State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

IN THE COURT OF VED PARKASH SIROHI ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE CHANDIGARH.

S T A T E
Ve !"! 1 2 Ravdeep Kaur w/o Sh. Raghvinder Singh, r/o 19-A, Nihal Bagh, Baradari, Patiala. Man it Singh ! Binu "on o# Sh. Kuldip Singh Ra$da"ia, r/o %illage Shei&hupur, Near Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala, Poli*e Station Sadar, Patiala. ....A**u"ed. F.I.R N#. 321 #$ 14.10.200%. U&'e Se()*#&! 302+34+10,+11%+120-. IPC/ P#0*(e S)1)*#& : C*2*0 L*&e!/ P1)*101. 3333333333333 Pre"ent+ Sh. %i a) Ku$ar Singla, Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or State. A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in *u"tod) repre"ented ') Sh. Baldev Singh, Senior Advo*ate a""i"ted ') Sh Ran an ,upta, Advo*ate. A**u"ed Man it Singh in *u"tod) repre"ented ') Sh. Ra'indra Pandit, Advo*ate.

JUDGMENT
-he #a*tual $atri. *ul$inating to the trial are that on 1/.10.2001, a telephoni* $e""age wa"

re*eived in the Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine", Patiala

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

#ro$ A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala with regard to $urder o# Sh. %i a) Singh, 5udge. 6n thi" 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh,

S46, Poli*e 3ine", Patiala along with AS7 Satpal Singh, 42 5a"pal Singh, No. 1/0/, 2on"ta'le 4ardeep Singh, No. /81, 2on"ta'le ,urdial Singh, No. 1/19, 2.77 Bahadur

Singh No. 191: in a ,overn$ent vehi*le No. PB11-AA-1;12 rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala where *o$plainant Shiv Ra Singh "on o# 3ate A itinder Singh, re"ident o#

Kothi Ra a Shivda)al Singh, Ra indra ,arden, Stadiu$ Road, Patiala $et hi$ and got hi" "tate$ent re*orded to the e##e*t that on 1/.10.2001 at a'out 12+/0 a.$.

Satinder Singh ! 2hanni, re"ident o# Patiala, a #riend o# %i a) Singh *a$e to hi" hou"e and in#or$ed that A'dullah Noori, re"ident o# <elhi, who u"ed to organi=e dog "how with %i a) Singh, had in#or$ed hi$ on

telephone that "o$e ti$e 'a*& %i a) Singh wa" tal&ing with "o$e 'od) on hi" $o'ile phone who heard hi"

"*rea$" and therea#ter, there wa" no noi"e #ro$ that "ide. Being worried on re*eipt o# in#or$ation, he

$ade a telephone *all to the hou"e o# hi" 'rother-inlaw %i a) Singh and *a$e to &now that %i a) Singh had gone out #or a wal& in late hour" and had not returned a" )et. ,round Singh. -hen he along with Satinder Singh rea*hed Polo and $ade "ear*h o# hi" 'rother-in-law %i a)

-hen with the help o# tor*h light he #ound

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

%i a)

Singh

l)ing

on

the

ground

"$eared

with

'lood

toward" the lower Mall Road "ide -ra*& o# the Polo ,round. -here were in urie" with "harp edged weapon on -here were deep -he

the #a*e and ne*& o# %i a) Singh.

in urie" on hi" *he"t, "to$a*h, leg" and head. 'lood wa" oo=ing out o# the in urie".

Mo'ile Phone "et

o# hi" 'rother-in-law wa" l)ing near') wherea", the another $o'ile phone wa" l)ing 'ro&en. the in ured to A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala -he) "hi#ted in their *ar

where he wa" de*lared 'rought dead.

4i" 'rother-in-law

%i a) Singh had 'een $urdered ') "o$e un&nown per"on" and a" and when he #ind" "o$e *lue, he will in#or$ the poli*e. $ade At a'out 2+/0 a.$. the inve"tigating o##i*er endor"e$ent on the "tate$ent o# the

hi"

*o$plainant and "ent a ru>a through 2on"ta'le ,urdial Singh, No. 1/19 to the poli*e "tation #or regi"tration o# the *a"e. 2. 6n re*eipt o# the ru>a, a #or$al ?7R under

Se*tion" ;02/119/111/120-B/;/ o# 7ndian Penal 2ode wa" regi"tered. -he inve"tigation wa" "et in $otion. -he

"enior poli*e o##i*er" al"o rea*hed at A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala. Singh -here were "o$e hair in right hand o# %i a) were ta&en $e$o. into -he poli*e $o'ile po""e""ion phone o# vide %i a)

whi*h

"eparate

re*over)

Singh produ*ed ') the *o$plainant, wa" al"o ta&en into

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

poli*e

po""e""ion the

vide

"eparate

re*over) the

$e$o. o#

-herea#ter, o**urren*e. and other

poli*e

part)

vi"ited

pla*e

7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh, 7n*harge 27A Sta## poli*e o##i*ial" al"o rea*hed there.

Photographer, Movie$a&er and dog ">uad al"o rea*hed at the "pot. S7M *ard 6ne $o'ile phone "et $a&e No&ia 1100, the o# whi*h wa" al"o l)ing there, were al"o

re*overed #ro$ the pla*e o# o**urren*e and were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion. li#ted #ro$ the "pot. o# o**urren*e wa" Blood "tained earth wa" al"o

-he rough "ite plan o# the pla*e -hen the poli*e part)

prepared.

along with photographer and video $ovie $a&er rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala. ta&en. Photograph" o# dead 'od) were

6n poli*e re>ue"t a 'oard *on"i"ting o# <r.

R.K.,ore)a, <r. K.K.Aggarwal, <r. Man it Singh Bal and <r. A$ar it Singh wa" *on"tituted and the po"t$orte$ o# dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh wa" *ondu*ted ') "aid 'oard o# <o*tor". prepared. -he %ideo Movie o# the po"t$orte$ wa"

-he report o# the po"t$orte$ wa" *olle*ted.

A" per the po"t$orte$ report there were 21 in urie" on the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh. -he par*el re*eived #ro$

the <o*tor a#ter po"t$orte$ e.a$ination wa" depo"ited with the M42, Man it Singh. ;. 6n 1/.10.2001 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh, 7n*harge

27A Sta##, Patiala, interrogated Narain Singh ! Ba''u,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

Servant o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur, who di"*lo"ed a'out the relation"hip o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur with %i a) Singh. al"o di"*lo"ed a'out the pre"en*e o# Man it 4e

Singh

,ranthi, re"ident o# She&hupura in the retiring roo$ o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur. -he $o'ile phone re*ord o# in*o$ing 6n 11.10.2001 <7,,

and outgoing *all" wa" *olle*ted.

Patiala Range, Patiala *on"tituted a "pe*ial tea$ #or inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e *on"tituting o# SP 2it), <SP and other Senior 6##i*er". -he inve"tigating o##i*er -he "tate$ent o#

vi"ited the hou"e o# %i a) Singh.

$other o# %i a) Singh and hi" wi#e <eepinder Kaur were re*orded under Se*tion 1:1 2r.P.2. a**u"ed in their "tate$ent". -he) na$ed 'oth the

-hen a raid wa" *ondu*ted

at the hou"e o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur 'ut it wa" #ound lo*&ed. @hen Ravi 4o"pital wa" raided, it wa" al"o -hen hou"e o# Man it Singh wa" raided Aven on 1:.10.2001, the

#ound l*o&ed.

'ut it wa" al"o l)ing lo*&ed.

a**u"ed *ould not 'e tra*ed de"pite repeated raid" at their pre$i"e". -he re*ord o# *o$plaint $ade ') <r.

Ravdeep Kaur again"t %i a) Singh through her "ervant Narain Singh wa" *olle*ted. o# Satinder Singh ! 2hanni 6n 19.10.2001 "tate$ent and San a) Kapila were

re*orded in whi*h the) "tated that %i a) Singh u"ed to tell the$ that <r. Ravdeep Kaur a#ter leaving her

hu"'and, wa" pre""uri=ing hi$ #or $arriage with her #or

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

the la"t $ore than two )ear" and "he wa" ta&ing help o# one Man it Singh. 6n one or two o**a"ion", Ravdeep -he

Kaur had pointed toward" hi$ to Man it Singh.

photograph" and 2<" o# pla*e o# o**urren*e were ta&en in poli*e po""e""ion. -hen "tate$ent o# 3a&h'ir Singh

! 3a&hi wa" re*orded who di"*lo"ed that he wa" #riend o# %i a) Singh "in*e *hildhood. %i a) Singh u"ed to

tell hi$ a'out Ravdeep Kaur that "he wa" pre""ing to ta&e divor*e #ro$ hi" wi#e <eepi and $arr)ing her.

She al"o *reated a "*ene in the 2ourt at 3udhiana 'ut he never gave an) re"pon"e to her. A'out 1B $onth ago

near CPS 2how&, Patiala, "he pin pointed one per"on toward" hi$, a'out who$ he *a$e to &now that he wa" Man it Singh. -herea#ter, "tate$ent o# Rupinder Singh

wa" re*orded to who$ <r. Ravdeep Kaur narrated whole "tor) and re>ue"ted #or help. Ravdeep Kaur wa" arre"ted. wa" prepared. $o'ile phone" 6n 18.10.2001 a**u"ed

4er per"onal "ear*h $e$o

?ro$ her pur"e two "$all diarie", two having nu$'er" 98119-0:001 and

98880-;/099, a *a"h o# R".100/- and driving li*en*e were re*overed. 6n the "a$e da), 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh

arre"ted a**u"ed Man it Singh and R2, 7dentit) *ard, R".10,000/- in *a"h, *lothe" "tained with 'lood were re*overed #ro$ hi" -A-A 209 No. <312-<-919:. 6ne

e$pt) 'o. o# $o'ile phone No&ia ;220 and 'ill were al"o

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

re*overed.

?ro$ hi" per"onal "ear*h one "$all diar),

&ara, diar) *ontaining $o'ile phone nu$'er" 2209999DRE, 2292082 ho"pital, 98119-0:001, 98880-;/099 and *a"h o# R".1980/were re*overed whi*h were ta&en into

po""e""ion ') the poli*e vide "eparate re*over) $e$o". -he rough "ite plan o# the pla*e and and o# re*over) $e$o wa" o#

prepared. a**u"ed

Per"onal

"ear*h -he

$e$o hair

arre"t 'lood

were

prepared.

"tained

earth were depo"ited in the o##i*e o# ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), 2handigarh. /. Man it 6n 19.10.2001 di"*lo"ure "tate$ent o# a**u"ed Singh wa" re*orded he and got in pur"uan*e o# hi" o#

di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent,

re*overed

weapon

o##en*e i.e. Kirpan #ro$ Bha&hra Kanal #ro$ ,hanaur to Sa$'hu "ide and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide "eparate re*over) $e$o. and the photograph" o# -he video $ovie wa" prepared the pla*e o# re*over) were

ta&en.

-he "ite plan o# pla*e o# re*over) wa" al"o 6n 20.10.2001 in pur"uan*e o# the di"*lo"ure

prepared.

"tate$ent $ade ') a**u"ed Man it Singh R". / 3a*" were re*overed #ro$ the 4ar$oniu$ o# the a**u"ed. 6ne 3M3

?reedo$ Motor *)*le 'earing No. PB/2-B-21/2 along with R2, "even photograph" o# di##erent po"ture" and

learnerF" li*en*e were al"o re*overed on 21.10.2001. 2ar 'earing No. PB11-N-0110, u"ed in the o##en*e along

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

with Audio 2a""ette having photograph o# Man it Singh a**u"ed were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion. "ear*h o# hou"e No. and o# a**u"ed Ravdeep, and poli*e 'ill" <uring the o# 4(-24 were vide

telephone re*overed

98880-;/099 ta&en into

98880-9/099 po""e""ion

"eparate re*over) $e$o". to the $edi*al treat$ent o#

-wo diarie", paper" relating o# a**u"ed Man it Singh, two

i$$igration

paper"

a**u"ed

Ravdeep

Kaur,

photograph", one with her hu"'and and other o# Man it Singh were re*overed. re*over) were prepared. 'an& a**ount" o# Rough "ite plan o# pla*e o# 6n 21.10.2001 the "tate$ent o# Kaur with State Ban& o#

Ravdeep

Patiala and 2anara Ban& were al"o ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion. Singh were 6n ta&en 22.10.2001 in 2ourt hair #or o# a**u"ed Man it 6n

*o$pari"on.

2;.10.2001 "ear*h o# Ravi 4o"pital wa" *ondu*ted and a *op) o# *o$plaint $ade again"t %i a) Singh to the

4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e Sh. B.K.Ro), 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh wa" re*overed. *ard o# F,reh o# Prave"hF Kennal o# 2lu' a**u"ed were -he invitation Man it Singh and and

*erti#i*ate ta&en $e$o. o# into

al"o

re*overed

poli*e

po""e""ion

vide

"eparate

re*over)

6n 2:.10.2001 a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in pur"uan*e di"*lo"ure "tate$ent got re*overed R".2

her

3a*",

.;2 'ore pi"tol, ar$" li*en*e, driving li*en*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

o# %i a) Singh, 'lood "tained "port "hoe" o# Man it Singh whi*h were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide

"eparate re*over) $e$o". o# re*over) wa" prepared. o# 4(-24 2o$pan) wa"

-he rough "ite plan o# pla*e 6n 2:.10.2001, the S7M *ard #ro$ a**u"ed Man it

re*overed

Singh. prepared.

-he rough "ite plan o# pla*e o# re*over) wa" -he *all re*ord" o# $o'ile phone No.

98880-9/099 G 98880;/099 were *olle*ted.

6n *o$pletion

o# inve"tigation, the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh were "ent up to #a*e trial #or *o$$i""ion o# o##en*e puni"ha'le under Se*tion ;02 read with Se*tion ;/, 109, 111, 120-B o# 7ndian Penal 2ode. 1. A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh were

"ent up to #a*e trial a" $entioned a'ove and the 2ourt o# <r. Ra nee"h, the then learned 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala vide order dated 09.01.200:,

*o$$itted the *a"e to the *ourt o# learned Se""ion" 5udge, Patiala. the 4onF'le 4owever, vide order dated 0;.02.200: 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana at

4igh

2handigarh tran"#erred thi" *a"e #ro$ the 2ourt o# Sh. Bhupinder Singh, Additional <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge, Patiala to the 2ourt o# learned <i"tri*t and Se""ion" 5udge, 2handigarh, who a""igned the *a"e to thi" *ourt #or di"po"al in a**ordan*e with law. :. ?ro$ the peru"al o# the report under "e*tion

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

10

19;

o#

the

2ode

o#

2ri$inal

Pro*edure

and

other

$aterial on #ile, a pri$a #a*ie *a"e #or the *o$$i""ion o# the o##en*e puni"ha'le under Se*tion" ;02 read with "e*tion 120-B o# 7ndian Penal 2ode wa" $ade out again"t the a**u"ed, there#ore, the) were *harge "heeted

a**ordingl) vide order dated 19.08.200:.

-he a**u"ed

pleaded not guilt) to the *harge and *lai$ed trial. -he *a"e wa" a**ordingl) #i.ed #or pro"e*ution eviden*e. 9. 7n order to "u'"tantiate a" $an) N## * a" a" it" *a"e, the ?i#t) Seven R16

pro"e*ution witne""e",

e.a$ined na$el)

A4'"0015

P@-1,

S5*2

S*&75 a" P@-2, HC J1!810 S*&75 a" P@-;, HC D*04175 S*&75 a" P@-/, C. J1!9*&'e S&e5* a" P@-:, HC G" 6*&'e S*&75 a" P@-8, S1)*&'e S*&75 a" P@-10, P10 a" P@-1, SI R16e!5 S*&75 a" P@-9, ASI U'51:

S*&75 Se;5#& a" P@-9, L1;54* S*&75 a" P@-11, D .

R"8*&'e

K.K.A771 910 a" P@-12, R16*&'e

P10 J1* 1)5 a" P@-1;,

S#51& S*&75 a" P@-1/, H1 41&! S*&75 a" P@-11, S1 2*&'e S*&75 G e910 a" P@-1:, N1 e!5 K":1 a" P@-18, S"&'e a" P@-19, K1:0e!5

L10 S51 :1 a" P@-19, H1 (51&' S*&75 a"

P@-20, V*8"0 P1 ;!5 a" P@-21, G" 6*) S*&75 a" P@-22, K"0'*8 N1 *&'e S*&75 K":1 a" P@-2;, a" S" *&'e P@-21, K":1 D51 1:6*) a" P@-2/, a"

K": 1

S*&75

P@-2:, I!5) P10 S*&75 a" P@-29, P1 :*&'e P@-28, R16*&'e

P10 S*&75 a"

S*&75 S*'5" a" P@-29, I&'e e!5 K51&&1

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

11

a" P@-;0, D . M#&*;1 a" P@-;1, C. A&1 C. J169*&'e S*&75 a" P@-;;, J#7*&'e

S*&75 a" P@-;2, S*&75 a" P@-;/, K1" a" P@-;:,

C. R1: S*&75 a" P@-;1, S:). Dee8*&'e D . A:1&'ee8 K1" K *!51& K":1 Ke!1 a" P@-;9, M";5)*1

S*&75 a" P@-;8,

a" P@-;9, HC M1&6*) S*&75 a" P@-/0, HC

S*&75 a" P@-/1, A:*) T1<10 a" P@-/2, ASI S#51&

S*&75 a" P@-/;, SI D51 1: De2 a" P@-//, G" :*) S*&75 a" P@-/1, SI J1!9*&'e S*&75 a" P@-/:, I&!8e()# J1!!1

S*&75 a" P@-/9, S5*21 N1&' a" P@-/8, D1 1 S*&75 a" P@-/9, J"710 K*!5# e a" P@-10, HC J17)1 S*&75 a"

P@-11, A:*) K":1 P@-1;, D .

a" P@-12, ASI R1: K*!51& S*&75 a" 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"",

R16&ee!5,

2handigarh a" P@-1/, ASI G" :1*0 S*&75 a" P@-11, DSP Se91 S*&75/ 7nve"tigating 6##i*er a" P@-1: and S"&*0 R1&1 a" P@-19. 8. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State gave up 2. ,urdial Singh, <r. R.K.,oria, <r. M.S. Bal, <r. A$ar it Singh, ,ur"haran Singh, AS7 Sat Pal, P@ ,aurav ,hai, 2D77E 5a"'ir Singh, No. ;229, 42 277 5a"'ir Singh, No. ;2/1, S$t. 5ana$ it Kaur, San a)

Kapila, Satinder Pal Singh ! Bittu, 5oginder Singh ! -oni, Singh, Singh, report So$ Nath, Parveen Kaur, Par&a"h 2. Kaur, Sohan Pal

Kuldeep

Kaur,

Beena,

Pappu,

%arinder

42 Baldev Singh and tendered into eviden*e the o# <eput) <ire*tor DSeroE ?oren"i* S*ien*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

12

3a'orator), A..P-291,

Pun a', o#

2handigarh <eput)

dated

29.11.2001 DSeroE

a"

report

<ire*tor

?oren"i*

S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh dated 11.01.200: a" A..P-292, report o# <eput) <ire*tor DSeroE ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh dated 08.12.2001 a" A..P-29;, report o# <eput) <ire*tor DSeroE ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh dated 08.12.2001 a" A..P-29/, report o# <eput) <ire*tor DSeroE ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh dated 08.12.2001 a" A..P-291, report o# <eput) <ire*tor D<o*u$ent"E

o##i*e o# <ire*tor ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a' dated 22.02.200: a" A..P-298 and *lo"ed the eviden*e

o# the pro"e*ution vide hi" "tate$ent dated 10.0/.2010. 9. 7n their "tate$ent" re*orded under Se*tion ;1;

o# 2r.P.2., the a**u"ed denied the allegation" again"t the$ and pleaded inno*en*e. 7n de#en*e eviden*e,

a**u"ed have e.a$ined a" $an) a" twent) two witne""e" na$el) S5. A:*) K#50* a" <@-1, C. M1&'ee8 S*&75 a" <@-2, J1!4* S*&75 a" <@-;, C. M16# S*&75 a" <@-/, HC

G" :";5 S*&75 a" <@-1, HC R1(5810 S*&75 a" <@-:, HC S";5'e2 S*&75 a" <@-9, HC K"09*&'e R1: K":1 <@-11, <@-1;, <@-11, a" <@-9, J1)*&'e S*&75 S*&75 a" a" K":1 <@-12, <@-1/, a" S*&75 a" <@-8, HC

a" <@-10, P1 1:6*) a" P1 :*'&e HC M10;*) Dee81; S*&75 S*&75 S*&75 a" a" a"

P1 1:6*) K"091&) C.

