9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o changed was then compared with the photograph of the dead body - there are no reason to differ from the view taken by the High Court. The transactions as have been admitted by the Appellant. The signatures alleged to have been put by Pushpa Verma on said documents is seen - the signatures are compared and it is found that the view taken by the High Court in that behalf to be correct. It is impossible and inconceivable that a lady who had retired as head mistress would mis-spell her own name while putting signatures. The flow of signature as evident from the admitted source is completely of a different nature. The signatures on the documents in question, to a naked eye, cannot be that of Pushpa Verma. Further, there is no reason why a lady who has two sisters and two Advocate nephews staying in same town, would give power of attorney and execute a Will in favour of a total stranger. These circumstances are clinchingly against the Appellant. His assertion that he had made over the payments received in cash to Pushpa Verma is not supported by any material on record. In fact, the Appellant kept receiving payments even in the month of March, 2003. None of the payments are reflected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther rigorous imprisonment for six months Under Section 364 Indian Penal Code and to rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months Under Section 201 Indian Penal Code All the sentences are to run concurrently. The conviction and sentence as recorded by the trial court has been affirmed by the High Court in the judgment under appeal. 4. The instant matter has genesis in Daily Diary Report (Ext. PA) lodged with Police Post, Sector 13, Karnal, by Chander Prakash on 16.03.2003 giving missing report about his sister Pushpa Verma. According to the report, she was missing since 20/22 January, 2003 and had not been receiving any calls since then. The follow-up action on this report indicates that information was sent to all the districts and all the police stations were intimated through wireless. On 18.05.2003 Chander Prakash moved an application (Ext. PC) for registration of an offence against the Appellant stating that he suspected that the Appellant wanted to grab her plots at Panipat and Gurgaon by preparing forged documents and that he had kidnapped her or murdered her. This rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reed to transfer Gurgaon property in favour of prospective purchasers and received part consideration of Rupees 2.5 Lakhs (Rupees 1.5 Lakhs in cash while Rupees One Lakhs by way of a cheque in the name of the Appellant himself). On 24.03.2003, further sum of Rupees Three Lakhs was received by the Appellant and endorsement to that effect was made on the agreement itself. e. On 31.03.2003 a demand draft of Rupees Five Thousand towards the fees for seeking permission to transfer Gurgaon property was taken out and enclosed along with the application (Ext. PJ) seeking permission to transfer that property. This application was preferred by the Appellant in his capacity as general power of attorney and was received in the office of HUDA on 03.04.2003. f. It appears that the signatures of Pushpa Verma on the general power of attorney submitted by the Appellant did not tally with her original signatures available on record with HUDA and a letter to that effect was dispatched on 07.04.2003. This was followed by another letter dated 24.04.2003 (Ext. PH) by HUDA addressed to Pushpa Verma with a copy to the Appellant asking her to remain present personally in the office in connection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant felt that Pushpa Verma suspected some foul play and therefore the Appellant plotted a scheme to finish her. On 23.01.2003 she expressed desire to visit Haridwar, on which pretext he took her in a car and after having administered a sedative, throttled her and while she was unconscious near Roorkee, threw her body in a canal known as Gang Canal in between villages Liverheri and Mangalore. F. After the arrest of the Appellant, voter identity card Ext. P-12 of Pushpa Verma was recovered from the bushes near Gang Canal where her dead body was thrown. Such recovery was in pursuance of the disclosure statement of the Appellant Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. In order to prove this part, the prosecution relied upon the testimony of PW 12 Mahir Hussain, Photographer and the testimony of PW 19 Investigating Officer Vijay Anand. G. Pursuant to the disclosure statement of the Appellant, a gold ring bearing inscription PV was also recovered from the house of the Appellant. The evidence in that behalf was available through PW5 Muktiyar Singh and PW6 Ashok Sharma. 6. In defence, the Appellant examined four witnesses. It was projected that an unidentified dead bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound that the case against the Appellant stood completely established. As regards application Under Section 391 Code of Criminal Procedure, it was observed that the Appellant had taken the defence that the dead body recovered in Muzaffar Nagar was actually that of Pushpa Verma and in such circumstances it was imperative for him to have examined the expert in his defence at the trial court stage itself and that the report of the privately engaged Forensic Expert at such belated stage could not be allowed to be taken on record. The High Court thus dismissed the appeal affirming the conviction and sentence of the Appellant. 9. This judgment of the High Court is presently under appeal. Crl. Miscellaneous Petition No. 10525 of 2012 was filed in the present matter seeking leave to bring on record additional documents which include the order of conviction in so far as aforementioned Suresh is concerned Under Section 25 of the Arms Act as well as deposition of the very same Sub Registrar S.P. Meena in Civil Suit No. 142 of 2009. Said Civil Suit was filed by Chander Prakash against the present Appellant seeking to invalidate the transactions allegedly entered into by Pushpa Verma. In tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he trial court stage itself and the High Court was right and justified in rejecting the prayer to lead additional evidence at the appellate stage. Nonetheless, we have gone through the report of said Forensic Expert engaged by the Appellant. The exercise undertaken by that expert is to start with the admitted photograph of Pushpa Verma on a computer, then remove the bindi by some process on the computer, then by same process remove her spectacles and by computer imaging change the image as it would have looked if the lady was lying down in an injured condition. The computer image so changed was then compared with the photograph of the dead body. We have seen both the images and we are not convinced at all about any element of similarity. We do not therefore see any reason to differ from the view taken by the High Court. 12. In the submissions of Mr. Brijender Chahar, learned Senior Advocate the circumstances E, F and G as culled out in paragraph 5 hereinabove were not proved at all and the transactions were completely genuine. It was submitted that it is impossible to believe that the Voter Identity Card of Pushpa Verma could be recovered from the bushes four months after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... office of HUDA. There is nothing on record to show that the Appellant had undertaken any attempt, if he was genuinely acting as power of attorney on her behalf. We are satisfied that the circumstances on record, even if we were to disregard that relating to the recovery of Voter Identity Card Ext.P-12, do suggest only one hypothesis and that is the guilt of the Appellant. The defence set up by the Appellant does not inspire any confidence and merits rejection. The appeal, therefore fails and is dismissed. 14. Before we part, we must deal with the conduct of PW10 S.P. Meena. As Sub-Registrar, it was expected of him and was fundamental part of his duty to see that the persons who are entering into transactions must appear before him in person and the documents would be registered only after the essential formalities were undertaken. His evidence in the present case shows rank dereliction of duty. Add to it, his attempt to strike a different chord in the private proceedings is also questionable. He appeared as witness for the Appellant and took a contradictory stand on oath. Such conduct must be dealt with strictly so that the matters of registration continue to have confidence in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
