver and that the bag containing the amount the proprietor Anil Kumar interestingly of Section 313 Cr.P.C., (O&M) ( 11 ) Admittedly, there is no eye-witness of the prosecution mainly banks upon the following admitted factum of presence of the accused Mukesh Kumar alongwith Krishan Kumar (deceased) in the murder and the story put-forth by the accused Mukesh Kumar regarding murder of Krishan Kumar by some unknown persons having been contradicted by accused Mukesh Kumar statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he has denied the factum of handing over of Rs.1 Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar, Recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ residence of accused Dharampal. Recovery of blood stained ‘panna’ instance of the accused. Motive i.e. robbing the deceased of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ case where the FIR was in fact lodged by accused Mukesh (appellant No.1) himself, wherein he had set up a case when he alongwith Krishan Kumar driver getting oil, a woman had signaled their tanker (Mukesh Kumar) had got down and was checking the rear tyres pressure, 4 unknown persons armed with iron rods came there and killed Krishan river and that he managed to escape and later bag containing the amount of Rs.1,30,000/ the proprietor Anil Kumar, the same was found missing. However, tingly at the time of recording of statement of the accused of Section 313 Cr.P.C., when a question regarding entrustment of occurrence in question and the following circumstantial evidence: presence of the accused Mukesh Kumar alongwith Krishan Kumar (deceased) in the tanker at the time of rth by the accused Mukesh Kumar regarding murder of Krishan Kumar by some unknown persons accused Mukesh Kumar in his recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he has denied the factum of handing over of Rs.1,30,000/- by Anil Kumar Bansal to the deceased (Krishan Kumar, driver). Recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- from a jute bag from the ’ (spanner) and clothes at the Motive i.e. robbing the deceased of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/-. case where the FIR was in fact lodged by accused Mukesh Kumar had set up a case that on 07.10.2000 driver was going on a tanker for anker to stop and that while he (Mukesh Kumar) had got down and was checking the rear tyres pressure, iron rods came there and killed Krishan he managed to escape and later when he looked for of Rs.1,30,000/- handed over to driver by , the same was found missing. However, statement of the accused in terms when a question regarding entrustment of VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 Rs.1,30,000/ Krishan Kumar, militates against the version got recorded by accused Mukesh Kumar in his statement Ex.PB on the basis of which FIR has been lodged his statement Rs.1,30,000/ Kumar Bansal to the driver for purchasing LDO oil, the said factum of entrustment of am his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 19. Where an accused recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. adverse inference against him. In this context, Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Munna Kumar Upadhyaya @ Munna Upadhyaya Vs. State of A.P. through Public Prosecutor, as under: “51. If the accused gave incorrect or false answers during the course of his statement unde adverse inference against him. 52. In the present case, we are of the considered opinion that the accused has not only failed to explain his conduct, in the manner in which every person of normal prudence would be expected to explain but had even given incorrect and false answers. In the pr such conduct of the accused would also tilt the case in favour of the prosecution 20. Since the factum of presence of the accused Mukesh Kumar alongwith Krishan Kumar, (O&M) ( 12 ) Rs.1,30,000/- by the owner of the tanker i.e. Anil Kumar Bansal to Krishan Kumar, driver was put to him, he denied the militates against the version got recorded by accused Mukesh Kumar in his statement Ex.PB on the basis of which FIR has been lodged his statement/ruqa (Ex.PB), Mukesh had admitted that an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- had been handed over by the owner of the Kumar Bansal to the driver for purchasing LDO oil, the said factum of tment of amount is denied by him (accused Mukesh Kumar) his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was Where an accused gives incorrect or false answers during the course of recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. adverse inference against him. In this context, Hon’ble the Supreme Munna Kumar Upadhyaya @ Munna Upadhyaya Vs. State A.P. through Public Prosecutor, 2012 (2) RCR (Criminal) If the accused gave incorrect or false answers during the course of his statement under Section 313 Cr adverse inference against him. In the present case, we are of the considered opinion that the accused has not only failed to explain his conduct, in the manner in which every person of normal prudence would be expected to explain but had even given incorrect and false answers. In the present