G" 8 ee)

S*&75

<@-1:,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

13

<@-19, L1;59*&'e

S*&75 a" <@-18,

I&'e 6*) S*&75 a"

<@-19, J17'*!5 C51&' a" <@-20, N12'ee8 G"8)1 a" <@-21 and S1)810 a" <@-22 and *lo"ed their de#en*e eviden*e in ter$" o# their "tate$ent dated 12.0;.2012. 10. 7 have heard Sh. %i a) Ku$ar Singla, Spe*ial

Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or State, Sh. Baldev Singh, Senior Advo*ate a""i"ted ') Sh. Ran an ,upta, 2oun"el #or

a**u"ed Ravdeep KaurH Sh. Ra'indra Pandit, 2oun"el #or a**u"ed Man it Singh and have gone through the *a"e #ile *are#ull) and thoroughl). 11. -o 'ring ho$e the guilt o# the a**u"ed, the

pro"e*ution #ir"t o# all e.a$ined A4'"0015 N## * "on o# Khan Shari# Khan a" P=-1 who te"ti#ied on oath that he ha" 'een in 7ndia "in*e 1989 and i" a *iti=en o# A#ghani"tan. %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed wa" a udi*ial

o##i*er and &nown to hi$ "in*e 199:.

4e $et hi$ #or 4e

the #ir"t ti$e in a dog "how in 199: in New <elhi.

$et hi$ la"t on 29.09.2001 at hi" DA'dullah NooriF"E re"iden*e when the de*ea"ed wa" going to Madra" ') air. 4e had dropped hi$ at Air Port, New <elhi. #riendl) lover". with ea*h other a" 'oth o# the$ -he) were were dog

4e had $et hi$ in Patiala al"o in *onne*tion -he) were on

with dog "how and even at hi" re"iden*e.

vi"iting ter$" and he had "ta)ed $an) a ti$e" at hi" re"iden*e and the de*ea"ed had "ta)ed $an) a ti$e" with

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

14

hi$ in New <elhi. on telephone al"o.

-he) had 'een intera*ting with other 4e #urther depo"ed that Satinder !

2hanni re"ident o# Patiala wa" al"o per"onall) &nown to hi$. 4e al"o parti*ipate in dog "how and in that 4e had 'een

*onne*tion the) *a$e *lo"e to ea*h other.

#riendl) with hi$ al"o and the) had 'een tal&ing with ea*h other on telephone. o**a"ionall). 4e 1;.10.2001 #urther at a'out te"ti#ied 10+;0 on oath he that on a -he) u"ed to vi"it ea*h other

p.$.,

re*eived

telephoni* *all #ro$ -ina Martin who wa" *alling #ro$ ,er$an). She appri"ed hi$ that "he had re*eived a

telephoni* *all #ro$ de*ea"ed %i a) Singh and when "he had tal&ed with hi$ #or a'out one $inute the phone got di"*onne*ted a#ter "he heard a *r) o# %i a) Singh. 4e

then rang up to %i a) Singh on hi" telephone nu$'er 'ut the "a$e #ound "wit*hed o##. hi" re"iden*e on land line. telephone. -hen he gave a *all at 4i" wi#e pi*&ed up the

4e en>uired #ro$ her regarding %i a) Singh.

She told hi$ that %i a) Singh had gone #or a wal& a "hort while 'e#ore. Stating that "he wa" not #eeling

well, %i a) SinghF" wi#e di"*onne*ted the phone #ro$ other "ide. having -hen he telephoned Satinder Singh ! Sunn) hi$ o# the *all and the "ituation

appri"ed

re#erred to herein a'ove regarding the *ondition o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

15

%i a) Singh. re"iden*e o#

4e a"&ed hi$ to per"onall) go to the %i a) Singh and veri#) the "ituation.

A#ter ;1//0 $inute" therea#ter, 2hanni *alled hi$ 'a*& on telephone and he wa" weeping. 4e "tated that %i a)

Singh wa" no $ore and "o$e 'od) had a""a""inated hi$ with a "word in Polo ,round at Patiala. -hen he ru"hed 4e rea*hed at a'out

to Patiala #ro$ <elhi ') hi" private *ar. Patiala at the re"iden*e o# %i a) Singh

9+;0/10 on ne.t da).

So$e attendant pre"ent at hi"

re"iden*e e"*orted hi$ to Ra endra 4o"pital where %i a) Singh wa" "tated re*orded to hi" 'e ho"pitali=ed. 6ne -wo poli*e wa"

o##i*ial"

"tate$ent.

o##i*er

a"&ing hi$ >ue"tion and "tate$ent. 4e #urther

other one wa" re*ording hi" depo"ed that #ir"tl) hi"

"tate$ent wa" re*orded in Pun a'i and then in Angli"h. 12. "tated 'rother 6##i*er,

P=-2 S5*2 R16 S*&75 "on o# A itinder Singh

po"ted

Pre"iding he wa"

3a'our

2handigarh

Additional Se""ion" 5udge. 1;/1/.10.2001 at a'out

6n the intervening night o# 12+/1 a.$. Satinder Singh

2hanni, who wa" one o# the #riend" o# %i a) Singh *a$e to hi$ at hi" re"iden*e. re*eived telephoni* *all 4e told hi$ that he had #ro$ A'dullah Noorie #ro$

<elhi that he had re*eived a *all #ro$ ,er$an) that

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

16

when he wa" tal&ing with %i a) Singh on telephone, the telephone wa" di"*onne*ted a#ter he had heard a *r) o# %i a) Singh. per"on who 4e had not di"*lo"ed hi$ na$e o# that wa" tal&ing with %i a) Singh a" a'ove.

4aving heard a'out thi" he rang up Mr". %i a) Singh. 4e en>uired #ro$ her a'out %i a) Singh a" to where he wa". She di"*lo"ed that %i a) Singh had gone #or a 4e

wal& out"ide and he had not returned ') that ti$e.

and Satinder Singh 2hanni then rea*hed Polo ,round ') 2hanniF" *ar. 4aving par&ed the *ar out"ide the par&

the) entered into the par& #ro$ lower $all "ide o# the par&. -he) "tarted "ear*hing %i a) Singh there with a -he) #ound %i a) Singh

help o# tor*h he wa" holding.

l)ing on the tra*& toward" lower $all/A$ar A"hra$ "ide. 4e wa" in in ured *ondition. B) hi" "ide hi" $o'ile A "$all $o'ile Satinder

phone #itted with *o$puter wa" l)ing.

in a 'ro&en *ondition wa" al"o l)ing there.

Singh 2hanni then 'rought hi" *ar in"ide the ground. Both o# the$ pi*&ed up %i a) Singh, put hi$ in the *ar and too& hi$ to A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala ') that *ar. -he) handed over the 'od) o# %i a) Singh to <o*tor" there. <o*tor" e.a$ined hi$ and de*lared hi$ dead. 4e had $ade "tate$ent A..Pwho"e na$e he doe" not

Poli*e al"o rea*hed there. A 'e#ore poli*e o##i*er

re*olle*t.

4e #urther depo"ed that poli*e too& the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

17

dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh in po""e""ion and the) "tarted e.a$ining it. -he poli*e re$oved "o$e hair #ound

*lit*hed in the pal$ o# right hand and too& the "a$e into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-A/1 a#ter having $ade the$ into a par*el in a "$all 'o. whi*h wa" "ealed with the "eal 'earing i$pre""ion ISSJ. to Satpal, a poli*e o##i*ial. Seal wa" handed over -he poli*e al"o ta&en

into po""e""ion the $o'ile #itted with *o$puter whi*h the) had retrieved #ro$ the "ite where %i a) Singh wa" l)ing, vide $e$o A..P-A/2. 4e #urther depo"ed that

having "ta)ed #or "o$e ti$e in ho"pital, the) again went to the pla*e where %i a) Singh wa" #ound l)ing in in ured *ondition. rea*hed there. B) that ti$e dog ">uad had alread)

Photographer, a $ovie $a&er 'e"ide"

large nu$'er o# poli*e *ontingent were alread) there. Poli*e "ite. had pi*&ed up 'lood "tained earth #ro$ that

-he "a$e wa" put into a "$all 'o..

7t wa" $ade

into a par*el and then "ealed with "a$e "eal i.e. ISSJ whi*h wa" ta&en 'a*& #ro$ Satpal. A#ter "ealing the -he

par*el, the "eal wa" again returned to Satpal.

"aid par*el wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..PA/;. -he 'ro&en $o'ile phone A..P-2 whi*h wa"

l)ing "*attered there wa" al"o ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..PA// a#ter a""e$'ling it" part". -he

three part" whi*h were a""e$'led

were the S7M *ard,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

18

the lid u"ed #or *overing the 'atter) and re$aining part o# the $o'ile. 4o"pital. -herea#ter, the) returned to A$ar

Prior to that "ite plan o# the pla*e o#

o**urren*e wa" drawn there on the "pot ') the poli*e o##i*ial". 4e #urther depo"ed that hi" "tate$ent wa"

again re*orded in the ho"pital regarding the re*overie" having 'een e##e*ted a" a'ove. At 9+;0/9+/1 a.$. the) -he)

had ta&en the dead 'od) to Ra indra 4o"pital. were e"*orted ') poli*e. *arr)ing the 'od).

4o"pital van wa" u"ed #or

7n Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala the

dead 'od) o# de*ea"ed wa" got identi#ied #ro$ hi$ and in>ue"t report A..PA/1 wa" prepared. A..PA/: wa" al"o re*orded there. 1;. 4i" "tate$ent

P=-3 HC J1!810 S*&75, No. 1/0/ depo"ed on

oath that on 1/.10.2001 he wa" pre"ent at Mortuar), Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala. Be"ide" hi$ 7n"pe*tor Sewa

Singh wa" heading the poli*e part) o# whi*h he wa" a $e$'er. At that ti$e AS7 Satpal pre"ented a par*el

allegedl) *ontaining wearing apparell" o# the de*ea"ed %i a) Singh to 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh whi*h wa" "ealed with the "eal i$pre""ion IKKAJ. An i$pre""ion o# "eal -he "a$e were

wa" al"o handed over ') AS7 Satpal. ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-B. 1/.

HC D*04175 S*&75, No. 219/ te"ti#ied on oath

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

19

that on 1/.10.2001 he re*eived a telephoni* $e""age at a'out 2+00 a.$. to rea*h Polo ,round, Patiala. -he

$e""age wa" re*eived #ro$ night M42 #ro$ Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine", Patiala. 4e told hi$ that in Polo ,round

a 5udge ha" 'een $urdered and he "hould rea*h there with hi" *a$era a" he wa" a photographer. 4e had

undergone training o# photograph) in the )ear 1988 at Phillaur. Mo'ile 4e had ta&en along ,ur inder Singh #ro$ %ideo

?oren"i*

S*ien*e

3a'orator),

Patiala,

2a$era and whole &it #or photograph). "ite at a'out 2+;0 a.$.

-he) rea*hed the -he

<ead 'od) wa" not there.

"enior o##i*er" who were pre"ent there a"&ed the$ to go to A$ar 4o"pital #or ta&ing "nap" o# the dead 'od). -he) a**ordingl) went to A$ar 4o"pital. 4e too&

*ertain "nap" o# the dead 'od) there wherea", ,ur inder Singh $ade a $ovie #il$. 4aving done the o' there

the) rea*hed 'a*& at Polo ,round at a'out /+/1/1+00 a.$. ite$" 4e too& *ertain "nap" at the "ite re#le*ting the 'e"ide" -he depo"ed the 'lood "plattered in*luded doe" not on the ground 4e

therein. #urther

arti*le" that he

$o'ile

phone.

e.a*tl)

re*olle*t

whether it wa" a *o$pa*t phone or *o$ponent" thereo#. B) :+00 a.$. the) *o$pleted the wor& there. -he) At 4e

re$ained a""o*iated with the inve"tigating tea$. a'out 11/11+11 a.$. the) rea*hed Ra indra 4o"pital.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

20

too& Snap" o# the do*tor" and the dead 'od) when po"t $orte$ e.a$ination wa" in progre"". ,ur inder Singh 6n 19.10.2001

prepared the video #il$ o# that pro*e"".

he handed over the photograph" A..P2/28 to A..P2/1/ along with their negative" A..P2/1 to A..P2/29 to 7n"p. Sewa Singh whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2. 4e #urther depo"ed that the photograph" are

#ree #ro$ retou*hing. 11.

P=-% C. J1!9*&'e

P10, No. 2::8, tendered

hi" a##idavit A..P-< in hi" eviden*e. 1:.

P=-6 SI R16e!5 S&e5* re*orded the ?7R A..P-A

and $ade endor"e$ent A..PA/1 on ru>a whi*h wa" re*eived #ro$ 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh through 2on"ta'le ,urdial

Singh No. 1/19. 19.

P=-> HC G" 6*&'e

S*&75, No. 21:: te"ti#ied

on oath that on 1/.10.2001 he wa" po"ted a" Movie Ma&er in <i"tri*t Patiala. 6n that da) at a'out 2+00 a.$. he

re*eived a telephoni* *all #ro$ *ontrol roo$ a"&ing hi$ to rea*h Polo ,round Stadiu$ where "o$e $urder had 'een *o$$itted. 6n thi" he rea*hed at Polo ,round. -here

he #ound $an) poli*e o##i*er" alread) pre"ent and $et 7n"p. Sewa Singh. ?ro$ there he wa" ta&en to A$ar

4o"pital and #ro$ there to Ra indra 4o"pital where he wa" a"&ed to get a video #il$ prepared at the ti$e o# po"t$orte$ e.a$ination. -he) rea*hed there at a'out

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

21

10+/1

a.$.

and

i$$ediatel)

therea#ter,

po"t$orte$

e.a$ination wa" *ondu*ted.

4e videographed the pro*e""

o# po"t$orte$ e.a$ination and prepared a video *a""ette there#ro$ and then #ro$ that *a""ette he prepared a 2< A..P?/1. 6n 19.10.2001 he handed over that 2< to

7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh in 2ivil 3ine", Patiala vide $e$o A..P-?. 18.

P=-8 ASI U'51: S*&75 tendered the #ile A..P-

, o# the o##i*e o# Senior Superintendent o# Poli*e, Patiala *ontaining the *o$plaint" re*eived #ro$ Narain Singh and a*tion ta&en thereon ') the authorit). 19.

P=-, S1)*&'e

S*&75 Se;5#& ? C51&&* depo"ed

on oath that de*ea"ed %i a) Singh wa" well &nown to hi$. 4e wa" &nown hi$ #or the la"t 10/12 )ear". 4e i" al"o a dog lover. 4e

wa" a dog lover.

-he) u"ed to

parti*ipate in dog "how" together.

-here 'oth o# the$ -he) Noori.

$et one A'dullah Noori who wa" al"o a dog lover. were having *ordial relation" with A'dullah

-he) u"ed to $eet ea*h other ver) o#ten at <og "how". Be"ide" that the) had 'een tal&ing to ea*h other on telephone. $urdered. *all #ro$ 4e #urther depo"ed that %i a) Singh wa" 6n 1;th 6*to'er, 2001 he re*eived telephoni* A'dullah Noori #ro$ <elhi at a'out 12

$idnight.

4e "tated that he had re*eived a telephoni* A'dullah Noori

*all #ro$ ,er$an) #ro$ one -ina Martin.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

22

"tated that "he had told hi$ that "he wa" tal&ing with %i a) Singh on that da) at a'out 10+;0 p.$. and their *onver"ation wa" di"*onne*ted a#ter a'out one $inute a#ter "he had heard the "ound o# IAhF #ro$ %i a) Singh. She #urther a"&ed, a" "tated ') A'dullah Noori, to

veri#) the #a*t #ro$ the re"iden*e o# %i a) Singh a'out hi" well 'eing. 4aving thought #or a while he too& hi" Singh ! <i$p) who

*ar and went to the hou"e o# Shivra

wa" 'rother-in-law DSi"terF" hu"'andE o# %i a) Singh. 4e narrated the whole "*ene to hi$. then Shivra Singh a"&ed %i a) 7n hi" pre"en*e SinghF" wi#e on

telephone a" to where %i a) Singh wa".

She told that

%i a) Singh had gone #or a wal& at 10+00 p.$. and therea#ter, he had not returned. 4e and Shivra Singh

then went toward" Polo ,round where %i a) Singh u"uall) go #or a wal&. 4e and Shivra entered the Polo ,round -he)

#ro$ the "ide o# 3ower Mall near A$ar A"hra$. were holding tor*h.

-he) #ound %i a) Singh l)ing in a -he) "aw deep wound" on

pool o# 'lood on the tra*&. hi" #a*e and *he"t.

-he) "aw one $o'ile phone o#

'igger "i=e $a&e No&ia 'e"ide another "$all "i=e $o'ile phone l)ing there. wa" l)ing in a -he "$all $o'ile phone $a&e No&ia 'ro&en *ondition. 4e i$$ediatel)

'rought the *ar in"ide that ground.

4e and Shiv Ra

Singh pi*&ed up %i a) Singh and put hi$ into the *ar.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

23

Shivra

Singh <i$p) pi*&ed up the $o'ile DBigger "i=eE

and "hi#ted to A$ar 4o"pital whi*h i" "ituated 2 K$". awa) #ro$ that on hi$ pla*e. ha" -here the hi$ Medi*al a" 6##i*er dead.

attending

de*lared

'rought

A#ter a "hort while he "aw a poli*e o##i*ial" having arrived Shivra there. Singh. Poli*e Poli*e re*orded too& out the "tate$ent hair o#

*ertain

#ound 4aving

*lin*hed in the right #i"t o# %i a) Singh.

e.tra*ted the "a$e #ro$ there that hair wa" $ade into a par*el whi*h wa" "ealed in a pa*&et with "eal FSSF. -he "pe*i$en o# the "eal wa" ta&en and therea#ter, the par*el wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..PA/1 in hi" pre"en*e. over to AS7 Satpal. -he "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed

-he $o'ile phone D'igger "i=eE Singh #ro$ the "ite wa"

whi*h wa" pi*&ed up ') Shivra

al"o ta&en into po""e""ion ') the poli*e vide re*over) $e$o A..PA/2. -he $o'ile phone re*overed a" a'ove wa"

not "ealed there. 4e pro*eeding" #urther the depo"ed too& that the$ a#ter to the a'ove o#

poli*e

the

"ite

o**urren*e where #ro$ the) had pi*&ed the 'od) o# %i a) Singh. $ovie @hen the) rea*hed there the) #ound dog ">uad, $a&er, photographer 'e"ide" nu$'er o# poli*e

o##i*ial" alread) pre"ent. li#ted #ro$ the "ite.

Blood "tained earth wa"

-he "a$e wa" put in a pla"ti*

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

24

*ontainer whi*h wa" $ade into a par*el and "ealed with the "eal o# FSSF whi*h wa" ta&en #ro$ AS7 Satpal. -hat

par*el wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..PA/;. 4aving ta&en the "pe*i$en o# the "eal the -he 'ro&en part" o#

"a$e wa" returned to AS7 Satpal.

the No&ia $o'ile phone D"$all "i=eE wa" a""e$'led ') the poli*e. -he "a$e wa" al"o ta&en into po""e""ion -hi" $o'ile phone wa" al"o not

vide $e$o A..PA//. "ealed.

4e #urther "tated on oath that %i a) Singh

had told hi$ a'out 8 $onth" prior to hi" death that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had a"&ed hi$ to divor*e hi" wi#e and $arr) her. 4e #urther told hi$ that he had

de*lined the o##er.

4e advi"ed %i a) Singh to report

the $atter to the poli*e 'ut he did nothing in thi" regard. 20.

P=-10 L1;54*

S*&75 ? L1;5* depo"ed on oath

that %i a) Singh "in*e de*ea"ed had 'een &nown to hi$ "in*e hi" *hildhood. 4e wa" po"ted a" Additional

<i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge in 2001. &eeping dog".

4e wa" #ond o#

4e u"ed to loo& a#ter the dog", he 4e u"ed to ta&e the dog" u"ed to ta&e the$ to the

D%i a) SinghE u"ed to &eep. out in the evening. 4e

ho"pital al"o when the) were ailing.

So$eti$e" he u"ed

to even "ta) at hi" re"iden*e #or the night i# re>uired #or the dog". 4e wa" not u"ual vi"itor. 4e u"ed to

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

25

vi"it hi$ o**a"ionall). hi$. @ahia. 4er #ather i"

Ravdeep Kaur i" al"o &nown to retired -eh"ildar <al it Singh

4e i" al"o &nown to hi$.

?ather o# %i a) Singh A**u"ed Ravdeep -hi" #a*t %i a) at

wa" #riendl) with <al it Singh @ahia.

Kaur wanted to $arr) de*ea"ed %i a) Singh.

wa" di"*lo"ed to hi$ ') %i a) Singh hi$"el#. Singh wa" alread) $arried to <eepinder

Kaur

Bathinda.

4e wa" 'le""ed with three daughter" al"o. Ravdeep Kaur She

Ravdeep Kaur wa" al"o alread) $arried.

wa" not having *ordial relation" with her hu"'and. did not want to pull on with hi$. turned her hu"'and out o# the hou"e.

Ravdeep Kaur had %i a) Singh told

that "he u"ed to "end hi$ dirt) $e""age" and "he u"ed to tal& to hi$ on telephone al"o in an illogi*al 4e told

$anner.

%i a) Singh did not li&e it at all.

hi$ that he had re'u&ed Ravdeep Kaur #or thi" 'ut "he did not relent. the %i a) Singh al"o "tated to hi$ that

a**u"ed had told hi$ that i# he *ould not 'e her, %i a)

"he would not let hi$ to 'e with an)'od) el"e.

Singh al"o told hi$ that the a**u"ed had *reated a $e"" in hi" 2ourt at 3udhiana. %i a) Singh al"o told hi$

that thi" a**u"ed had gone to hi" hou"e and e.tended threat to hi" $other and wi#e. %i a) Singh al"o told

hi$ that thi" a**u"ed had #iled a *o$plaint in the poli*e "tation alleging that %i a) Singh and hi" wi#e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

26

had given 'eating" to her "ervant.

4e al"o told hi$

that thi" a**u"ed had al"o #iled an anon)$ou" *o$plaint 'e#ore 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' and 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt. 4e #urther depo"ed that a'out one and hal# $onth" prior to 1;.10.2001 he and %i a) Singh had gone out with dog" at CPS 2how&, Patiala where the) *a$e a*ro"" a *ar 'earing No. PB11-N-0110 DMa&e 4onda 2it)E in whi*h a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "een "eated with one "i&h gentle$an Man it Singh. 4e "aw a**u"ed Ravdeep

Kaur hinting toward" %i a) Singh and telling "o$ething to the other a**u"ed. A#ter that in*ident he advi"ed %i a)

%i a) Singh to 'e *autiou" a'out the"e a**u"ed.

Singh wa" a "trong $an who "tated that he "eldo$ 'other a'out the"e. -herea#ter, he "aw the a**u"ed Man it 4e told %i a)

Singh roa$ing in Polo ,round twi*e.

Singh that he had "een thi" a**u"ed in Polo ,round at odd hour" at a'out 9/9+;0 p.$. and he "hould ta&e *are o# hi$"el#. @hen %i a) Singh did not ta&e it "eriou"l) 6n one da) he "aw thi"

he #ollowed thi" Man it Singh.

a**u"ed riding a $otor *)*le at ;+00 p.$. and *o$ing out o# Ravi 4o"pital 'eing run ') Ravdeep Kaur. 4e

*ha"ed hi$ on hi" "*ooter, he *a$e to &now that he i" re"ident o# She&hupura and hi" na$e i" Man it Singh. 4e *a$e to &now that he wa" a #re>uent vi"itor to ho"pital 'eing run ') Ravdeep Kaur a" he wa" a pathi

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

27

who re*ite hol) "er$on" and hi" ante*edent were not good. it 4e narrated ever)thing to %i a) Singh who too& "a)ing that o' o# pathi i" to re*ite

lightl)

"er$on" and nothing 'e)ond that.

4e al"o di"*lo"ed

a'out thi" a**u"ed ever)thing to %i a) SinghF" wi#e a" well a" hi" $other. Poli*e $et hi$ again on 20.10.2001. Prior to that he had "een thi" a**u"ed Man it Singh on -% S*reen and identi#ied hi$. had $urdered %i a) Singh. 4e *a$e to &now that he

4e told to the poli*e on

20.10.2001 when the poli*e $et hi$ at %i a) SinghF" hou"e. 21. te"ti#ied

P=-11
on

R"8*&'e
oath that

S*&75
hi"

"on #ather

o#

Bhagat

Singh

wa"

7rrigation 4e i"

Advi"or to 2hie# Mini"ter Sh. A$rinder Singh. $e$'er o# Maharani 2lu', Patiala. &nown to hi$.

Ravdeep Kaur i" well

4e had 'een $eeting her >uite o#ten in %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed wa" well

the a#ore"aid *lu'. &nown to hi$.

6n 19.10.2001 at a'out :+00 p.$. a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur $et hi$ in the part) at Maharani 2lu', Patiala. She too& hi$ a"ide and told hi$ that "he wa"

having an urgent wor& and wanted to tal& to hi$ on that $atter. She *on#e""ed 'e#ore hi$ that "he had

*o$$itted a 'lunder.

She *on#ided in hi$ ') "a)ing

that de*ea"ed wa" her 'e"t #riend "in*e *hildhood and "he want to $arr) hi$. She al"o told hi$ that he had

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

28

got $arried to "o$e one el"e.

She #urther told hi$

that under the pre""ure o# her #a$il) $e$'er" "he wa" $arried o## to "o$e'od) el"e. She #urther "aid that

de"pite o# all that "he *ould #orget hi$ and "he wa" having longing #or hi$ at that ti$e a" well. She

#urther told that "he had 'een pre""ing hi$ to divor*e hi" wi#e in order to $arr) her. She even went to the

e.tent o# going to 2ourt" at 3udhiana and pi*&ed up >uarrel with hi$. She #urther "aid that #or %i a)

Singh de*ea"ed "he had le#t her hu"'and 'ut de"pite o# that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed did not *o$e to her pre""ure. 6n a**ount o# all that "he 'e*a$e pertur'ed and even wrote a letter to 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt. She even $ade a #al"e *o$plaint again"t

%i a) Singh, de*ea"ed and hi" wi#e "tating that the) had given 'eating" to her "ervant. 6ut o# #ru"tration

hatred &ept on developing whi*h led to eli$inate %i a) Singh. -herea#ter, "he 'ought a pi"tol to u"e the "a$e She #urther told hi$ that 9/8

again"t %i a) Singh.

da)" prior to the pre"ent in*ident "he had a Path at her ho"pital in the na$e o# Ravi 4o"pital. Singh, ,ranthi Path. o# 7n village thi" She&hupura Man it Man it #or and

*a$e Singh

per#or$ing

$anner

Ravdeep a**u"ed *a$e *lo"er and "he parted with a "u$ o# R"./ to 1 3a*" #or hi" hou"e and ,urudwara to Man it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

29

Singh.

She #urther "aid that one da) "he had a tal&

with Man it a**u"ed that %i a) Singh had *heated her and "he want" to ta&e revenge #ro$ hi$. a**u"ed de$anded "u$ o# R". 1 3a*" #or Man it Singh eli$inating

%i a) Singh.

Ravdeep a**u"ed #urther told that "he had

developed "o $u*h hatred again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed that "he even 'e*a$e read) to part with a "u$ o# R". 1 3a*" #or thi" purpo"e in #avour o# Man it Singh,

a**u"ed.

She #urther told that "he had ta&en Man it

Singh in her *ar to Polo ,round and CPS 2how& and "howed %i a) Singh, 5udge to hi$ #or identi#i*ation. @hen "he wa" "howing %i a) Singh to Man it, another per"on wa" there with %i a) Singh who had "een Ravdeep Kaur "howing %i a) Singh to Man it. @hen Man it *ould

identi#) %i a) with *ertaint) "he had given a "u$ o# R". 10,000/- and two 4(-24 Mo'ile add-on phone". 6n

the a#ore"aid phone" Man it and Ravdeep a**u"ed had 'een tal&ing ver) o#ten. 6n 1;.10.2001 Man it Singh

gave a phone *all to Ravdeep Kaur at a'out 8+00 p.$. that he would eli$inate %i a) Singh that da). At 11+11

p.$. "he re*eived a telephoni* *all #ro$ Man it that he had &illed %i a) Singh who had al"o a"&ed to &eep read) the $one) a" he i" *o$ing to *olle*t the "a$e. 20 $inute" Man it a**u"ed rea*hed the a#ter o#

re"iden*e

Ravdeep and gave her the driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

30

de*ea"ed "o a" to en"ure that he had &illed hi$.

A"

the "hoe" o# Man it were "tained with 'lood there#ore, Ravdeep got hi$ *hanged hi" "hoe" and 'lood "tained "hoe" were &ept at the re"iden*e o# Ravdeep. Aven the

*lothe" o# Man it were 'lood "tained and in order to *over up the "a$e "he had given tra*& "uit to Man it. She #urther told that "he had given a "u$ o# R". 2 3a*" to Man it that ver) night and gave another "u$ o# R". 2,10,000/- to Man it Singh the #ollowing da) at 1+;0 a.$. at ,urudwara. She had al"o told hi$ that poli*e

*a$e to &now that "he got &illed %i a) Singh through Man it Singh and a" "u*h poli*e had 'een raiding the hou"e" o# Man it Singh and that o# her. She a"&ed hi$

to help her out a" no'od) el"e wa" helping her at that ti$e. She al"o told hi$ that "in*e hi" #ather wa" Advi"or to 2hie# Mini"ter and *lo"ed to

7rrigation

Nav ot Singh Sidhu, Me$'er o# Parlia$ent #ro$ A$rit"ar, there#ore, he "hould help her. poli*e torture. She wa" #earing o#

She wanted hi$ to have a tal& with

poli*e in that regard with the a""uran*e that "he will "urrender regard. her"el# and "he "hould 'e helped in that

4e gave a""uran*e to her to "ave her #ro$ 4e $et Sewa Singh 7n"pe*tor in

poli*e hara""$ent.

thi" regard and narrated hi$ the entire "tor). 22.

P=-12 D . K.K.A771 910, 4ead o# ?oren"i*

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

31

Medi*ine, ,overn$ent Medi*al 2ollege, Patiala te"ti#ied on oath that he along with <r. R.K.,oria, the then Pro#e""or and 4ead and o# o# ?oren"i* Medi*ine, and <r. <r.

M.S.Bal,Pro#e""or A.S.,rover,

4ead

Patholog) Ra indra

Pro#e""or

Surger),

4o"pital,

Patiala *ondu*ted po"t$orte$ e.a$ination on the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh "/o 3ate Sh. A$ar it Singh, aged a'out /1 )ear" and re"ident o# Patiala. -he $edi*al

'oard wa" *on"tituted ') Prin*ipal ,overn$ent Medi*al 2ollege, Patiala. at 11+11 a.$. -he po"t$orte$ e.a$ination wa" done

-he dead 'od) wa" 'rought ') AS7 Satpal

Singh o# 2ivil 3ine", Patiala and wa" identi#ied ') Shivra Singh ! <i$p) "/o A it 7nder Singh and Satinder -he dead 'od) wa"

Singh ! 2hanni "/o ,urpreet Singh.

wrapped in white *loth "heet whi*h wa" 'lood"tained at pla*e". nouri"hed 7t wa" dead waring 'od) o# $oderatel) with 'uilt and

$ale

--"hirt

pant,

'elt, Blood

underwear, "o*&" and "port" "hoe in 'oth #eet. "tained PA-KA wa" l)ing ') "ide. and 'lood"tained. head, #a*e,

All *lothe" were $ud

Mud and *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent on "ole o# "hoe" wa" $ud and

pal$",

'lood"tained. Rigor$orti"

A)e" were *lo"ed and $outh wa" open. wa" pre"ent throughout the 'od).

Po"t$orte$ "taining wa" pre"ent on 'a*&. were 'la*& and 'lood "tained.

S*alp hair

2orre"ponding *ut" were

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

32

pre"ent on --"hirt and pant. were pre"ent on the dead 'od) +-

-he #ollowing in urie"

1. 2hopped in*i"ed wound 11 *$ . 1.1 *$ wa" pre"ent on right "ide o# #a*e, no"e and e.tending to $edial end o# le#t e)e. 2lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent. 7t wa" o'li>uel) pla*ed. -he underl)ing #a*ial and na"al 'one "howed *ut #ra*ture. 2. 2hopped in*i"ed wound 1/ . 2 *$ pre"ent on le#t "ide o# #orehead and going downward" to angle o# le#t $andi'le. 2lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent. -he underl)ing #a*ial 'one" and $andi'le "howed *ut #ra*ture. 7t wa" verti*all) pla*ed. ;. 7n*i"ed wound /..1 *$ pre"ent on le#t upper lid. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 7t wa" hori=ontall) pla*ed. -he underl)ing or'ital 'one "howed *ut #ra*ture. /. 2hopped in*i"ed wound 11 *$ . ; *$ pre"ent *hin. -here wa" #ra*ture o# lower $andi'le. on

1. 7n*i"ed wound 12 *$ . 2 *$ pre"ent on 'a*& o# head over $id and right "ide : *$" a'ove po"terior hair line. -he underl)ing o**ipital 'one "howed *ut #ra*ture. -here wa" "u'ara*hnoid hae$ato$a over right *ere'eral he$i"phere. 10 2* o# *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent at 'a"e *ranial *avit). :. 7n*i"ed penetrating wound / . 2 *$ pre"ent on le#t "ide o# *he"t. 1 *$ 'low tip o# le#t "houlder oint. 7t wa" hori=ontall) pla*ed. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 9. 7n*i"ed penetrating wound /.1.1 *$ pre"ent on le#t "ide o# *he"t 2 *$ lateral #ro$ $id line and 8 *$ 'elow and $edial to le#t nipple. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 6n di""e*tion the wound *o$$uni*ated to le#t plural *avit) through inter *o"tal "pa*e. -here wa" *ut pre"ent on le#t lung. A'out 1 litre o# #luid and *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent in le#t plural *avit). 8. 7n*i"ed penetrating wound 1.2..1 *$ pre"ent on right "ide o# a'do$en 19 *$ 'elow right nipple. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 6n di""e*tion the wound *o$$uni*ated to a'do$inal *avit). -here wa" *ut

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

33

pre"ent liver.

on

the

diaphrag$

and

"uperior

lo'e

o#

9. 7n*i"ed penetrating wound 1.2..8 *$ pre"ent on right lateral #lan& o# *he"t 1/ *$ 'elow and lateral to right nipple and 19 *$ lateral to $id line. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 6n di""e*tion there wa" #ra*ture o# 10th ri' anteril). -here wa" *ut on the anterior lo'e o# liver. A'out 1100 22 o# #luid and *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent in the a'do$inal *avit). 10.7n*i"ed penetrating wound ; . 1 *$ pre"ent on le#t lateral #lan& o# *he"t on interior a.illar) line 19 *$ a.illa. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 6n di""e*tion there wa" *ut in diaphrag$ and there wa" *ut on the "pleen. 11.7n*i"ed penetrating wound 2 *$ . .9 *$ pre"ent on le#t lateral #lan& o# *he"t 1 *$ a'ove in ur) No. 10. 7n ur) No. 10 and 11 were hori=ontall) pla*ed and on di""e*tion there wa" *ut on the diaphrag$ and "pleen. 12.7n*i"ed penetrating wound ; *$ . 1.1 *$ pre"ent on 'a*& o# le#t "ide o# *he"t over po"terior a.illar) line 10 *$ 'elow and lateral to lower end o# "*apula. -he in ur) *o$$uni*ated to le#t plural *avit). 1;.Reddi"h a'ra"ion 1 . 2 *$ pre"ent on le#t lateral #lan& o# a'do$en. 3a*erated wound 1.1 . 1 *$ wa" pre"ent in the *enter. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 1/.7n*i"ed wound 1 . 1 *$ pre"ent on le#t thigh anteriorl) 9 *$ a'ove le#t &nee oint. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent, hori=ontall) pla*ed. 11.7n*i"ed wound /.1 . 1 *$ pre"ent on #ront o# le#t leg in upper 1/;rd. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent, hori=ontall) pla*ed. 1:.7n*i"ed wound / . 2 *$ pre"ent on le#t #ore ar$ 10 *$ a'ove wri"t oint. 7t wa" hori=ontall) pla*ed. 19.7n*i"ed wound ; . 1 *$ pre"ent on pal$er a"pe*t o# le#t little #inger over la"t phalan.. Mud and *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

34

18.7n*i"ed wound ; . 1 *$ pre"ent on pal$er a"pe*t o# ring #inger over la"t phalan.. Mud and *lotted 'lood wa" pre"ent. 19.7n*i"ed wound 1. . .1 *$ pre"ent on 'a*& o# right thu$' near 'a"e. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 20.7n*i"ed wound 1.1 . .1 *$ pre"ent on pal$er a"pe*t o# right thu$' over di"tal phalan.. -here wa" #ra*ture o# underl)ing 'one. 21.7n*i"ed wound / . 1 *$ pre"ent on right lateral #lan& o# *he"t on po"terior a.illar) line 10 *$ 'elow a.illa. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 22.7n*i"ed wound 1 . .1 *$ pre"ent on 'a*& o# *he"t on right "ide 1; *$ #ro$ $id line and 11 *$ 'elow lower 'order o# "*apula. 2lotted 'lood pre"ent. 2;.Reddi"h linear "*rat*h 12 *$ . .2 *$ pre"ent on interior a"pe*t o# le#t upper ar$ : *$ 'elow tip o# "houlder oint. 7t wa" hori=ontall) pla*ed. 2/.A'ra"ion reddi"h in *olour 1 . 1 *$ pre"ent on 'a*& o# right ring #inger over di"tal phalan.. 21.Reddi"h a'raded *ontu"ion 2 . 1 *$ on right "ide o# #a*e 2 *$ 'elow outer angle o# right e)e. Re"t o# the organ" were nor$al and "to$a*h *ontained 110 ** o# "e$i dige"ted #ood *ontent $i.ed with 'lood. All in urie" were ante $orte$ in nature.

-he 'oard #urther opined that the *au"e o# death in thi" *a"e wa" hae$orrhage and "ho*& a" a re"ult o# in urie" and in urie" No. 1, 9, 8, 9, 10 and 11 were individuall) "u##i*ient to *au"e death in ordinar)

*our"e o# nature.

-he ti$e elap"ed 'etween in ur) and

death wa" i$$ediate and 'etween death and po"t$orte$ wa" within 12 to 2/ hour". 4e #urther depo"ed that

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

35

therea#ter, the) handed over to poli*e the #ollowing +1. Stit*hed dead 'od) a#ter po"t$orte$ e.a$inationH 2. 2ar'on *op) o# po"t$orte$ reportH ;. Poli*e paper" 1 to 22 dul) "igned ') the$H /. A "ealed pa*&et with one "eal *ontaining 'elonging"H 1. Sa$ple "eal". -he 'oard wa" *on"tituted on the appli*ation o# poli*e A..P-4 vide order A..P4/1 whi*h i" "igned ') Prin*ipal ,overn$ent Medi*al 2ollege, Patiala who"e

"ignature" he identi#ied. the dead 'od) wa"

4e #urther te"ti#ied that in the $ortuar) on

re*eived

1/.10.2001 vide endor"e$ent A..P4/2.

4e al"o proved

the *ar'on *op) o# po"t$orte$ report A..P-5, pi*torial diagra$" "howing "eat o# in urie" A..P-5/1 and the

"ignature" o# 'oard $e$'er" on in>ue"t report Dpage" 1 to 22E A..P-K. 6n poli*e re>ue"t dated 1/.12.2001

A..P-3 the $e$'er" o# the 'oard opined that po""i'ilit) o# in urie" $entioned in the re>ue"t letter 'eing

*au"ed ') "hown weapon or "i$ilar t)pe o# weapon *annot 'e ruled out. 4e #urther identi#ied the "ignature" o# -he "hown weapon on it 'earing

'oard $e$'er" on endor"e$ent A..P3/1. wa" returned in original with "lip

"ignature" o# 'oard $e$'er" and it wa" dul) "ealed with #ive "eal", "a$ple o# "eal wa" al"o handed over along with it. -he pa*&et wa" opened a#ter *o$paring with

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

36

"eal o# ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) and the opinion wa" given on 11.12.2001 vide endor"e$ent A..P3/2. 4e

#urther identi#ied the &irpan A..P-;, pat&a A..P-/, -Shirt A..P-1, Pant A..P-:, underwear A..P-9, Pair o# "o*&" A..P-8 G A..P-9, pair o# "hoe" A..P-10 G A..P-11, 'elt A..P-12 i.e. 'elonging" o# de*ea"ed in the 2ourt al"o. 2;.

P=-13 R16*&'e

P10 J1* 1)5, 2hie# Manager,

Pun a' National Ban&, 5alandhar te"ti#ied on oath that on 22.10.2001 he wa" po"ted a" Bran*h Manager, Pun a' National Ban&, Phata& No. 22, Patiala and on that da) on the written re>ue"t o# the poli*e he had handed over the a**ount "tate$ent A..P-M o# a**ount No.

1/820001000::1:1 #or the period w.e.#. 01.01.2001 to 11.10.2001 pertaining to Satna$ -ru"t whi*h wa"

operated ') <r. Ravdeep Kaur w/o Sh. Raghvinder Singh r/o ;1, A it Nagar Patiala and 5a"want Kaur w/o <al it Singh. 2/. Ban&,

P=-14
Kothrud, he

S#51&
Pune wa"

S*&75,
ha"

2hie#

Manager, on oath

2anara that on

te"ti#ied a" Senior

22.10.2001

po"ted

Manager,

2anara

Ban&, 3eela Bhawan Mar&et, Patiala and on that on the re>ue"t o# poli*e he handed over a**ount" "tate$ent A..P-N G A..PN/1 #or the period 01.01.2001 to

22.10.2001 o# a**ount No. SB1088 pertaining to Ravdeep

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

37

Kaur d/o S. <al it Singh @ahia, re"ident o# ;1 A it Nagar, Patiala. 4e al"o proved the withdrawal #or$"

A..P-6 and A..P-P vide whi*h the a**ount holder had drawn a "u$ o# R". ; 3a*" ea*h #ro$ her a**ount. 21.

P=-1% H1 41&! S*&75 "on o# Ra&ha Ra$ "tated

on oath that a'out two )ear" 'a*& he along with Malta "on o# Ra$ A"ra and Sure"h "on o# 5aggu Ra$ were *alled ') S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar and told the$ to go to village ,hanaur and to *onta*t the -hanedar there. @hen the) rea*hed 'u" "tand ,hanaur, then the) gave a phone *all to -hanedar. 4e *a$e over there along with -hen poli*e

poli*e part) and a**u"ed Man it Singh.

part) had ta&en the$ on the road #ro$ ,hanaur to Sarala road, *ro""ed the ")phon and the) had travelled a'out B &$ #ro$ 'ridge o# village ,hanaur. 6n the pointing out -hen

o# a**u"ed the) "topped in #ront o# Ki&&ar tree.

the a**u"ed pointed out the pla*e where he had thrown the &irpan in the *anal water. -hen he dived into the

water and too& out the &irpan A..P-; #ro$ the *anal water and handed over the "a$e to the 7n"pe*tor. At

that ti$e video graph) wa" al"o done and photograph" were *li*&ed. A..P-1; and 7n"pe*tor too& out "word #ro$ "heath $ade it dr) in the open under hi"

"upervi"ion and "ent one o##i*ial to 'ring one wooden 'o. and white *loth. -hen 7n"pe*tor prepared "&et*h

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

38

A..P-K

o#

&irpan

on

whi*h

he

put

hi"

"ignature".

Kirpan wa" put into a wooden 'o. and therea#ter it wa" "ealed into a par*el ') 7n"pe*tor and "heath wa"

"eparatel) $ade into a par*el and 'oth the"e arti*le" were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-R. Kirpan and "heath were "tained with 'lood. "tained near handle. 4e identi#ied the Kirpan wa" &irpan and

"heath in the 2ourt. 2:. that

P=-16 S1 2*&'e
%i a) Singh he *a$e

S*&75 G e910 "tated on oath

de*ea"ed to

1;.10.2001 $aternal

Patiala

hou"e A$rao

grandun*le

na$el)

3ate

Singh,

Retired Prin*ipal.

Ra 'irender Singh D'rother-in-lawE,

hi" wi#eF" 'rother, Nai' -eh"ildar al"o *a$e with hi$. -he) *a$e to Patiala in order to di"tri'ute *ard o# the 'irthda) o# "on o# Ra 'irender Singh whi*h wa" to ta&e pla*e on 19.10.2001. @hen the) were *o$ing 'a*& to

Na'ha it wa" a'out 10+;0-10+/1 p.$., a#ter *ro""ing Modi 2ollege *ro""ing toward" lower $all polo ground, he "aw a $otor*)*le rider *o$ing out o# 'ro&en wall o# Polo ,round who wa" driving the $otor*)*le at a great "peed. -hat $otor*)*le rider "lipped and hi"

$otor*)*le then #ell on the ground.

-hat $otor*)*le

rider wa" Man it Singh ,ranthi, a**u"ed pre"ent in the 2ourt. 4e *a$e to &now a'out hi" na$e on 20.10.2001.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

39

4e wa" o# the age o# 2//21 )ear". a*tive )oung $an having thin 'eard. a#ter appl)ing 'ra&e".

4e wa" thin and wa" 4e "topped hi" *ar

Man it Singh got up at on*e.

4i" &irpan whi*h had al"o #allen down wa" pi*&ed up ') hi$. At that ti$e he DMan itE wa" wearing 'lue

*oloured Kurta Pa) a$a. 4e had "een that in

-hat wa" having 'lood"tain". the light o# hi" *ar. 4e

i$$ediatel) "tarted hi" $otor*)*le and had run awa) ') driving hi" $otor*)*le toward" #ountain *how&. 4e

drove the $otor*)*le at a great "peed and within a "plit o# "e*ond he di"appeared. 4e thought #ro$ all

thi" that he DMan itE $u"t have done "o$ething wrong and 'e#ore he *ould get down #ro$ *ar Man it had

alread) gone awa).

A" the ti$e wa" odd, there#ore, he

never wanted to ta&e the trou'le o# involving hi$"el# in arduou" wor&. 4e *a$e 'a*& to Na'ha.

4e #urther depo"ed that on the ne.t da) i.e. 1/.10.2001 he *a$e to &now #ro$ -% new" that S. %i a) Singh had 'een &illed. 4e *a$e to Patiala at A$ar

4o"pital where 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh $et hi$ who wa" &nown to hi$. DSarvinder 4e wa" having a #ile in hi" hand. told hi$ a'out the in*ident 4e o#

SinghE

1;.10.2001 whi*h he wat*hed at a'out 10+;0-10+/1 p.$. Poli*e re*orded hi" "tate$ent out"ide A$ar 4o"pital. 6n 20.10.2001 he wa" pre"ent at Patiala at the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

40

re"iden*e o# de*ea"ed. were al"o pre"ent there.

Sewa Singh and other o##i*ial" 6n 19.10.2001 he had "een the -hen he the "a$e

photograph o# Man it Singh and Ravdeep Kaur. identi#ied that Man it Singh, a**u"ed wa"

per"on who$ he had "een on the night o# 1;.10.2001 a" the one #ell in #ront o# hi" *ar. 4e had al"o read the

new"paper dated 19.10.2001 and "aw the photograph" o# a**u"ed Man it Singh and Ravdeep. ?ro$ that photograph

al"o he identi#ied a**u"ed Man it Singh a" the one who had #allen down in #ront o# hi" *ar. 4e had al"o "een

the $otor*)*le #ro$ whi*h Man it had #allen down. 29.

P=-1>

N1 e!5

K":1 ,

5unior

A""i"tant,

<-6

6##i*e, Patiala proved the owner"hip o# $otor*)*le $a&e 3M3 200/ Model 'earing 2ha""i" No. ;/8198, Angine No. ;;922; and regi"tration No. PB/2-B-21/2 whi*h wa"

tran"#erred in the na$e o# Man it Singh "on o# Kuldeep Singh, r/o Se&hupura, Po"t 6##i*e, Pan a'i (niver"it), Patiala on 09.09.2001 vide entr) No. 8//2. 4e #urther

identi#ied the poli*e re>ue"t A..P-R on whi*h he $ade endor"e$ent A..P-R/1. 28.

P=-18

K1:0e!5,

2ler&,

<-6

6##i*e,

Patiala

proved the regi"tration re*ord o# 4onda 2it) 2ar No. PB11-N-0110 whi*h "tand" regi"tered in the na$e o#

Ravdeep Kaur wi#e o# Sh. R.S.Maan, re"ident o# 4ou"e No. 19-A, Nihal Bagh, Patiala. She #urther identi#ied

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

41

the poli*e re>ue"t A..P-S on whi*h "he $ade endor"e$ent A..P-S/1. 29. Manager,

P=-1,

S"&'e

L10

S51 :1, the then Bran*h

2enturian

Ban&

o#

Patiala "tated on oath that on 22.10.2001 he had handed over *o$puteri=ed "tate$ent A..P-- o# a**ount 'earing No. 2;SB1/9119;/ #or the period w.e.#. 01.01.2001 to 22.10.2001 'elonging to Ravdeep Kaur */o Ravi 4o"pital, (r'an A"tate, Patiala. 4e #urther proved the a**ount

opening #or$ o# the a'ove "aid a**ount whi*h 'ear" the photograph o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur a" A**ount 4older. ;0.

P=-20 H1 (51&' S*&75 te"ti#ied on oath that

he wa" &nown to de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. %i a) Singh wa" 'eing &illed.

11-20 da)" prior to date

o# death o# %i a) Singh, he had gone to a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur with hi" wi#e #or her *he*&-up. o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur, a**u"ed one 7n the $ain roo$ nur"e wa" #ound

"tanding.

4e had a"&ed her a'out <r. Ravdeep Kaur

whereupon the nur"e had a"&ed hi$ to wait #or "o$e ti$e a" "he i" 'u") with "o$e o# her gue"t. her to $a&e <r. Ravdeep &nown a'out 4e then a"&ed hi" pre"en*e

whereupon that nur"e told her that "he wa" #or'idden to *o$e in"ide. At thi", nur"e had $ade hi$ "it with hi"

wi#e in the *he*&-up roo$ o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed. 4e wa" a*>uainted with the voi*e o# Ravdeep Kaur,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

42

a**u"ed.

4e had heard her "a)ing rather a"&ing Man it

li&e thi" that "he had given hi$ a "u$ o# R".10,000/and #urther that the $atter had alread) 'een dela)ed and "he #urther told that "he would 'e pa)ing 'alan*e a$ount o# R"./,10,000/- and then a"&ed Man it ') ta&ing hi" na$e literall) to do the wor& o# 5udge Sahi'

a""igned to hi$.

She had al"o told Man it to tell her

#ran&l) i# he *an do awa) with the li#e o# %i a) Singh 5udge Sahi' or not. -herea#ter, he heard a $ale voi*e

who wa" telling her that he *ould not 'e &nown a" Ba'a Man it Singh in *a"e he would not #ini"h the li#e o# %i a) Singh 5udge Sahi' within a wee& or ten da)". al"o heard the a#ore$entioned $ale voi*e o# 4e

Man it

Singh who wa" "a)ing to Ravdeep a**u"ed to &eep read) the 'alan*e a$ount and he "hall 'e *olle*ting the "a$e a#ter doing the a""igned wor& to hi$. @ithin 1 or 2

$inute", <r. Ravdeep a**u"ed *a$e out o# a#ore"aid roo$ and "at in her *hair and therea#ter, a**u"ed Man it *a$e out o# the roo$ and le#t wi"hing that <r. Ravdeep, 4e ')

uttering

?ateh,

?ateh

pla*e.

#urther

te"ti#ied that on 19.10.2001 he had read the new" in the new"paper and had al"o "een the photograph" and new" on the televi"ion a" well a" in the new"paper". Photograph" were that o# a**u"ed Man it and a**u"ed Ravdeep. on "eeing the "a$e, the a#ore$entioned entire

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

43

in*ident *a$e 'e#ore hi" e)e" and he narrated the "a$e to the poli*e. ;1.

P=-21

V*8"0

P1 ;1!5,

Bran*h

Manager,

4<?2

Ban& te"ti#ied on oath that on 21.10.2001 he wa" po"ted a" Bran*h Manager, 4<?2 Ban&, 3eela Bhawan, Patiala. 6n that da) on the re>ue"t o# the poli*e he had handed over a**ount "tate$ent 'elonging to A..P-( o# a**ount Kaur and No. <r.

11:1000028;08 Ravdeep Kaur.

5oginder

7n thi" a**ount, Ravdeep Kaur having a

oint a**ount with 5oginder Kaur. ;2.

P=-22 G" 6*) S*&75 depo"ed on oath that on

2:.10.2001 he had gone to 27A Sta##, Patiala.

wa" pre"ent out"ide the gate o# 27A Sta##, Patiala, he had *o$e a*ro"" 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh. the inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e. 4e 4e oined hi$ in ta&en hi$

had

in"ide the 27A Sta##.

-here Ravdeep Kaur and ,ranthi 3ad) S7 Bindu Bala

Man it Singh a**u"ed were pre"ent. wa" al"o with the$.

Poli*e then interrogated Ravdeep

Kaur a**u"ed who "u##ered di"*lo"ure "tate$ent that "he had &ept hidden R".2,00,000/- *urren*) note", .;2 'ore pi"tol, Ar$" 3i*en*e 'elonging to her and driving

li*en*e o# de*ea"ed in the *up'oard o# her 'ed roo$ a#ter putting the a#ore"aid arti*le" in 'la*& *oloured 'ag. Blood "tained pair o# "hoe" whi*h "he had 'ought

#or Man it Singh and al"o gave the "a$e to Man it Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

44

a**u"ed a#ter putting the "a$e into a pol)thene 'ag &ept hidden in the upper *olu$n o# the *up'oard o# her 'ed roo$. She al"o di"*lo"ed that "he had &ept hidden

'la*& *oloured 'ag and pol)thene 'ag under the >uilt under the a#ore"aid *up'oard. She #urther di"*lo"ed

that "he alone &now" a'out that and *an get the "a$e re*overed o# her own. wa" re*orded. 4er di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-%

4e #urther depo"ed that a**u"ed then led

the poli*e part) to her hou"e at 4.No. 19-A, Nihal Bagh, Baradari ,arden, Patiala. A#ter going to her

hou"e, "he along with poli*e part) went in"ide a 'ed roo$. She pla*ed one "tool in #ront o# *up'oard o# her 'ed roo$ and a#ter *li$'ing on that "tool too& the a#ore$entioned 'la*& *oloured 'ag and pol)thene 'ag

#ro$ 'eneath the >uilt l)ing in *up'oard o# her 'ed roo$ and produ*ed the "a$e 'e#ore poli*e. 6n opening

the 'ag, R".2,00,000/-, one pi"tol .;2 'ore, her ar$ li*en*e and driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed were re*overed. Rough "&et*h plan A..P-@ o# re*overed AS7 Sat Pal Singh al"o "igned it

pi"tol wa" prepared. a" witne"".

R".2,00,000/-, one pi"tol .;2 'ore, ar$

li*en*e o# Ravdeep Kaur and driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..PL. Blood "tained pair o# "hoe" produ*ed 'e#ore the

poli*e ') a**u"ed Ravdeep were $ade into a par*el and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

45

"a$e wa" dul) "ealed with the "eal o# SS and ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-C. Spe*i$en "eal

i$pre""ion" o# the "eal wa" al"o retained. "eal wa" handed the over 'la*& to 'ag AS7 Satpal.

A#ter u"e, 4e #urther A..P-11,

identi#ied

A..P-1/,

pi"tol

driving li*en*e o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh A..P-1: and Ar$" 3i*en*e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep A..P-19 in the 2ourt. 4e al"o identi#ied the *urren*) note" o# R".2,00,000/A..P-18 to A..P-100, "hoe" whi*h were got re*overed ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur A..P-101 and A..P-102. plan o# pla*e o# re*over) wa" al"o prepared. ;;. P=-23 K"0'*8 S*&75 G e910 "tated on oath that Rough "ite

he i" pra*ti*ing in 3udhiana #or the la"t ;0 )ear" a" Advo*ate. Adho* 7n Septe$'er, 200; %i a) Singh wa" po"ted a" Se""ion" 5udge at 3udhiana. 6n

Additional

29.09.200; he wa" "itting in the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed and wa" in wait #or hi" turn in "o$e *a"e 'e#ore hi$. 7t wa" 2+;0 p.$. and Su&hpal Singh ,ill G Mr. Ko*hhar, Advo*ate" were al"o "itting with hi$ in the a#ore"aid *ourt roo$. A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur entered into the

2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed and "tarted $i"'ehaving with %i a) Singh ') "a)ing that he had not $arried her and had there') "poiled her li#e and he ha" $arried to one lad) <eepi and "he ha" le#t her hu"'and. She #urther

told that he D%i a) SinghE had "poiled her li#e and he

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

46

hi$"el# wa" doing told that "he

udge"hip *o$#orta'l). 'e 'ehaving with

She #urther hi$ in "a$e

would

#a"hion a" "he had done that da) and would al"o "poil hi" li#e in the "a$e $anner a" her li#e wa" "poiled. -he de*ea"ed told her that a" the *ourt pro*eeding" were going on there#ore, he "ugge"ted her to have a tal& later-on. <e*ea"ed had al"o told her to loo&

a#ter her hou"e a" "he ha" alread) $arried and have *hildren. live She "hould live pea*e#ull) and let hi$ al"o -hen "he threatened to li>uidate

pea*e#ull).

%i a) Singh.

-herea#ter, %i a) Singh *alled hi"

o##i*ial" and dire*ted the$ to ta&e the a**u"ed out o# 2ourt roo$. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 1/.10.2001,

when he *a$e to 2ourt there wa" *ondolen*e $eeting in the $orning and *a$e to &now that %i a) Singh wa"

$urdered la"t night.

A#ter #ew da)" o# the "aid $urder

#ro$ -% and new"paper he "aw the photograph" o# a**u"ed Ravdeep involved and in one the Si&h gentle$an -hen to he 'e the per"on" a'out

$urder.

re*olle*ted

Ravdeep Kaur to 'e the "a$e lad) who had a'u"ed 5udge Sahi' on 29.09.200; in the 2ourt and had threatened hi$ to li>uidate. ;/.

P=-24

S" *&'e

K":1 ,

2ler&,

6##i*e

o#

<eput) 2o$$i""ioner, Patiala proved the ar$" li*en*e No. 2;11/0//<M/P/PS23.P-A/?e'ruar) 200/ A..P-19 whi*h

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

47

ha" 'een i""ued on 2;.02.200/ in #avour o# Ravdeep Kaur w/o Ragh'inder Singh, Kothi No. 19-A,Nihal Bagh, A"

Patiala and the "a$e wa" valid up to 21.02.2008.

per re*ord 'rought ') hi$ the pur*ha"e o# a pi"tol o# .;2 'ore 'earing No. 1;0:19 i" entered. ;1.

P=-2% N1 *&'e

K":1

K": 1 "tated on oath

that he i" having a $o'ile "hop in Ra pura 2olon) at Patiala. Mo'ile phone A..P-10; wa" pur*ha"ed ') hi$

#ro$ Mu"&an Agen*ie" on 08.10.2001 vide 'ill A..P-10/. 6n the "a$e da) $o'ile A..P-10; wa" "old to a**u"ed Man it Singh vide 'ill A..P-101. -he 'ill" A..P-10/

and A..P-101 were produ*ed 'e#ore the poli*e whi*h were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-10:. al"o 'rought the original 'ill 'oo& in the 4e

2ourt

regarding "ale o# Mo'ile A..P-10;. ;:. Se*retar) P=-26 R-A, D51 1:6*) Patiala S*&75, proved 2ler&, the 6##i*e o#

driving

li*en*e

A..P-19 'earing No. 188:/2 dated 0;.08.2001 i""ued in the na$e o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur w/o <r. R.3.Maan, r/o -alania, $eant #or "*ooter, *ar and valid up to

19.02.201/. ;9. P=-2> I!5) P10 S*&75 te"ti#ied on oath that on

0;.0;.200/ a pi"tol @e'le) and S*ott 3i$ited 'earing No. 1;0:19 ;2 'ore wa" "old to Ravdeep Kaur w/o

Raghuvinder Singh, re"ident o# Kothi No. 19-A, Nihal

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

48

Bagh, <i"tri*t Patiala again"t li*en*e No. 2;11/<M/P/PS 2ivil 3ine"/P-A/?e'0/ whi*h wa" valid up to 21.02.2001. -he a#ore"aid li*en*e wa" granted ') <.M.Patiala. 4e

#urther proved the re*ord pertaining to the "ale o# a#ore"aid de*laration pur*ha"er. the "a$e pi"tol at the on whi*h Ravdeep #or Kaur "igned o#

pla*e

$eant

"ignature"

4e #urther depo"ed that 21 *artridge" o# were -he al"o entr) pur*ha"ed in the vide 'ill/*a"h-$e$o in thi"

A..P-108.

"ale

regi"ter

regard i" proved a" A..P-109 DPhoto*op)E whi*h i" in the hand o# Ra vir Singh, Sale"$an. ;8. 6##i*e P=-28 P1 :*&'e o# <-6 Sangrur, P10 S*&75, 5unior A""i"tant, Pun a' 'rought the re*ord

pertaining to tran"#er o# vehi*le 'earing No. <312<-919: $a&e -A-A $o'ile 209. A" per re*ord, the "a$e

wa" in the na$e o# A$it Sehgal o# M/". 7nternational Potato 2enter, New <elhi and wa" tran"#erred in the na$e o# Man it Singh "/o Kuldip Singh r/o %illage

Se&hupura, <i"tri*t Patiala now at Bhawanigarh Road, <i"tri*t Sangrur vide entr) No. ;/9 dated 29.0:.2001. -o thi" e##e*t he $ade an endor"e$ent on the re>ue"t o# the Poli*e A..P-110. ;9. P=-2, R16*&'e S*&75 S*'5", <). Manager, State

Ban& o# Patiala, Patiala proved the re*ord o# a**ount holder o# a**ount No. 110119:21;/ who"e previou" nu$'er

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

49

wa" 0119000:111 and the "a$e wa" in the na$e o# Ravdeep Kaur, ;1 A it Nagar, Patiala, Pun a'. 4e #urther

proved the *op) o# a**ount "tate$ent a" A..P-112. /0. P=-30 I&'e e!5 K51&&1 depo"ed on oath that he 6n 09.12.2001 he had vi"ited Singh ! <i$pan).

i" an approved dra#t"$an.

"pot/polo ground Patiala with Shivra

6n hi" ni"handehi he prepared the "ite plan A..P-11; with *orre*t $arginal note". /1. P=-31 D . M#&*;1, Medi*al 6##i*er te"ti#ied on

oath that on 19.10.2001 at a'out 10+;1 a.$. on the re>ue"t o# Poli*e A..P-11/, "he e.a$ined Man it Singh ! Binu "/o Kuldip Si&h, near Singh, aged 21 )ear" $ale r/o Patiala. *a"te %illage -he

Ra$da"ia

o**upation Pun a'i

,ranthi,

She&hupura,

(niver"it)

patient wa" *on"*iou", *ooperative and well oriented to ti$e, pla*e and per"on and on e.a$ination "he #ound

#ollowing in urie" on hi" per"on +1. 1 *$ wound in the healing "tage on the pal$er "ur#a*e o# little #inger o# le#t hand on the $iddle phal)n. a""o*iated pain and tenderne"". Advi"ed .-ra) and orthopedi* o'"ervation. 2. 1 *$ healing wound pre"ent hori=ontall) on the pal$er "ur#a*e o# the pro.i$al phal)n. o# little #inger o# le#t hand a""o*iated with pain and tenderne"". Advi"ed .-ra) and orthopedi* opinion. -he nature o# in urie" *ould not 'e *o$$ented at that ti$e 'e*au"e the wound wa" in healing "tage. -he pro'a'le duration o# in ur) wa" a'out ; to : da)".

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

50

She #urther proved the *ar'on *op) o# M3R A..P-111, pi*torial diagra$ "howing the "eat o# in urie" A..P-11: and 6P< "lip A..P-119. She #urther depo"ed that on

08.11.2001 on the re>ue"t o# poli*e "he had opined that the po""i'ilit) o# in urie" $entioned in M3R a" 'eing "el# in#li*ted *annot 'e ruled out. /2. P=-32 C.A&1 S*&75 tendered in eviden*e hi"

a##idavit A..P-118. /;. P=-33 C. J169*&'e S*&75 tendered in eviden*e

hi" a##idavit A..P119. //. on oath P=-34 J#7*&'e that in Ma) S*&75, Se*urit) ,uard depo"ed 2001 at a'out 8.;0 p$ he wa"

"itting in the "e*urit) roo$ "ituated at the $ain gate o# Pun a'i (niver"it) Patiala. Su&h'ir Singh, "e*urit) guard wa" al"o "itting with hi$. At that ti$e he

re*eived a telephone *all in#or$ing that one lad) and one gent" were "itting in a *ar near State Ban& o# Patiala "ituated in the (niver"it) and al"o advi"ed the$ to go there and *he*& the$. 6n thi" he along with Su&h'ir Singh went to that "pot. 6ne 4onda 2it) *ar wa" l)ing par&ed. 6n the driving "eat one lad) wa" "itting and on the #ront "eat o# the "aid *ar one giani "i&h per"on wa" "itting. 6n their a"&ing the lad) had

di"*lo"ed a'out her identit) that "he wa" do*tor o# Ravi ho"pital, (r'an A"tate Patiala and the gentle$an

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

51

"itting ') her "ide wa" granthi Man it Singh.

-he)

told the$ that the) *ould not "it in dar& at that pla*e. 4e al"o told the$ i# the) have to "it together

the) *an par& their *ar in the light and then onl) *an "it otherwi"e he advi"ed the$ to go ho$e. 6n*e that

lad) re"i"ted ') "a)ing that "he i" a do*tor and he *annot "top her li&e that 'ut when again he repeated hi" "a)ing then 'oth o# the$ le#t that pla*e. 4e

#urther identi#ied the lad) who di"*lo"ed her identit) a" do*tor o# Ravi ho"pital and Man it pre"ent in *ourt. /1. P=-3% C.R1: S*&75 tendered in eviden*e hi"

a##idavit A..P-120. /:. P=-36 S:). Dee8*&'e K1" wi#e o# %i a)

Singh de*ea"ed te"ti#ied on oath that "he i" a hou"e wi#e. B) wa) o# ho'') "he al"o run a 'outi>ue in her hou"e. 7n the )ear 1989 "he got $arried to de*ea"ed. She have three daughter". 6n 1;.10.2001, "he re*eived telephoni* *all #ro$ Shiv Ra "i"ter-in-law DNanadF"

hu"'andE. 4e en>uired a'out her hu"'and a" to where wa" he. She had told hi$ that he had gone to Polo ground #or evening wal& at a'out 10. o# a#ore"aid telephone, her At the ti$e o# re*eipt hu"'and de*ea"ed %i a)

Singh wa" not at ho$e. 'e*a$e ten"e.

-herea#ter, her $other-in-law A#ter "o$e

Aven "he al"o 'e*a$e ten"e.

ti$e, again "he re*eived telephoni* *all #ro$ Shivra

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

52

Singh.

4e told her that at that ti$e "o$e'od) had

*au"ed "evere in urie" to her hu"'and at Polo ground and he wa" 'eing ta&en to A$ar 4o"pital. She wa" al"o

a"&ed to rea*h A$ar 4o"pital, whereupon, "he alongwith her $other in law rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital. 6n the wa) -he) had "een Shivra

the) had a halt at polo ground.

Singh ta&ing her hu"'and ') *ar to A$ar 4o"pital. A" "u*h the) #ollowed hi$. the A$ergen*) o# the She had "een her hu"'and in 4o"pital. 4e wa" 'adl)

A$ar

in ured.

A#ter "o$eti$e <o*tor" de*lared hi$ dead.

-here wa" great ru"h at A$ar 4o"pital. She #urther depo"ed that <al it Singh @ahia, Retd. -eh"ildar and her #ather in law were having ver) good relation" with ea*h other. A**u"ed Ravdeep pre"ent in

the 2ourt i" the daughter o# <al it Singh @ahia. %i a) de*ea"ed and Ravdeep were o# the "a$e age and the) grew up together. A#ter her $arriage her hu"'and %i a)

de*ea"ed had told her that Ravdeep a**u"ed wanted to $arr) hi$ wherea" he had no intere"t in her. Ravdeep

a**u"ed had 'een *o$pelling her hu"'and to $arr) her even Both 'e#ore the and a#ter had the $arriage to o# her hu"'and. Kaur

#a$ilie"

tried

$a&e

Ravdeep

under"tand a" to what"oever wa" thought ') her in thi" regard, not *orre*t. 7n the )ear 1989 Ravdeep wa" ?ro$

$arried to <r. Raghvinder Mann o# 2handigarh.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

53

thi" $arriage Ravdeep wa" not happ) and "he had 'een pur"uing her hu"'and to $arr) her. Ravdeep then

"tarted living with her hu"'and at 4.No.19-A, Nihal Bagh, Patiala. Ravdeep then had a "on. 4owever,

in#atuation #or her D<eepinder KaurF"E hu"'and did not la"t. Ravdeep even "tarted *o$ing to her hou"e on the She

prete.t o# 'u)ing *lothe" #ro$ her 'outi>ue.

never li&ed her *o$ing to her hou"e in thi" $anner. She even had a tal& with her $other in law on thi" point. She even told Ravdeep not to *o$e to her hou"e Aven her $other-in-law *he*&ed her She al"o had a tal& in thi" -herea#ter, Ravdeep a**u"ed

with the"e prete.t.

#ro$ *o$ing to the hou"e. regard with her hu"'and.

"tarted $a&ing phone *all" to her hou"e 'ut the) never re"ponded. 6n*e her hu"'and even told her a#ter *o$ing

#ro$ hi" o##i*e that Ravdeep a**u"ed had 'een "ending o'"*ene SMS to hi$ and al"o $a&e phone *all" to hi$ and al"o told her that he had even repre$inded Ravdeep on that a**ount. -herea#ter, "he *a$e to &now that

Ravdeep had turned out her hu"'and #ro$ the hou"e "o that he $a) not *au"e an) trou'le in the relation" o# %i a) de*ea"ed and Ravdeep. She had ten"ion on that 4e

a**ount a" "u*h "he al"o tal&ed to her hu"'and.

a""ured her ') "a)ing that he would not give a long rope to Ravdeep a**u"ed and "he need not worr). Again

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

54

on one da) a#ter *o$ing #ro$ o##i*e her hu"'and had told that he re*eived a telephoni* *all #ro$ Ravdeep a**u"ed to the e##e*t that "he had given a threat to hi$ ') "a)ing that "he had alread) le#t her hu"'and #or hi$ and now i# de*ea"ed doe" not leave her D<eepinder KaurE and $arr) her, "he will get hi$ &illed. ti$e a" well At that

her hu"'and a""ured her not to worr) and 4owever, "he lad) *an do

al"o told her that "he *an do nothing. a"&ed hi$ to 'e *are#ul a" "u*h li&e

an)thing at an) ti$e. Again one da) when her hu"'and wa" awa) to hi" o##i*e Ravdeep a**u"ed *a$e to her hou"e ') *ar and a"&ed her and her $other in law a'out the wherea'out" o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. She >ue"tioned the pre"en*e

o# a**u"ed Ravdeep at that ti$e at her hou"e whereupon "he told that i# "he *ould not own %i a) de*ea"ed "he would not even allow her to have hi$. 6n return o# her

hu"'and #ro$ hi" o##i*e "he had a tal& with hi$ in thi" regard. 4e again told her that Ravdeep i" a lad) and 4er hu"'and wa" a 'old

"he *annot do an) har$ to hi$. $an.

She #urther depo"ed that when her hu"'and wa" po"ted a" Additional <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge,

3udhiana, Ravdeep a**u"ed ha" tried to enter into hi" retiring roo$ during lun*h ti$e 'ut the "e*urit)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

55

per"onnel did not allow her to enter hi" retiring roo$. 4er hu"'and had told her a'out thi" in*ident.

4owever, a#ter lun*h "he entered into the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed where "he *reated "*ene and told her hu"'and that "he will not leave hi$ alive even i# he e$plo) an) nu$'er o# "e*urit) per"onnel". $a)

-hi" #a*t She

wa" al"o told her at her hou"e ') her hu"'and.

a"&ed her hu"'and to re$ain alert 'ut he alwa)" too& it lightl). -herea#ter, on*e when her hu"'and wa" po"ted at 3udhiana "he alongwith her hu"'and wa" there at

3udhiana 'ut Ravdeep a**u"ed had "ent a "lip through her "ervant Narain Singh to their hou"e at Patiala 'ut her $other in law had "ent hi$ 'a*& along with the "lip. -herea#ter, Ravdeep a**u"ed got #iled a *o$plaint through Narain Singh again"t her and %i a) Singh that "he and %i a) Singh had given 'eating" to hi$. -hat

*o$plaint wa" got #iled in order to $aline her and %i a) Singh, however, on in>uir) that *o$plaint wa" #iled. -herea#ter Ravdeep a**u"ed $ade an anon)$ou"

*o$plaint again"t her hu"'and to the 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' and 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt. 6n a**ount o# a#ore

$entioned a*t" o# Ravdeep Kaur "he u"ed to have ten"ion 'ut alwa)" her hu"'and had 'een *on"oling her ') "a)ing that "he need not to worr).

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

56

She #urther "tated that one and a hal# $onth prior to the in*ident 3a&h'ir Singh a *lo"e #riend o# her hu"'and had told her that he had "een Ravdeep Kaur along with a Si&h gentle$an "itting in her *ar at a rounda'out near C.P.S. and polo ground. told her that Ravdeep Kaur wa" telling toward" 4e had al"o that Si&h

gentle$an

"o$ething

a#ter

pointing

de*ea"ed.

3a&h'ir Singh had al"o told her that he had "een on*e or twi*e that Si&h gentle$an ta&ing round" in the Polo ground in the late night. 3a&h'ir Singh had al"o told 4e

her that he had even #ollowed that Si&h gentle$an.

$ade in>uir) a'out that Si&h gentle$an whereupon he *a$e to &now that he wa" re"ident o# %illage Se&hupura near Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala and hi" na$e wa"

Man it Singh Pathi.

4e al"o *a$e to &now that that

Si&h gentle$an wa" on vi"iting ter$" with Ravdeep in Ravi 4o"pital, (r'an A"tate, Patiala. 3a&hi had al"o

told her that he even had a tal& in thi" regard with de*ea"ed %i a). 3a&hi had 'een going with %i a)

de*ea"ed on evening wal& u"uall) 'ut on the da) o# the in*ident he did not go 'e*au"e he wa" not well.

<e*ea"ed %i a) wa" not having an) en$it) with an)'od). She wa" *ertain that e.*ept Ravdeep a**u"ed pre"ent in the 2ourt no one wa" ini$i*al with de*ea"ed %i a) and it i" Ravdeep a**u"ed who had got &illed her hu"'and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

57

a#ter

giving

$one)

to

Man it

Singh

Pathi,

a**u"ed

pre"ent in the 2ourt. /9. P=-3> D . A:1&'ee8 K1" , <enti"t te"ti#ied

on oath that "he i" having *lini* in the na$e o# <r. 2hughF" <ental 2lini*, at 3ehal 2olon) Patiala. running thi" *lini* "in*e 200;. She &now" She i" a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur, pre"ent in the *ourt. to the $urder o# %i a) Singh.

A'out a )ear prior

A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur

*a$e to her *lini* #or the treat$ent o# hi" "on #or hi" orthodonti* treat$ent. She ha" introdu*ed her"el#

a" <r. Ravdeep Kaur and "he had her *lini* in (r'an A"tate Pha"e-7 under the na$e o# Ravi 4o"pital. -he duration o# the treat$ent in "u*h li&e pro'le$" a" her "on wa" #a*ing i" a'out 1 )ear or "o. She u"ed to *o$e -wo and

a'out on*e in a $onth #or the "aid purpo"e.

hal# $onth" prior to the in*ident o# $urder o# %i a) Singh, <r. Ravdeep Kaur had 'rought one Man eet Singh, a**u"ed pre"ent in the *ourt #or the treat$ent o# hi" teeth i.e. #or "traightening hi" teeth a" hi" upper teeth were pro*lined. She had introdu*ed Man eet Singh

that he wa" her Ba'a i and he wa" >uite *lo"e to her and he "hould 'e given proper *are. She had 'rought She #urther i""ued #or

Man eet Singh to her *lini* 2-/ ti$e". proved the pre"*ription "lip A.. P-121

Man eet Singh.

She #urther te"ti#ied that "he had read

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

58

the

new"

o#

the

$urder

o#

%i a)

Singh,

5udge

and

therea#ter in -.%. "he had "een the photograph" o# 'oth the a**u"ed. She had identi#ied 'oth the a**u"ed a" She had al"o "een the in the

her a'ove "aid patient".

photograph o# Man eet Singh, in a new"paper,

poli*e "tation and had told a'out it to the poli*e. /8. P=-38 M";5)*1 S*&75 depo"ed on oath that

he i" trained in ,at&a pla)ing and had learned a'out it at the age o# 11 )ear". At the ti$e o# Nagar Kirtan he 4e &now" a**u"ed 4e had given hi$

u"ed to "how hi" "&ill" in ,at&a. Man eet Singh, pre"ent in the *ourt. training in ,at&a.

4e had "tarted giving hi$ training 8th *la"". 4e had given hi$ 4e wa" given 4e learnt trained. in Nagar

when he wa" "tudent o#

training in 2 "hi#t" in ; $onth" ea*h.

training ') u"ing "ti*& in pla*e o# "word. ,at&a Man eet "u##i*ientl) a**u"ed had 'ut 'een he wa" not well the$

a**o$paning

Kirtan and "howing hi" "&ill a" well in ,at&a with the$. /9. P=-3, K *!51& K":1 depo"ed on oath that he

i" a photographer ') pro#e""ion and run" a Studio in the na$e o# <hi$an Patiala. Studio in %illage ,hanaur, <i"tri*t

6n 20.10.2001, poli*e *a$e to hi$ at hi"

"tudio. So$ Nath "on o# A$ar it Singh wa" pre"ent at hi" "hop. 4e too& hi$ alongwith and gone with the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

59

poli*e to 2anal #or ta&ing the photograph". ?ir"tl), the) had gone to Bu" Stand o# %illage ,hanaur. -here the) *o$e a*ro"" three per"on" who were diver".

-herea#ter, the) rea*hed near S)phon a#ter *ro""ing the ,hanaur Bridge Man it that *overing Singh ti$e. a di"tan*e wa" o# al"o a'out with B the and

&ilo$eter. poli*e at

a**u"ed -herea#ter,

the),

poli*e

Man it a**u"ed get down #ro$ the vehi*le and therea#ter Man it a**u"ed pointed toward" a pla*e near Ki&&ar that pla*e wa" *anal. -herea#ter, one o# the diver u$ped

into the *anal and 'rought one Kirpan. 7t wa" within it" "heath. 4ar'an" diver handed over that Kirpan to 5a""a Singh, 7n"pe*tor. 5a""a Singh too& out the

&irpan #ro$ the "heath and pla*ed the "a$e under the "un #or dr)ing. re$oved. 4e -he water #ro$ the "heath wa" al"o #our Nath photograph" the #urther o# video a#ore"aid o# the the

too& So$

pro*eeding". a#ore"aid

prepared 4e

pro*eeding".

proved

photograph" A..P-122 to A..P-121 whi*h were handed over to 5a""a Singh 7n"pe*tor. 4e had al"o given the %ideo 2a""ette A..P-129 alongwith the "aid photograph" to

5a""a Singh 7n"pe*tor, whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-12:. 3earned Pu'li* Pro"e*utor

re>ue"ted to *ro"" e.a$ine thi" witne"" 'ut de"pite hi" *ro"" e.a$ination he denied having *li*&ed the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

60

photograph" on 19.10.2001. 10. P=-40 HC M1&6*) S*&75 tendered in eviden*e hi"

a##idavit" A..P-129 to A..P-129. 11. P=-41 HC Ke!1 he *a$e to S*&75 depo"ed on oath that on Mohali to in>uire a'out the

29.10.2001

owner"hip o# the S7M i""ued ') 4ut*h *o$pan), where he $et Muni"h Sriva"tav, Nodal 6##i*er who handed hi$ over one letter A..P-1;0, *op) o# agree$ent A..P-1;1 and *op) o# driving li*en*e o# Ravdeep Kaur A..P-1;2. 4e

#urther depo"ed that a#ter *o$ing to Patiala he handed over the a#ore"aid do*u$ent" to 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh. 12. P=-42 he A:*) wa" T1<10 po"ted depo"ed a" ?ront on oath that on

2:.11.2001

6##i*e

Manager,

Ma e"ti* Par& Pla=a 4otel at 3udhiana.

6n that da) S46

Sewa Singh o# Poli*e 3ine", Patiala *a$e to hi$ and in>uired a'out "ta) o# Ravdeep Kaur on 29.09.200; in the a'ove "aid 4otel. <etail" a'out the "ta) wa"

$aintained in *o$puter onl) and a" per re*ord Ravdeep Kaur wa" allotted roo$ No. ;0/ and her addre"" wa" written a" ;1 (r'an A"tate-7, Patiala. 4e #urther

depo"ed that a" per re*ord "he "ta)ed in the hotel #ro$ /+;1 p.$. to 9+0: p.$. and 'ill No. :989 A..P-1;;

a$ounting to R".;/10/- a" tari## o# the roo$ and in re"pe*t o# other order" wa" *harged. 1;. P=-43 ASI S#51& S*&75, te"ti#ied on oath that

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

61

on 21.10.2001 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh a"&ed hi$ to rea*h at 4.No. 19-A Nihal Bagh, Patiala and on rea*hing there he #ound S7 <hara$ <ev, 7n*harge Poli*e Po"t -ripari alread) pre"ent along with #or*e. 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh

along with 3/S7 Bindu Bala and a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur *a$e there and then the) raided the a'ove "aid hou"e and *ondu*ted the "ear*h. 7n the por*h o# the "aid

hou"e one *ar $a&e 4onda 2it) 'earing No. PB11-N-0110 wa" l)ing par&ed. A**u"ed Pi*&ed up the &e)" o# the

*ar #ro$ the por*h it"el# and handed over the "a$e to 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh. ?ro$ the "ear*h o# "aid *ar one

Audio *a""ette A..P-1;1 wa" re*overed #ro$ it" da"h 'oard 'earing letter" I2haran Ka$al <a Aa"raJ along with photograph o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. and *a""ette were ta&en in po""e""ion Both the *ar vide $e$o

A..P-1;/.

-herea#ter, the) *ondu*ted the "ear*h o# the

hou"e and on "ear*h o# wooden *up 'oard in the 'ed roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur, two re*eipt" A..P-1;: and

A..P-1;9 pertaining to two $o'ile phone", one photo*op) o# in"uran*e *erti#i*ate o# *ar, photo*op) o# pa)$ent re*eipt A..P-1;9 o# one *ar and two to photograph" a**u"ed and A..P-1;8 her and

pertaining

hu"'and

Ragh'inder Singh wherea", another photograph o# Man it Singh, two do$e"ti* diarie" A..P-1/0 G A..P-1/1, #ew do*u$ent" pertaining to i$$igration, original R2 o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

62

4onda 2it) *ar A..P-1/2, one pre"*ription "lip o# 2hugh 2lini* A..P-121 were re*overed whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-1/;. 1/. P=-44 SI D51 1: De2, 7n"pe*tor <u&hniwaran o# thi" ') Sewa depo"ed on oath that on a"&ed in 4e Sewa hi$ to rea*h with the

18.10.2001 ,urdwara

Singh

Patiala *a"e. 7n"p.

*onne*tion wa" oined in

inve"tigation inve"tigation

part)

Singh.

-herea#ter

raid wa" *ondu*ted at the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh at She&hupura. the) 4i" hou"e wa" lo*&ed at that ti$e. *ondu*ted raid at Ravi ho"pital,

-herea#ter Patiala.

-here al"o the pre$i"e" wa" #ound lo*&ed.

@hile the) were *o$ing 'a*& near over 'ridge near 'u" "tand Patiala a "e*ret in#or$ation wa" re*eived to

7n"p.Sewa Singh that <r. Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed re"iding in 4.No.19-A Nihal Bagh Patiala i" $a&ing preparation" to leave the hou"e and in *a"e raid i" *ondu*ted at that ver) ti$e "he *an 'e apprehended. A" "u*h raiding part) rea*hed the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep i.e. 19-A Nihal Bagh, Patiala. At that ti$e Ravdeep a**u"ed wa" lo*&ing her hou"e. with the #a*t" o# A" "u*h "he wa" $ade a*>uainted the *a"e and oined in the

inve"tigation. 3/S7 Bindu Bala wa" al"o with the$ who *ondu*ted per"onal per"onal "ear*h a "ear*h 'rown o# a**u"ed Ravdeep. pur"e 6n wa"

*olour

*he*&wala

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

63

#ound #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Ravdeep. 6n "ear*h o# her pur"e two "$all diarie" A..P-1/9 G A..P-1/8, two $o'ile $o'ile telephone" 'earing No,98119-0:001 #ive and o# other the

No.98880-;/099

A..P-111,

note"

deno$ination o# R".100/- ea*h A..P-110 to A..P-11/, one driving li*en*e o# Ravdeep A..P-109, Sahi', o'tained one "trip #ro$ o#

3i*en"ing

Authorit)

?atehgarh

*ap"ule" na$el) Neurotrat A..P-1/9 were re*overed. -he a#ore"aid arti*le" were ta&en in po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P1//. A**u"ed Ravdeep wa" appri"ed o# the ground" o# her arre"t vide $e$o were A..P1/1. al"o -he legal heir" o#

a**u"ed

Ravdeep

in#or$ed

through

$o'ile

telephone vide $e$o A..P-1/:. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 2;.10.01 7n"p. Sewa Singh *alled hi$ at 27A "ta## Patiala where a**u"ed Man it Singh and Ravdeep Kaur were in *u"tod).

?ir"tl) Man it Singh wa" interrogated and therea#ter a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" interrogated under the

"upervi"ion o# 3/S7 Bindu Bala. 7n"p.Sewa Singh had alread) 'elonging o'tained to "ear*h warrant" o# Ravi and ho"pital the) all

a**u"ed

Ravdeep

Kaur

pro*eeded to Ravi ho"pital along with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur along with 3/S7 Bindu Bala. AS7 %id)a Sagar had alread) 'een dire*ted to 'ring Parveen Ku$ari having &e)" o# the ho"pital to 'e pre"ent there. -he) rea*hed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

64

at Ravi ho"pital and *ondu*ted the "ear*h

oined one Pappu into part) and o# the ho"pital. @hen roo$ o#

<r.Ravdeep wa" "ear*hed and on "ear*hing drawer o# the ta'le one photo*op) o# the *o$plaint A..P-1:0 whi*h wa" addre""ed Pun a' and to Sh.B.K Ro), 4igh 4onF'le 2ourt, Man it Mr. 2hie# 5u"ti*e *ard award

4ar)ana

one

invitation one

A..P-119

#ro$

a**u"ed

Singh,

*erti#i*ate #ro$ Kennel 2lu' Patiala A..P-119, another #ro$ Kennel *lu' 5alandhar A..P-118 were re*overed

whi*h were ta&en in po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-11:. 4e #urther te"ti#ied on oath that therea#ter, 6n 21.10.2001 he wa" again *alled in 27A "ta## ') 7n"p. Sewa Singh where a**u"ed Ravdeep wa" in *u"tod) o#

poli*e under "upervi"ion o# 3/S7 Bindu Bala. ta&en a**u"ed Ravdeep to the 2ourt o#

-he) had 5udi*ial

Magi"trate 7"t 2la"" <r. Ra ni"h where 7n"p. Sewa Singh $oved an appli*ation and A..P1:1 #or o# o'taining "pe*i$en -he

hand-writing

"ignature"

a**u"ed

Ravdeep.

4onF'le Pre"iding 6##i*er a"&ed a**u"ed Ravdeep whether "he wa" read) to give her "pe*i$en handwriting and

"ignature" to whi*h "he gave no o' e*tion and gave her *on"ent A..P-1:2. "ignature" o# -herea#ter "pe*i$en handwriting and Ravdeep were ta&en on three

a**u"ed

"eparate "heet" A..P-1:; to A..P-1:1 and her "pe*i$en hand-writing wa" al"o o'tained on two "eparate "heet"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

65

A..P-1:: and A..P-1:9 whi*h were atte"ted ') Magi"trate and were ta&en into po""e""ion a#ter "ealing the "a$e ') the *ourt the vide $e$o A..P-1:8. phone and 4e #urther #ro$ a"

identi#ied a**u"ed

"e*ond Kaur

$o'ile a"

re*overed the

Ravdeep

A..P-2:1

pur"e

A..P-2::. 11. P=-4% G" :*) S*&75, 5unior A""i"tant, 6##i*e

o# <-6, 3udhiana proved the driving li*en*e No. 01;2:8 o# 200; A..P-1: whi*h wa" i""ued in the na$e o# %i a) Singh "/o A$ar it Singh, Additional Se""ion" 5udge 9-A, Ra&h Bagh 3udhiana on 29.08.200;. 4e #urther

identi#ied hi" report A..P-190 on the poli*e re>ue"t A..P-1:9. 1:. P=-46 SI J1!9*&'e S*&75 depo"ed on oath that

on 09.11.2001

S46, 2ivil 3ine", Patiala dire*ted hi$

to vi"it the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh to 'ring original *o$plaint again"t Sh.

%i a) Singh, the then 3d. Addl. <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge, 3udhiana. ?ir"t he went to the 6/o SSP, Patiala

and #ro$ there he got a letter addre""ed to Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, 2handigarh and went there. he $et 3d. Regi"trar, and handed Pun a' over G 4ar)ana letter 4igh #ro$ -here 2ourt, SSP,

2handigarh Patiala.

"aid

-herea#ter, ld. Regi"trar handed over to hi$

one "ealed envelope whi*h he had handed over to S46,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

66

2ivil 3ine", Patiala.

S46 had opened the "aid envelope

in hi" pre"en*e, whi*h *ontained one original *o$plaint again"t Sh. %i a) Singh, 3d. Addl. <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge along with one #orwarding letter #ro$ the 6/o 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt, Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh. -he

"aid *o$plaint wa" re-"ealed ') the S46 with hi" "eal 'earing i$pre""ion FSSF and handed over the "eal a#ter u"e to AS7 Satpal. -he "aid envelope *ontaining

original *o$plaint wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-191. 4owever, thi" witne"" wa" de*lared ho"tile

on the re>ue"t o# learned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the State and in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination he ad$itted it to 'e *orre*t that in the 6/o Regi"trar, "ealed

envelope wa" handed over to hi$ ') Superintendent Sh. Shiva Nand and "in*e the 6##i*e wa" that o# Regi"trar there#ore, he had $entioned/"tated toda) that the

"ealed envelope wa" handed over to hi$ ') Regi"trar. 19. P=-4> I&!8e()# J1!!1 S*&75 depo"ed on oath

that in the intervening night o# 1; and 1/.10.2001, he re*eived a $e""age #ro$ S46 2ivil 3ine" Patiala that Sh.%i a) Singh, Addl. Se""ion" 5udge ha" 'een $urdered in Polo ,round and he "hould rea*h there. he alongwith the #or*e went to Polo ,round. -herea#ter, Be#ore hi"

rea*hing to the "pot, 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh, <SP, SP 2it) and other o##i*er" had alread) rea*hed at the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

67

"pot.

4e

oined the inve"tigation and al"o a""i"ted

7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh in the in"pe*tion o# "pot. -he dead 'od) o# 5udge %i a) Singh had alread) 'een re$oved to A$ar 4o"pital. -herea#ter, he al"o rea*hed A$ar

4o"pital and in"pe*ted the dead 'od) and #ound a'out two do=en in urie" on the dead 'od) o# 5udge %i a) Singh in#li*ted ') $ean" o# "harp edged weapon. -hen a" per the in"tru*tion" o# the o##i*er", he went to Polo ,round #or "ear*hing o# eviden*e in the Polo ,round. -hen the) &ept a on "ear*hing the Polo ,round. tea$ 6n wa"

11.10.2001,

"pe*ial

inve"tigation

*on"tituted *o$pri"ing hi$. 4e interrogated the people who u"ed to 'e pre"ent in the evening hour" in or near Polo ,round. 6n 1:.10.2001, again the) &ept on

"ear*hing the per"on involved in the *o$$i""ion o# the o##en*e. 4e had put "o$e poli*e o##i*ial" in plain

*lothe" near') the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur a" well a" near') the ho"pital Sewa o# the a**u"ed. hi$ 6n that

1:.10.2001,

7n"pe*tor

Singh

in#or$ed

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur a" well a" Man it Singh have 'een no$inated a" a**u"ed in thi" $urder *a"e and #urther advi"ed hi$ to *ondu*t the inve"tigation again"t

a**u"ed Man it Singh wherea" 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh will *ondu*t inve"tigation >ua a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 6n

1:.10.2001, he *ondu*ted raid at the hou"e o# a**u"ed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

68

Man it Singh at village She&hupura. -he hou"e wa" #ound lo*&ed. 6n 19.10.2001, he again &ept on "ear*hing 6n

a**u"ed Man it Singh 'ut he wa" not availa'le.

18.10.2001, again he *ondu*ted raid at the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh 'ut the hou"e wa" #ound lo*&ed. 6n en>uir) #ro$ the village She&hupura, he *a$e to &now that a**u"ed Man it Singh had le#t the village on hi" vehi*le $a&e -ata-209. 6n return, when he rea*hed near

-.Point Mahindra 2ollege Patiala, he re*eived a phone *all #ro$ 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh that he had arre"ted <r. Ravdeep Kaur. 6n thi" he rea*hed poli*e "tation 2ivil

3ine", Patiala and al"o interrogated the a**u"ed and therea#ter, he *a$e out to "ear*h a**u"ed Man it Singh. @hen he rea*hed near ,opal Sweet" "ituated near Railwa) 2ro""ing No.22, re*eived "e*ret in#or$ation that

a**u"ed Man it Singh riding on hi" -ata-209 'earing No.<3-12<-919: i" going toward" Sangrur wearing white &urta p) a$a and in *a"e he i" raided, he *ould 'e apprehended. Sangrur and 4e #ollowed in#or$ation and went toward" a#ter *ro""ing Bha&hra 2anal, when he

rea*hed near Petrol Pu$p, he "aw the vehi*le -ata 209 'earing No.<3-12<-919: whi*h wa" $ade to "top a#ter overta&ing alighted it. the -he "aid driver a**u"ed and Man it Singh running

#ro$

vehi*le

"tarted

toward" Sangrur. 4e wa" apprehended and on en>uir), he

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

69

di"*lo"ed hi" na$e a" Man it Singh. vehi*le #ro$ it" da"h 'oard a "u$

6n "ear*hing the o# R".10,000/-

*o$pri"ing o# note" o# deno$ination o# R".100/- ea*h A..P-192, one R2 A..P-19; whi*h wa" in the na$e o# Man it Singh and one 7.2ard A..P-19/ o# Man it Singh were re*overed. -he"e arti*le" alongwith the vehi*le

were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-191. 6n #urther "ear*h o# the vehi*le, one pol)thene *arr) 'ag o# red *olour A..P-19: wa" re*overed whi*h *ontain" one parna A..P-199, one lower A..P-198, one upper

'earing Mar& Adida" A..P-199 and one glove o# right hand A..P-180 were re*overed. All the"e arti*le" were 6n

ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-181.

#urther "ear*h o# the vehi*le, one "uite-*a"e *arr)ing one &a$ee whi*h "ealed wa" A..P-18/ G pa) a$a A..P-181 o# 'lue *olour 'lood "tained were re*overed whi*h 5S were and

into

par*el

'earing

"eal

i$pre""ion

"a$ple "eal wa" "eparatel) prepared. Seal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to AS7 ,ur$ail Singh and the "aid par*el wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-182. -he "aid par*el dul) "ealed i" A..P-18;. 4e #urther

depo"ed that on #urther *he*&ing o# the vehi*le, #ro$ 'eneath the driver "eat o# the "aid vehi*le, one e$pt) *arton A..P-18: one o# 'ill $o'ile No.;1 phone dated o# No&ia ;220

*ontaining

08.10.2001

A..P-11

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

70

i""ued

in

the

na$e

o#

Man it

Singh

#ro$

Ku$ra

2o$$uni*ation were re*overed. a" the 'ill were having 7MA7

-he "aid *arton a" well nu$'er o# the $o'ile

phone. Both the *arton a" well a" the 'ill were ta&en into po""e""ion "ear*h one vide o# re*over) $e$o A..P-189. note" 6n o# K-2

per"onal

the

a**u"ed, diar)

*urren*)

R".1980/-,

po*&et

A..P-189

'earing

*ontaining the addre"" o# <r.Ravdeep Kaur and phone nu$'er" o# <r.Ravdeep Kaur o# two $o'ile" phone",

re"iden*e phone a" well a" the phone in"talled at the ho"pital and one &ara A..P-189 #ro$ the right hand

'earing i$pre""ion $ar& A&a$&aar, were re*overed. -he diar) wa" "ealed into par*el 'earing i$pre""ion 5S, "a$ple "eal wa" "eparatel) prepared and "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to AS7 ,ur$ail Singh and all the"e arti*le" were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-188. Rough "ite plan A..P-190 o# the pla*e o#

apprehen"ion o# a**u"ed and re*over) wa" prepared. -he a**u"ed wa" arre"ted. 4e wa" al"o in#or$ed the ground" o# arre"t vide $e$o A..P-191 whi*h wa" "igned ') the a**u"ed and atte"ted ') the a'ove "aid witne""e". An

in#or$ation o# hi" arre"t wa" al"o given to hi" #a$il) $e$'er" vide $e$o A..P-192. 4e #urther depo"ed that on

return to the poli*e "tation 2ivil 3ine", Patiala, the *a"e propert) with "eal" inta*t were handed over to M42

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

71

Man it Singh and the a**u"ed wa" lodged in the lo*& up o# 27A Sta##. 6n 19.10.2001, he interrogated a**u"ed Man it Singh and during interrogation, he $ade di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent A..P-191 that the &irpan with whi*h he had &illed 5udge %i a) Singh he had &ept *on*ealed in ,anga Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra 2anal #ro$ ,hanaur to %illage Sarala Road near S)phon in #ront o# Ki&ar -ree whi*h wa" in hi" e.*lu"ive &nowledge and he *ould get the "a$e re*overed ') pointing out the pla*e. wa" got $edi*all) to e##e*t e.a$ined the and -he a**u"ed the) o#

therea#ter 6n $a&ing

pro*eeded

re*over).

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent, he had *alled the diver" #ro$ Ropar ') giving a phone *all to the S46 2it) Ropar and had advi"ed hi$ to "end diver" at 'u" "tand ,hanaur. 4e had al"o advi"ed hi$ to give hi" $o'ile nu$'er to the "aid diver" whi*h he had told to hi$. 4e rea*hed

village ,hanaur alongwith a**u"ed Man it Singh and $ade an arrange$ent #or the photographer a" well a" the

$ovie $a&er and therea#ter he re*eived a phone *all #ro$ 4ar'an" <iver that he had rea*hed at 'u" "tand ,hanaur. 4e went to 'u" "tand and a""o*iated 4ar'an"

Singh alongwith two $ore diver" and too& the$ to the pla*e pointed out ') a**u"ed Man it Singh and on the pointing o# a**u"ed Man it Singh, 4ar'an" Singh dived

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

72

into *anal and 'rought out one &irpan with "heath and handed over to hi$. -he photographer a" well a" the $ovie $a&er too& photograph" and prepared $ovie o# thi" tran"a*tion and he too& out the &irpan A..P-; #ro$ the "heath A..P-1; and $ade it to dr) in the "un light. -he "&et*h A..P-K o# &irpan wa" prepared and wa" "ealed into a par*el $ade o# wooden 'o. with "eal o#

i$pre""ion 5S wherea" the "heath wa" "eparatel) "ealed into a par*el in white *loth whi*h wa" al"o "ealed with "eal i$pre""ion 5S and the "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to AS7 ,ur$ail Singh. Both &irpan a" well a"

"heath par*el" were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-R. -he dul) "ealed par*el *ontaining &irpan and Sheath were produ*ed in the 2ourt. Rough "ite plan

A..P-19: wa" prepared at the "pot with *orre*t $arginal note". the -he $e$o A..P-199 with regard to the #a*t that led the poli*e part) to the pla*e o#

a**u"ed

o**urren*e and pointed out the pla*e o# o**urren*e o# thi" *a"e wa" prepared. 4e interrogation di"*lo"ure #urther o# the depo"ed a**u"ed, A..P-198 that the that on #urther $ade &ept

a**u"ed he ha"

"tate$ent

*on*ealed a "u$ o# R"./+00 la*" in hi" 4ar$oniu$ l)ing at hi" re"iden*e in the roo$ "ituated at right hand o# the entran*e whi*h are in hi" e.*lu"ive &nowledge and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

73

po""e""ion and he *an get the "a$e re*overed. 4e 20.10.2001, #urther the depo"ed led that the therea#ter poli*e part) on in

a**u"ed

pur"uan*e o# hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent at the di"*lo"ed pla*e i.e. hi" re"iden*e and got re*overed one

har$oniu$ A..P-210 #ro$ the roo$ "ituated on the right "ide o# the entran*e and a#ter re$oving one wooden

plan& #ro$ the 'a"e o# har$oniu$ got re*overed a "u$ o# R"./+00 la*" in 8 'undle" o# *urren*) note" o# R".100/ea*h, ea*h 'undle *ontained 100 *urren*) note". the eight 'undle" were $ar&ed 1 to 8 A..P-201 All to

A..P-208 and the nu$'er o# #ir"t *urren*) note and the la"t *urren*) note o# ea*h 'undle wa" noted down and therea#ter all the"e eight 'undle" were put into a

pol)thene paper and therea#ter it wa" "ealed into a par*el A..P-209 a" with a" "eal o# i$pre""ion o# *urren*) 5S. note" -he o#

har$oniu$

well

par*el

R"./+00 la*" were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-211 whi*h wa" atte"ted ') a'ove "aid

witne""e". -he a**u"ed Man it Singh al"o got re*overed one $otor *)*le No.PB/2-B-21/2 A..P-12;, with one <3 A..P-211, one pollution *erti#i*ate A..P-21: and one R2 o# the $otor *)*le whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-212. pa""port A..P-219 and 9 4e al"o re*overed one A..P-219 to

photograph"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

74

A..P-221 o# a**u"ed Man it Singh #ro$ the 'a*& o# the 'ed whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-218. -he rough "ite plan o# the pla*e o#

re*over) A..P-22: wa" prepared at the "pot with *orre*t $arginal note". -he *a"e propert) with "eal" inta*t

wa" depo"ited with M42 Man it Singh and the a**u"ed wa" lodged in the lo*& o# 27A Patiala. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 21.10.2001 during inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e, he *alled Narinder Ku$'ra to 27A Sta##, Patiala who produ*ed one 'ill A..P-10/ dated 08.10.2001 regarding pur*ha"e o# Mo'ile No&ia

whi*h wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-10:. 4e al"o re*orded the "tate$ent o# witne"" Narinder. 6n 22.10.2001, the "pe*i$en hair o# the a**u"ed Man it Singh were ta&en a#ter o'taining per$i""ion #ro$ 3d. 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"" vide appli*ation A..P-2;/ ') *o$'ing hi" hair ') Man it Singh and the hair le#t out in the *o$' in*luding *o$' wa" put into a pla"ti* 'o. and were "ealed into a par*el A..P-21; 'earing

i$pre""ion <R ') the 2ourt and it wa" handed over to hi$ whi*h wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-212. 4e 2:.10.2001, during #urther "tated that on therea#ter, on

a**u"ed

Man it $a&e

Singh, a

interrogation "tate$ent

poli*e

*u"tod)

di"*lo"ure

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

75

A..P-211 that one S7M *ard o# 4ut*h 2o$pan) *arr)ing phone No. 988809/099 whi*h wa" given to hi$ ') <r. Ravdeep Kaur and it wa" put in hi" No&ia Mo'ile phone, Model No. ;220 and it wa" u"ed ') hi$ at the ti$e o# $urder o# 5udge %i a) Singh and therea#ter, he had

ta&en out the "aid S7M *ard and handed over the $o'ile to hi" 'rother Sur it Singh and the S7M *ard he had &ept *on*ealed a#ter wrapping the "a$e in a pie*e o# paper in the *lothe" l)ing in the 'o. o# a 'ed l)ing in one roo$ o# hi" he hou"e *an whi*h get wa" the in hi" e.*lu"ive re*overed.

&nowledge

and

"a$e

-herea#ter, a**u"ed while in poli*e *u"tod) lead the poli*e part) at the di"*lo"ed pla*e" and got re*overed one S7M 2ard A..P-21: whi*h wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-219. Rough "ite plan o# the

pla*e o# re*over) A..P-218 wa" prepared with *orre*t Marginal note". -he *a"e propert) wa" depo"ited with -herea#ter,

M42, Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine", Patiala.

on 29.10.2009 Sur it Singh "/o Kuldeep Singh 'rother o# Man it Singh produ*ed one $o'ile hand "et $a&e No&ia ;220 A..P-219 whi*h wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide Kuldeep Singh, #ather o# the a**u"ed on the "a$e da), two to <%< 2a""ette" dated

$e$o A..P-2:;. al"o produ*ed and

A..P-2:0

A..P-2:1

pertaining

progra$"

20.08.2001 and 21.08.2001.

Both the"e *a""ette" were

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

76

ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:2.

6n

the "a$e da) Kri"han Ku$ar, Photographer al"o produ*ed #our photograph" A..P-122 to A..P-121 along with one video *a""ette" A..P-129 whi*h were ta&en into

po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-12:.

6n 28.10.2001

a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" produ*ed 'e#ore 3d. 7lla>a Magi"trate, appli*ation writing *on"ent o# o# <r. Ra nee"h #or Man it hi" and on that da) he $oved hand

A..P-2/; a**u"ed a**u"ed,

o'taining Singh.

"pe*i$en A#ter

o'taining wa"

"pe*i$en

hand

writing

o'tained on three "heet" whi*h were *erti#ied ') the 7lla>a Magi"trate. par*el ') the -he "aid "heet" were "ealed into a 7lla>a Magi"trate with "eal" o#

i$pre""ion <R.

Separate "a$ple "eal wa" prepared and

the "aid envelope along with "a$ple "eal were handed over to hi$ whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:/. -herea#ter, the inve"tigation" were *arried

out ') 7n"p. Sewa Singh. 18. P=-48 S5*21 N1&', A""i"tant Regi"trar,

2on#idential, Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, 2handigarh proved the original *o$plaint again"t %i a) Singh, the then Additional Se""ion" 5udge a" A..P-19; and the

envelope A..P-19/. 19. P=-4, D1 1 S*&75, A""i"tant, CPS S*hool,

Patiala depo"ed on oath that 5a"noor Singh "/o Ravdeep

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

77

Kaur

wa"

"tudent

o#

their

"*hool.

6n

2/th

Augu"t,

Ravdeep Kaur $oved appli*ation" A..P-198 and A..P-199 in the "*hool #or i$$igration written ') purpo"e. Ravdeep Kaur -he in "aid hi"

appli*ation"

were

pre"en*e and "a$e were handed over ') hi$ to AS7 Satpal Singh vide $e$o A..P-200 on the re>ue"t o# SSP,

Patiala. :0. P=-%0 J"710 K*!5# e te"ti#ied on oath that he

i" having a Printing Pre"" under the na$e and "t)le o# 3eonard Printer" in 3al Bagh Street at Patiala. 7n

Augu"t, 2001 a**u"ed Man it Singh had *a$e to hi$ #or printing o# the 2ard" #or F,reh Parve"hF *ere$on). 4e

had 'rought the *ard" a" well a" the envelope" #or the purpo"e o# printing. 4e had printed 200 *ard" and

*harged the la'our a" R".;00/- #or the "aid printing. 4e #urther identi#ied the invitation *ard a" A..P-229. :1. P=-%1 HC J17)1 S*&75 tendered in eviden*e hi"

a##idavit A..P-228. :2. P=-%2 A:*) K":1 , A.e*utive o# %6<A?6NA ASSAR

South 3i$ited, Mohali proved the *all detail" o# $o'ile phone nu$'er 98880;/099 and o# $o'ile phone nu$'er

988809/099.

A" per re*ord 'oth the"e *onne*tion" have

'een i""ued in the na$e o# Ravdeep Kaur, 4.No. 19-A, Nihal nu$'er Bagh, o# Near 2ir*uit 4ou"e, Patiala. S7M *ard i"

$o'ile

phone

nu$'er

988809/099

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

78

8991880000000;091019.

4e

#urther

proved

the

re*ord

pertaining to the relea"ing o# a'ove "aid *onne*tion a" Mar&-A, *op) o# driving li*en*e Mar&-B, another #or$ #or ad-on *onne*tion Mar&-2 and *op) o# driving 3i*en*e Mar&-<. -he *all detail" o# phone nu$'er 98880;/099

were proved a" A..P-229 Dpage" 1 to 1:E and that o# phone nu$'er 988809/099 were proved a" A..P-2;0 Dpage" 1 to 22E whi*h were e.tra*ted ') hi$ #ro$ the *o$puter. 4e #urther depo"ed that the lo*ation o# Poll Nu$'er 19101 i" near Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala wherea", the lo*ation o# Poll No. 191/; i" near <u&hniwaran

,urudwara at Patiala. :;. that 2ivil on P=-%3 ASI R1: K*!51& S*&75 depo"ed on oath 02.01.200/ he re*eived regarding a $e""age #ro$ o# S46,

3ine",

Patiala

ad$i""ion

Narain

Singh "/o ,urdeep Singh, r/o 4.No. 1112, ,ali No. 9-B, 6ld Bi"han Nagar, Patiala in Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala whereupon he along with other o##i*ial" went to the ho"pital and a#ter o'taining the #itne"" o# the in ured he re*orded hi" "tate$ent, photo*op) o# whi*h i" Mar&A. Sin*e the <o*tor on dut) wa" *hanged, "o M3R *ould

not o'tained and on return to the poli*e "tation he re*orded the <<R No. 1/ A..P-2;1 in the poli*e po"t. 4e #urther depo"ed that a#ter in>uir) the "tate$ent given ') Narain Singh wa" #ound to 'e #al"e/'ogu" and a

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

79

<<R A..P-2;2 to thi" e##e*t wa" re*orded on 0;.01.200/. -herea#ter, the #ile wa" handed over to 7n"p. Balwinder Pal Shar$a who al"o in>uired a'out thi" $atter and the #inal report wa" "ent ') the Senior Superintendent o# Poli*e to 4onF'le <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge, Patiala. -he #inal report A..P-2;; wa" "igned ') Sh. A.S.Rai, the then SSP, Patiala. Narain Singh, *o$plainant o#

that *a"e wa" wor&ing with Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed. :/. P=-%4 D . R16&ee!5, 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t

2la"", 2handigarh, then po"ted at Patiala te"ti#ied on oath that on 20.10.2001 the poli*e $oved an appli*ation A..P-2;/ along with a**u"ed Man it Singh #or o'taining hi" "pe*i$en hair #or the purpo"e o# *o$pari"on,

whereupon, "he a"&ed a**u"ed Man it Singh, i# he wa" read) to give hi" "pe*i$en hair to whi*h he $ade hi" "tate$ent A..P-2;1 and gave hi" *on"ent #or giving hi" "pe*i$en hair and a**ordingl) "he pa""ed order A..P-2;: and the *a"e wa" ad ourned to 22.10.2001 #or thi"

purpo"e. 6n 22.10.2001, again the a**u"ed wa"

produ*ed 'e#ore her #or o'taining hi" "pe*i$en hair and on that da) al"o "he re>ui"itioned the *on"ent o# the a**u"ed. -he a**u"ed gave hi" no o' e*tion #or giving

hi" hair "a$ple #or the purpo"e o# *o$pari"on and hi" "tate$ent to thi" e##e*t A..P-2;9 wa" re*orded.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

80

-herea#ter, a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" handed over one white *o$' #or *o$'ing hi" hair and a#ter *o$'ing hi" hair, the e.tra hair le#t in the *o$' in*luding the *o$' wa" ta&en a" "a$ple and were "ealed into a par*el 'earing i$pre""ion <R and a#ter preparing "a$ple "eal, the par*el and the "a$ple "eal were handed over to the poli*e and a "tate$ent A..P-2;8 to thi" e##e*t o# 7n"p. 5a""a Singh wa" re*orded. She pa""ed the order

a**ordingl). Kaur wa"

-herea#ter, on 21.10.2001 a**u"ed Ravdeep 'e#ore #or her and her an appli*ation hand

produ*ed wa" $oved

A..P-1:1

o'taining

"pe*i$en

writing and "ignature" #or the purpo"e o# *o$pari"on. She a"&ed Ravdeep Kaur i# "he wa" read) to give her "pe*i$en hand writing and "ignature" in the 2ourt a" a "a$ple #or *o$pari"on. 7t wa" al"o $ade *lear to her

that the "aid "pe*i$en" *ould 'e u"ed again"t her a" eviden*e in the *a"e "he wa" produ*ed in the 2ourt, the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur gave no o' e*tion to thi" e##e*t and her "tate$ent A..P-1:2 wa" redu*ed into writing whi*h wa" read over to her and a#ter ad$itting the "a$e to 'e *orre*t, "he "igned the "a$e and "he a**ordingl) pa""ed order" A..P-2;9 and A..P-2/0. -he order" pa""ed on 22.10.2001 in re"pe*t o# o'taining "pe*i$en hair o# a**u"ed Man it Singh are A..P-2/1 and A..P-2/2. "pe*i$en hand writing o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur -he were

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

81

ta&en on #ive "heet" A..P-1:; to A..P-1:9 whi*h were "ealed into an envelope with "eal o# i$pre""ion <R. Spe*i$en "eal wa" "eparatel) prepared and it wa" handed over to the 7nve"tigating 6##i*er. -herea#ter, on 28.10.2001 a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" again produ*ed along with one appli*ation A..P-2/; #or o'taining hi" "pe*i$en hand writing #or the purpo"e o# *o$pari"on. A**u"ed Man it Singh wa"

a"&ed a'out hi" *on"ent in giving "pe*i$en hand writing and "ignature", though, he wa" given li'ert) to give or not to give the "pe*i$en hand writing, however, it wa" $ade *lear to hi$ that the "aid "pe*i$en" *ould 'e read again"t hi$ a" eviden*e in the *a"e, he wa" produ*ed in the 2ourt 'ut a**u"ed Man it Singh gave hi" *on"ent vide hi" two "eparate "tate$ent" A..P-2// and A..P-2/1. -he "pe*i$en hand writing o# a**u"ed Man it Singh were ta&en on three "heet" A..P-2/: to A..P-2/8 and "he gave her *erti#i*ate" hand on all the do*u$ent" on whi*h Kaur "heet" the and o#

"pe*i$en Man it

writing were

o#

a**u"ed -he

Ravdeep

Singh

ta&en.

"pe*i$en

a**u"ed Man it Singh were "ealed in to an envelope with "eal i$pre""ion <R. A "eparate "a$ple "eal wa"

prepared and the envelope along with "a$ple "eal were handed over to the poli*e and "he pa""ed order"

A..P-2/9 and A..P-210 a**ordingl).

A re*eipt o# ta&ing

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

82

the "pe*i$en hand writing o# Man it Singh wa" o'tained #ro$ 7n"p. 5a""a Singh vide hi" "tate$ent A..P-211. :1. on P=-%% ASI G" :1*0 S*&75, depo"ed on oath that 11.10.2001 a Spe*ial 7nve"tigation -ea$ wa"

*on"tituted *o$pri"ing o# Sh. Ko"tu' Shar$a, SP 2it), <SP Sh. 5a"preet Singh Sidhu, 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and 7n"p. Sewa Singh regarding inve"tigation o# the $urder o# %i a) Singh, the then Additional Se""ion" 5udge, Pun a'. 6n 1:.10.2001 during inve"tigation o# thi"

*a"e a**u"ed Man it Singh ! Binnu and <r. Ravdeep Kaur were no$inated a" a**u"ed. 7n"p. Sewa Singh had

in#or$ed a'out the involve$ent o# the"e two a**u"ed in the $urder o# Sh. %i a) Singh. ?or *ondu*ting the

inve"tigation again"t a**u"ed Man it Singh, 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and hi" tea$ wa" deputed wherea" #or the

inve"tigation again"t a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur, 7n"p. Sewa Singh wa" entru"ted the with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh o'. and 6n 19.10.2001 he along other poli*e o##i*ial"

raided the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh in hi" village She&hu Pura and the) al"o raided Maternal ,rand Parent" at village Khali"pur in <i"tt. ?atehgarh Sahi'. a**u"ed *ould not 'e tra*ed out at the"e pla*e". -he -he)

raided at di##erent pla*e" where he *ould 'e "ear*hed out 'ut the a**u"ed *ould not 'e tra*ed out. 6n

18.10.2001 he along with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and other

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

83

o##i*ial" again raided the hou"e o# Man it Singh in village She&hu Pura #ro$ where the) *a$e to &now that Man it Singh had gone out on hi" vehi*le -A-A 209. return when the) rea*hed near Mohindra 6n

2ollege,

Patiala, 7n"p. 5a""a Singh re*eived a phone *all #ro$ 7n"p. 5a""a Singh that 7n"p. Sewa Singh had arre"ted <r. Ravdeep Kaur. other poli*e part) -hen 7n"p. 5a""a Singh along with in*luding hi$ went to Poli*e

Station, 2ivil 3ine, Patiala where 7n"p. Sewa Singh wa" interrogating a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 7n"p. 5a""a Singh -herea#ter, on ,opal where Sweet" 7n"p.

al"o interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. return "ituated when near the) were pre"ent near No.

railwa)

*ro""ing

22,

5a""a Singh re*eived "e*ret in#or$ation that a**u"ed Man it Singh, riding on hi" vehi*le $a&e -A-A 209

'earing regi"tration No. <312-<-919: wa" going #ro$ the "ide o# Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala toward" Sangrur

*arr)ing in the "aid vehi*le all the luggage $eant #or Kirtan in*luding 4ar$oniu$. 4e wa" #urther in#or$ed

that the a**u"ed wa" wearing white Kurta Pa a$a at that ti$e and in *a"e he i" engaged and raided, he *an 'e apprehended. 5a""a Singh @hereupon, *ha"ed on the the) all along with 7n"p.

a**u"ed

and

a#ter

*ro""ing ,agan a#ter

Bha&hra #illing

Kanal "tation

Patiala-Sangrur $ade hi" vehi*le

road to

near "top

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

84

overta&ing it.

-he a**u"ed a#ter alighting #ro$ hi" 4e wa" he

vehi*le atte$pted to run toward" Sangrur. apprehended and on a"&ing a'out hi"

identit),

di"*lo"ed hi" na$e a" Man it Singh.

-hen the vehi*le

No. <312-<-919: o# the a**u"ed wa" "ear*hed and #ro$ the da"h 'oard o# the "aid vehi*le one R2, 2urren*) note" o# R".10,000/- o# the deno$ination o# R".100/ea*h and one 7dentit) *ard were re*overed whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide i" $e$o A..P-191. and R2 i" o#

A..P-19;,

7dentit)

*ard

A..P-19/

'undle

*urren*) note" i" A..P-192.

?ro$ the rear "eat o# the

vehi*le #ro$ the red *olor pol)thene 'ag, one Parna o# 'lue *olor, one lower, one a*&et upper portion on

whi*h Faddida"F wa" written in Angli"h and one glove o# right hand were re*overed whi*h were ta&en into

po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-181. the Parna A..P-199, lower

4e #urther identi#ied

A..P-198, 5a*&et A..P-199,

glove A..P-180 and the pol)thene 'ag A..P-19: in the 2ourt. Pa a$a 6ne "uit *a"e *ontaining one Kurta A..P-18/ and A..P-181 'lue *olored 'lood "tained were

re*overed. par*el with

Both Kurta and Pa a$a were "ealed into a "eal o# i$pre""ion 5.S. B) 7n"p. 5a""a

Singh and "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to hi$ and thi" Kurta Pa a$a wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-182. ?ro$ 'eneath the driver "eat o# the "aid

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

85

vehi*le one e$pt) *artoon DA..P-18:E o# $o'ile phone $a&e No&ia ;220 *ontaining whi*h were one 'ill No. in ;1 dated o#

08.10.2001 a**u"ed

A..P-101 Singh

wa"

i""ued

#avour Both

Man it

re*overed.

the"e

arti*le" were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-189. -hen per"onal "ear*h o# the a**u"ed wa" *ondu*ted and #ro$ hi" po""e""ion a "u$ o# R".1980/- were re*overed #ro$ the #ront le#t po*&et o# hi" "hirt, one diar) A..P-189 whereon F5)oti Kathuria K-2F wa" written and in"ide the "aid diar) addre"" o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur along with $o'ile phone a" well a" telephone nu$'er" o#

ho"pital a" well a" re"iden*e o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur were written and one Kara "teel #ro$ the right hand were re*overed. -he diar) wa" "ealed into a par*el with the

"eal o# i$pre""ion 5S ') 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and "eal wa" handed over to hi$ a#ter u"e. -he arti*le" were ta&en -he a**u"ed wa"

into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-188.

arre"ted and the ground" o# arre"t were *onve)ed to the a**u"ed a**u"ed. vide $e$o A..P-181 whi*h wa" "igned ') the

-he inti$ation regarding arre"t o# a**u"ed

Man it Singh wa" given to hi" )ounger 'rother vide $e$o A..P-192. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 19.10.2001 in the $orning he wa" pre"ent at 27A Sta##, Patiala and at that ti$e 7n"p. 5a""a Singh interrogated a**u"ed Man it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

86

Singh

and

during

interrogation

he

$ade

di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent that the "word with whi*h he had $urdered %i a) Singh 5udge, the "aid "word along with "heath thrown in Bha&hra Kanal Bran*h Kanda Kheri near S)phan in #ront o# Ki&&ar -ree whi*h wa" in hi" e.*lu"ive &nowledge re*overed. and po""e""ion and he *an get the "a$e

-he "aid "tate$ent wa" redu*ed into writing

vide $e$o A..P-191 whi*h wa" "igned ') the a**u"ed and witne""ed ') hi$ and 42 4ari 2hand. -herea#ter, the

a**u"ed along with the poli*e part) went to ,hanaur -own where Kri"han Ku$ar, Photographer and So$ Nath Movie $a&er were oined in the part). -herea#ter, the) 6n re*eipt o#

*a$e to Bu" Stand o# ,hanaur -own.

telephone *all #ro$ the diver" ') 7n"p. 5a""a Singh, three diver" na$el) 4ar'an" Singh, Sure"h and Malta had *o$e #ro$ Ropar. poli*e part). -he) were al"o oined in the

-herea#ter, the a**u"ed Man it Singh

led the poli*e part) at the di"*lo"ed pla*e in #ront o# Ki&&ar -ree a#ter *ro""ing S)phon and pointed out the pla*e where he had thrown the &irpan with "heath.

4ar'an" diver dived into the &anal and 'rought out one &irpan A..P-; in a "heath A..P-1; in a "hort while and produ*ed the "a$e too& 'e#ore 7n"p. and the 5a""a $ovie Singh. $a&er 7n"p.

Photographer

photograph

prepared the $ovie o# the whole tran"a*tion.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

87

5a""a Singh too& out the &irpan #ro$ the "heath and "pla"hed the water #ro$ it and $ade it to dr) in "un. 42 Ba&htaur Singh wa" "ent to 'ring the wooden 'o. with white *loth and 7n"p. 5a""a Singh prepared "&et*h o# "aid &irpan. -herea#ter, the &irpan wa" put into a

wooden 'o. and $ade into a par*el whi*h wa" "ealed with "eal i$pre""ion F5SF. Sa$ple "eal wa" "eparatel)

prepared and "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to hi$. "heath wa" al"o "ealed into a par*el with "eal o#

i$pre""ion F5SF and were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-R. 6n return the a**u"ed al"o pointed out

the pla*e o# o**urren*e and the pla*e where he had par&ed hi" $otor *)*le and $e$o to thi" e##e*t wa" prepared whi*h i" A..P-199. Singh #urther interrogated he $ade 6n 19.10.2001 7n"p. 5a""a the a**u"ed and during A..P-198

interrogation

di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent

that the a$ount o# R".1 3a*" whi*h he had ta&en #ro$ a**u"ed Ravdeep a" *on"ideration to &ill 5udge %i a) Singh out o# that a$ount he had *on*ealed R"./ 3a*" in hi" 4ar$oniu$ a#ter re$oving a pie*e o# wood and the "aid pie*e wa" again repla*ed at the "a$e pla*e and he had &ept the "aid 4ar$oniu$ at hi" re"iden*e in a roo$, "ituated on the right "ide o# the entran*e o# hi" hou"e whi*h wa" in hi" e.*lu"ive &nowledge and po""e""ion and he *ould get re*overed on pointing out the "a$e pla*e.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

88

-herea#ter, on 20.10.2001, he along with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and other poli*e o##i*ial" had again "tarted the inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e and a**u"ed

Man it Singh while in poli*e *u"tod) led the poli*e part) at hi" re"iden*e at village She&hu Pura and in pur"uan*e o# hi" "tate$ent got re*overed one 4ar$oniu$ #ro$ a roo$ "ituated on the right "ide o# the entran*e and got re*overed R"./ 3a*" a#ter re$oving the wooden pie*e o# hi" 4ar$oniu$ with hi" own hand". -here were

total 8 'undle" o# *urren*) note" o# the deno$ination o# R".100/- ea*h. All the pa*&et" were $ar&ed 1 to 8

and the #ir"t and la"t nu$'er o# *urren*) note" were noted down o# ea*h pa*&et. All the pa*&et" were "ealed

into one par*el in a pol)thene paper and in a white *loth and wa" "ealed with the i$pre""ion o# F5SF and "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to hi$. -he eight

pa*&et" are A..P-201 to A..P-208 and "aid par*el along with 4ar$oniu$ A..P-210 were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-211. 6ne $otor *)*le $a&e 3M3 ?reedo$

'earing PB/2-B-21/2 #ro$ the "tore roo$ o# hi" hou"e with paper" R2 o# the $otor *)*le in the na$e o# the a**u"ed A..P-21/, <3 o# the a**u"ed A..P-211, Pollution *erti#i*ate A..P-21: and $otor *)*le A..P-21; were

ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-212.

?ro$ the

'a*& 'o. o# the 'ed o# a**u"ed one pa""port o# Man it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

89

Singh A..P-219 and "even photograph" o# Man it A..P-219 to A..P-221 were re*overed whi*h were ta&en into

po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-218. 6n 20.10.2001, the a**u"ed wa" produ*ed in the 2ourt and al"o an appli*ation wa" $oved #or o'taining the "pe*i$en hair o# the a**u"ed and the "aid appli*ation wa" ad ourned ') 3d. 7lla>a Magi"trate to 22.10.2001. 6n inve"tigation o# 21.10.2001, thi" *a"e he with had 7n"p. oined 5a""a the

Singh.

Narinder Ku$ar Ku$'ra *a$e to 27A Sta## and produ*ed one invoi*e A..P-10/ dated 08.10.2001 regarding

pur*ha"e o# one No&ia Mo'ile Set and it wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-10:. 6n 22.10.2001 he again oined the

inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and again a**u"ed wa" produ*ed 'e#ore 7lla>a Magi"trate #or o'taining "pe*i$en hair o# the a**u"ed. Magi"trate a#ter o'taining hi" *on"ent -he 7lla>a a"&ed the

a**u"ed Man it Singh to *o$' hi" hair with white *o$' whereupon re$oved. pla"ti* "o$e o# the hair" o# a**u"ed Man it were

-he "aid *o$' along with hair wa" put into a 'o. whi*h wa" "ealed a#ter $a&ing into a

par*el, ') the 7lla>a Magi"trate, <r. Ra nee"h with her "eal o# i$pre""ion <R and wa" ta&en into po""e""ion

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

90

vide $e$o A..P-212. 6n 2:.10.2001 again he oined the

inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and the a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" interrogated and during interrogation a**u"ed Man it Singh $ade a di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-211 that one S7M *ard o# 4(-24 *o$pan) 'earing No. 988809/099, whi*h wa" given to hi$ ') <r. Ravdeep Kaur and he had put the "aid S7M in No&ia Phone $odel No. ;220 and u"ed at the ti$e o# &illing 5udge %i a) Singh and therea#ter, he had given the "aid

$o'ile "et to hi" 'rother Sur it Singh 'ut had &ept *on*ealed the "aid S7M wrapped in a paper at hi"

re"iden*e under the *lothe" o# the 'ed 'o. l)ing in a roo$ on the right hand "ide whi*h wa" in hi" e.*lu"ive &nowledge re*overed. and po""e""ion and he *ould get the "a$e

-herea#ter, the a**u"ed while in poli*e

*u"tod) lead the poli*e part) at the di"*lo"ed pla*e and in pur"uan*e the "aid o# S7M hi" di"*lo"ure and "tate$ent wa" ta&en got into

re*overed

A..P-21:

po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-219. 6n 29.10.2001 again he oined the

inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and on that da) Sur it Singh, 'rother o# Man it Singh

produ*ed one $o'ile, $a&e No&ia, $odel ;220 A..P-219 and wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:;. 6n

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

91

the "a$e da) Kuldeep Singh, #ather o# a**u"ed Man it Singh produ*ed two <%< 2a""ette", one dated 20.08.2001 and another dated 21.08.2001 A..P-2:0 and A..P-2:1

whi*h were ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:2. 6n the "a$e da) Kri"han Ku$ar <hi$an produ*ed #our

photograph" A..P-122 to A..P-121 and one %ideo 2a""ette A..P-129 whi*h he had ta&en on 19.10.2001 and were

ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-12:. 6n 28.10.2001, again he oined

inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e with 7n"p. 5a""a Singh and on that da) again 7n"p. 5a""a Singh $oved an

appli*ation A..P-2/; #or o'taining the hand writing and "ignature" o# a**u"ed Man it Singh 'e#ore the 7lla>a Magi"trate. "pe*i$en "pe*i$en" -he a**u"ed on in>uir) agreed to give hi" writing ta&en and on "ignature" three "heet" whereupon A..P-2/: hi" to -he

hand were

A..P-2/8 in the pre"en*e o# 7lla>a Magi"trate.

"aid "heet" were "ealed in an envelope whi*h "eal o# i$pre""ion F<RF ') the 2ourt and the "aid envelope wa" al"o "ta$ped at #ive pla*e" with i$pre""ion F5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", PatialaF. Sa$ple "eal wa" al"o

prepared and it wa" al"o ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:/. ::. P=-%6 DSP Se91 S*&75, te"ti#ied on oath that

on 1/.10.2001, he wa" po"ted a" S46/7n"p. Poli*e State

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

92

2ivil 3ine", Patiala.

At a'out 1+/0 a.$., he re*eived

a telephoni* $e""age #ro$ A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala that %i a) Singh Additional Se""ion" 5udge had 'een $urdered and hi" dead 'od) wa" l)ing in A$ar 4o"pital.

-hereupon, he along with AS7 Satpal and other o##i*ial" pro*eeded ho"pital to Shiv A$ar Ra 4o"pital. Singh $et 6n hi$ the and gate he o# the hi"

$ade

"tate$ent A..P-A on whi*h he $ade endor"e$ent A..P-2:9 and "end the "a$e to the poli*e "tation through 2. ,urdial Singh #or the regi"tration o# the *a"e. al"o dire*ted to in#or$ the higher authoritie" 4e and

*alled #or <og S>uad, $ovie $a&er, photographer and ?inger Print A.pert" at the "pot. 4e #urther te"ti#ied on oath that

therea#ter, he *a"uall) e.a$ined the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh and #ound there were a'out 20-21 in urie" on hi" 'od) and he wa" having "o$e hair in hi" right hand. -he "aid hair were put in to the pla"ti* 'o. and wa" "ealed with the "eal i$pre""ion FSSF. Sa$ple "eal wa"

"eparatel) prepared and "aid pla"ti* 'o. wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-B/1. -herea#ter, Shiv Ra Singh, produ*ed 'e#ore

hi$ one $o'ile $a&e No&ia A..P-1 whi*h wa" li&e a 'oo& alleged to have 'een re*overed ') hi$ #ro$ the "pot and the S7M nu$'er o# the "aid $o'ile wa" 98922-10092 and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

93

it wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-A/2. 4e #urther depo"ed that a#ter that he

pro*eeded to the "pot at Polo ,round. ">uad, photographer, $ovie $a&er

-he tea$" o# <og and #inger print

e.pert" had alread) rea*hed there.

-he) were deputed 4e in"pe*ted

#or their re"pe*tive dutie" at the "pot.

the "pot and #ro$ the "pot one 'ro&en $o'ile A..P-2 *o$pri"ing o# 'od), S7M and *over whi*h wa" a""e$'led at the "pot and wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-A//. pla"ti* 'o. Blood "tained earth wa" ta&en in a "$all #ro$ the "pot whi*h wa" "ealed into a

par*el with "eal i$pre""ion SS and "eal a#ter u"e wa" handed over to AS7 Satpal and the par*el wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-A/;. Rough "ite plan

A..P-2:8 wa" prepared at the "pot with *orre*t $arginal note". to A$ar -herea#ter, he along with other o##i*ial" went 4o"pital, Patiala and got the dead 'od)

photographed, re*orded the "tate$ent" o# witne""e" and the dead 'od) wa" ta&en to Ra indra 4o"pital #or the purpo"e" o# Po"t$orte$. 4e prepared in>ue"t report

A..P-K at the "pot and the dead 'od) wa" identi#ied ') Shiv Ra Singh and Satinder Singh. 4e $oved

appli*ation A..P-4 #or the *on"titution o# the Board #or the purpo"e" o# po"t$orte$ and "u'$itted the paper" #or po"t$orte$ and the 'oard *ondu*ted the po"t$orte$

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

94

on the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh.

-he photographer and

$ovie $a&er were dire*ted to get the photograph" and to prepare the $ovie o# the po"t$orte$. -herea#ter, he

re*orded the "tate$ent o# A'dula Noorie in Angli"h and then in Pun a'i. 4e #urther te"ti#ied on oath that therea#ter, he went to the hou"e o# 5udge %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed and interrogated the "ervant" o# the "aid hou"e. -hen he

again went to Polo ground and interrogated the -u'ewell operator o# Polo ,round and then again returned 'a*& to Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala. AS7 Satpal produ*ed 'e#ore

hi$ one par*el with "eal" o# KKA and the "eal wa" inta*t, along with "a$ple "eal and the "aid par*el

*ontained two "hoe" A..P-10 G A..P-11, two "o*&" A..P-8 G A..P-9, underwear A..P-9, pent A..P-:, --"hirt

A..P-1, Pat&a A..P-/ and Belt A..P-12 and the par*el wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-B. o# witne""e" were re*orded. "tation, the *a"e propert) State$ent"

6n return to the poli*e wa" depo"ited with M42

Man it Singh with "eal" inta*t.

4e #urther depo"ed

that on 11.10.2001 he went to the hou"e o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed where *o$plainant $et hi$ and therea#ter, he went to 27A Sta## and had interrogated the "u"pe*ted people. <7,, Patiala had *on"tituted a "pe*ial

7nve"tigating -ea$ *on"i"ting o# hi$, SP Sh. Ko"tu'

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

95

Shar$a,

<SP

5a"preet

Singh

and

7n"p.

5a""a

Singh,

7n*harge 27A Sta##, