STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri upheld the life-imprisonment awarded to five person of family in double murder case over property dispute.
The briefly stated the facts of prosecution case are that on 07.09.2011 at 6.45 a.m one Jaipal Singh S/o Vishwa Nath R/o village Sadhota Tehsil & District Udhampur telephonically informed the police that unknown person(s) has committed the murder of Krishni Devi W/o Situ and Parkash Singh S/o Chuni Lal both residents of village Sadhota Tehsil Udhampur with sharp edged weapons during the intervening night of 6th/7th of September 2011 at village Sadhota Tehsil and District Udhampur. On the basis of this information FIR No.38/2011 under Section 302 RPC was registered and investigation commenced. After completion of investigation challan was presented and Trial Court on February 3, 2020 awarded life-imprisonment to Prem Nath, Sita Ram, Krishan Chand sons of Massu, Babu Ram S/o Sita Ram and Guddi S/o Massu all residents of Sadhota Mohra Sanal Tehsil Udhampur. DB after hearing Advocate Anmol Sharma for the accused persons whereas AAG RS Jamwal for the UT, observed that it has been established beyond doubt that there was enmity between the deceased and the appellant-Prem Nath on account of the fact that appellant-Prem Nath was claiming whole of the property left behind by the husband of deceased-Krishni Devi, who happened to be his Aunt, but deceased-Krishni Devi wanted to give whole of the property to her grandson, deceased-Parkash Singh to the exclusion of appellant-Prem Nath. On account of this dispute, the appellant-Prem Nath in conspiracy with other appellants, who happen to be his brothers and nephew thought of committing murder of both the deceased so as to achieve his objective of succeeding to the property of Situ, husband of deceased-Krishni Devi. After the occurrence, appellants absconded and they were arrested from a cave inside the forest when the Police launched a massive manhunt. Though the circumstance of abscondence is also a week circumstance for connecting the accused to the crime, yet when read with other circumstances, it does point to the conclusion of the guilt of the accused. It has also been established that weapons of offence and objects stained with the blood of the deceased were recovered on the basis of disclosure statements made by the appellants from the places regarding which only the appellants had the knowledge. The scientific evidence on record has proved that finger prints of appellants viz., Guddi Ram, Krishan Chand and Sita Ram were found on the three weapons of offence i.e. ‘Toka’, ‘Drahat’ and ‘Axe’. When these circumstances are read with the evidence regarding similarity of hair strands of the deceased with the hair strands found on the weapons of offence, ‘Drahat’ and ‘Toka’, it can safely be concluded that it is the appellants who are the authors of the crime.
DB is of the opinion that the impugned judgment does not call for any interference by this Court. The same is elaborate and lucid. In fact, the Trial Judge has meticulously analysed and appreciated the evidence on record and reached a correct conclusion. There is no illegality much less any perversity in the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly. The reference made by the trial court is accepted and the order of sentence passed by the said court is confirmed.