case, the Court not only draws an adverse inference, but such conduct of the accused would also tilt the case in favour of the prosecution.” Since the factum of presence of the accused Mukesh Kumar alongwith Krishan Kumar, driver (deceased) on 07.10.2000 when they started from anker i.e. Anil Kumar Bansal to river was put to him, he denied the said fact which militates against the version got recorded by accused Mukesh Kumar in his statement Ex.PB on the basis of which FIR has been lodged. While in , Mukesh had admitted that an amount of over by the owner of the tanker i.e. Anil Kumar Bansal to the driver for purchasing LDO oil, the said factum of (accused Mukesh Kumar) when was recorded. gives incorrect or false answers during the course of recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the Court can draw an adverse inference against him. In this context, Hon’ble the Supreme Munna Kumar Upadhyaya @ Munna Upadhyaya Vs. State 2012 (2) RCR (Criminal) 962, held If the accused gave incorrect or false answers during the course of Cr.P.C., the Court can draw an In the present case, we are of the considered opinion that the accused has not only failed to explain his conduct, in the manner in which every person of normal prudence would be expected to explain but had even given incorrect and false answers. In the esent case, the Court not only draws an adverse inference, but such conduct of the accused would also tilt the case in favour of the Since the factum of presence of the accused Mukesh Kumar alongwith 07.10.2000 when they started from VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 Delhi to Mathura is not disputed, Mukesh Kumar was the person who would be expected to have complete knowledge about the incident. coming out with a version which infact aspect from his own statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C. he has not effectively discharged the burden which Section 106 of the Evidence Act puts on him, as he is the person who would have the knowledge of tru convincing justifiable explanation him. 21. In the present case, it is the specific case of the prosecution that an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ Kumar Bansal to Krishan Kumar, LDO Oil. When the inquest proceedings were conducted on 08.10.2000, ASI Siri Kishan owner of the Rs.1,30,000/ kept in a jute bag on which ‘ It is worth mentioning that when the amount of Rs.1,10,00 recovered from the house of accused Dharampal on was found lying in a jute bag on which ‘ as is specifically recorded in the recovery memo Ex.PL. 22. Although learned counsel for the appellants factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ Dharampal (O&M) ( 13 ) Delhi to Mathura is not disputed, Mukesh Kumar was the person who would be expected to have complete knowledge about the incident. coming out with a version which infact stands contradicted on material aspect from his own statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C. he has not effectively discharged the burden which Section 106 of the Evidence Act puts on him, as he is the person who would have the knowledge of true facts and thus not having come out convincing justifiable explanation, the said fact can safely be used against In the present case, it is the specific case of the prosecution that an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was entrusted by the owner Kumar Bansal to Krishan Kumar, driver for the purpose of purchasing When the inquest proceedings were conducted on 08.10.2000, ASI Siri Kishan, in his report, has specifically recorded that Anil Kumar, owner of the tanker, had disclosed to him that he had given an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- to the driver and cleaner for purchasing LDO oil, which was kept in a jute bag on which ‘Kaho Na Pyar It is worth mentioning that when the amount of Rs.1,10,00 recovered from the house of accused Dharampal on was found lying in a jute bag on which ‘Kaho as is specifically recorded in the recovery memo Ex.PL. Although learned counsel for the appellants factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ Dharampal does not stand substantiated inasmuch as the independent Delhi to Mathura is not disputed, Mukesh Kumar was the person who would be expected to have complete knowledge about the incident. By stands contradicted on material aspect from his own statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., he has not effectively discharged the burden which Section 106 of the Evidence Act puts on him, as he is the person who would have the e facts and thus not having come out with any , the said fact can safely be used against In the present case, it is the specific case of the prosecution that an was entrusted by the owner of the tanker i.e. Anil river for the purpose of purchasing When the inquest proceedings were conducted on 08.10.2000, has specifically recorded that Anil Kumar, had disclosed to him that he had given an amount of to the driver and cleaner for purchasing LDO oil, which was yar Hai’ was written in English. It is worth mentioning that when the amount of Rs.1,10,000/- was recovered from the house of accused Dharampal on 09.10.2000, the same aho Na Pyar Hai’ was written, as is specifically recorded in the recovery memo Ex.PL. Although learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- from accused/appellant does not stand substantiated inasmuch as the independent was written in English. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 witness namely Anil allegedly effected has it is not a case that he ( the factum of recovery. chief and also the cross is reproduced hereinunder: “……… Krishan Kumar driver for payment as price of products. The amount was in a Jute bag. The Tanker started from Delhi at about 7 date and in the morning of the next day Tanker had been looted and the driver Krishan Kumar was murdered. The Tanker was found reached there. Some labo conductor of the Tanker. Amount of rup later recovered by the police and it was obtained by me on sapurdari from the court. The Tanker was also taken on Sapurdari. Accused were interrogated by the police, on interrogation. The amount was recovered by the police from the room of Dharampal accused and Mukesh might have disclosed about it to the police. (At this stage Ld. PP states that witness is suppressing the tr be allowed to put questions to him in the shape of cross Heard. Request allowed). XXXXXXX by P.P. It is correct that on being interrogated accused Mukesh had disclosed that Krishan Kumar was murdered with the Pa memo Ex.PG. It bears my signature and my signatures were obtained by the police after the writing was done on it 23. Further, the recovery was effected in the presence of PW Naveen Kumar, who had effected the recovery in discha duties. There is nothing on record to show that there is any enmity of the accused either with the police officials or with (O&M) ( 14 ) witness namely Anil Bansal in whose presence the said recovery was allegedly effected has resiled from his statement, but this Court finds that it is not a case that he (PW-12 Anil Bansal the factum of recovery. The relevant extract from his examination chief and also the cross-examination conducted by the Publi is reproduced hereinunder: ………I have given amount of rupees one lac and thirty thousand to Krishan Kumar driver for payment as price of products. The amount was in a Jute bag. The Tanker started from Delhi at about 7 date and in the morning of the next day Tanker had been looted and the driver Krishan Kumar was murdered. The Tanker was found near Mundkati Police post, near Palwal and I reached there. Some labourers had also go conductor of the Tanker. Amount of rup later recovered by the police and it was obtained by me on sapurdari from the court. The Tanker was also taken on Sapurdari. Accused were interrogated by the police, but I do not remember as to what transpired on interrogation. The amount was recovered by the police from the room of Dharampal accused and Mukesh might have disclosed about it to the police. (At this stage Ld. PP states that witness is suppressing the tr be allowed to put questions to him in the shape of cross Heard. Request allowed). XXXXXXX by P.P. It is correct that on being interrogated accused Mukesh had disclosed that Krishan Kumar was murdered with the Pa memo Ex.PG. It bears my signature and my signatures were obtained by the police after the writing was done on it Further, the recovery was effected in the presence of PW Naveen Kumar, who had effected the recovery in discha duties. There is nothing on record to show that there is any enmity of the accused either with the police officials or with in whose presence the said recovery was resiled from his statement, but this Court finds that Bansal) has absolutely resiled from The relevant extract from his examination-in- examination conducted by the Public Prosecutor s one lac and thirty thousand to Krishan Kumar driver for payment as price of products. The amount was in a Jute bag. The Tanker started from Delhi at about 7 P.M.on the said date and in the morning of the next day, I received information that the Tanker had been looted and the driver Krishan Kumar was murdered. Mundkati Police post, near Palwal and I rers had also gone with the driver and conductor of the Tanker. Amount of rupees one lac ten thousand was later recovered by the police and it was obtained by me on sapurdari from the court. The Tanker was also taken on Sapurdari. Accused were but I do not remember as to what transpired on interrogation. The amount was recovered by the police from the room of Dharampal accused and Mukesh might have disclosed about it to the (At this stage Ld. PP states that witness is suppressing the truth and he be allowed to put questions to him in the shape of cross-examination. It is correct that on being interrogated accused Mukesh had disclosed that Krishan Kumar was murdered with the Panna. I have seen disclosure memo Ex.PG. It bears my signature and my signatures were obtained by the police after the writing was done on it………..” Further, the recovery was effected in the presence of PW-8 Inspector Naveen Kumar, who had effected the recovery in discharge of his official duties. There is nothing on record to show that there is any enmity of the accused either with the police officials or with complainant. It is VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 observed in several cases that the police effects recovery of Aadhar card, driving license, establish its case, but in the instant case not only the recover Rs.1,10,000/ in the year 2000, but the sequence and the proxim the occurrence and the recovery lends absolute assurance as regards the credibility of the case of prosecution. any ground to doubt the factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ from the hou 24. As already discussed above, it is a case where looting the money was apparently the motive. Although motive would not have great significance when a case is based on direct evidence, but in a case of circumstantial evidence, the same assumes humongous import link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. 25. The facts and the chain of events clearly show that lodging of FIR at the instance of accused/appellant No.1 Mukesh subterfuge on his part in a vain atte the police off Kumar in FIR itself stands demolished by his statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he absolutely denied the factum of handing over of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ Krishan Kumar (deceased) kill Krishan Kumar (deceased). from the very beginning regarding murder of deceased when infact (O&M) ( 15 ) observed in several cases that the police effects recovery of Aadhar card, driving license, wallet etc. in a hackneyed establish its case, but in the instant case not only the recover Rs.1,10,000/- was a huge amount, particularly having regard to its value in the year 2000, but the sequence and the proxim the occurrence and the recovery lends absolute assurance as regards the credibility of the case of prosecution. As such, this Court does not find any ground to doubt the factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/ from the house of accused Dharampal immediately after his arrest. already discussed above, it is a case where looting the money was apparently the motive. Although motive would not have great significance when a case is based on direct evidence, but in a case of circumstantial evidence, the same assumes humongous import link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. The facts and the chain of events clearly show that lodging of FIR at the instance of accused/appellant No.1 Mukesh on his part in a vain attempt to mislead the police the police off-track. In any case, the version got recorded by Mukesh in FIR itself stands demolished by his statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he absolutely denied the factum of over of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/ Krishan Kumar (deceased), which in fact turned out to kill Krishan Kumar (deceased). Thus, by coming out with a false version from the very beginning regarding murder of deceased when infact observed in several cases that the police effects recovery of Aadhar card, hackneyed manner from the accused to establish its case, but in the instant case not only the recovered amount i.e. particularly having regard to its value in the year 2000, but the sequence and the proximity in terms of time of the occurrence and the recovery lends absolute assurance as regards the As such, this Court does not find any ground to doubt the factum of recovery of an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- immediately after his arrest. already discussed above, it is a case where looting the money was apparently the motive. Although motive would not have great significance when a case is based on direct evidence, but in a case of circumstantial evidence, the same assumes humongous importance and is an additional link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. The facts and the chain of events clearly show that lodging of FIR at the instance of accused/appellant No.1 Mukesh Kumar was nothing, but a mislead the police and to keep track. In any case, the version got recorded by Mukesh in FIR itself stands demolished by his statement recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he absolutely denied the factum of over of an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- by Anil Bansal to the driver , which in fact turned out to be the motive to coming out with a false version from the very beginning regarding murder of deceased when infact VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 accused was present alongwith deceased till his death warrants application of Section 106 of Evidence Act as against accused. by Dharambir (brother of the deceased) par suspicion on the accused Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal cannot be an afterthought inasmuch as he was very much present at the time of inquest proceedings and in fact his statement was also recorded in terms of Section 175 Cr.P.C., wher against Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal. factors, the case of the prosecution recovery of were found to be blood stained, as specifically reported in the report (Ex.PF) of the FSL. 26. The aforesaid sequence of facts in the shape of circumstantial evidence leaves no manner of doubt as regards the involvement of both the accused in the commission of murder of Krishan Kumar. It is a case where all the material links in the chain of circum The existence of motive further lends corroboration to the case of prosecution. the deceased at the time of his murder, but not having come out with any justifiable explanation, the same also points towards his guilt. and circumstances of the case lead to one and only one conclusion that it is the accused, who had murdered Krishan Kumar. 27. As an upshot of the discussion made above, we guilt of the accused/appellants as recorded by the trial Court, do not suffer (O&M) ( 16 ) accused was present alongwith deceased till his death warrants application of Section 106 of Evidence Act as against accused. by Dharambir (brother of the deceased) par suspicion on the accused Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal cannot be an afterthought inasmuch as he was very much present at the time of inquest proceedings and in fact his statement was also recorded in terms of Section 175 Cr.P.C., wherein he categorically expressed his suspicion against Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal. factors, the case of the prosecution also take strength from the recovery of a ‘panna’ (spanner) and also the clothes of the accused were found to be blood stained, as specifically reported in the report of the FSL. The aforesaid sequence of facts in the shape of circumstantial evidence leaves no manner of doubt as regards the involvement of both the accused in the commission of murder of Krishan Kumar. It is a case where all the material links in the chain of circumstantial evidence are duly established. The existence of motive further lends corroboration to the case of prosecution. The accused Mukesh Kumar admittedly was present with the deceased at the time of his murder, but not having come out with any ble explanation, the same also points towards his guilt. and circumstances of the case lead to one and only one conclusion that it is the accused, who had murdered Krishan Kumar. upshot of the discussion made above, we guilt of the accused/appellants as recorded by the trial Court, do not suffer accused was present alongwith deceased till his death warrants application of Section 106 of Evidence Act as against accused. The version put-forth by Dharambir (brother of the deceased) particularly as regards his suspicion on the accused Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal cannot be an afterthought inasmuch as he was very much present at the time of inquest proceedings and in fact his statement was also recorded in terms of ein he categorically expressed his suspicion against Mukesh Kumar and Dharampal. In addition to the aforesaid also take strength from the factum of (spanner) and also the clothes of the accused which were found to be blood stained, as specifically reported in the report The aforesaid sequence of facts in the shape of circumstantial evidence leaves no manner of doubt as regards the involvement of both the accused in the commission of murder of Krishan Kumar. It is a case where all the stantial evidence are duly established. The existence of motive further lends corroboration to the case of The accused Mukesh Kumar admittedly was present with the deceased at the time of his murder, but not having come out with any ble explanation, the same also points towards his guilt. The facts and circumstances of the case lead to one and only one conclusion that it is the accused, who had murdered Krishan Kumar. upshot of the discussion made above, we find that the findings of guilt of the accused/appellants as recorded by the trial Court, do not suffer stantial evidence are duly established. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-344-DB-2005 from any infirmity and the same are hereby affirmed. We do not ground to interfere 28. No other point has been raised or urged before this Court. Finding no merit in the instant appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. 29. A copy of this judgment be sent to the quarters concerned for necessary compliance. 17.03.2025 Vimal (O&M) ( 17 ) from any infirmity and the same are hereby affirmed. We do not ground to interfere with the said findings. No other point has been raised or urged before this Court. Finding no merit in the instant appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. A copy of this judgment be sent to the quarters concerned for necessary compliance. (GURVINDER SINGH GILL .03.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: from any infirmity and the same are hereby affirmed. We do not any No other point has been raised or urged before this Court. Finding no merit in the instant appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. A copy of this judgment be sent to the quarters concerned for necessary GURVINDER SINGH GILL) JUDGE (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Yes/No VIMAL KUMAR 2025.03.18 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document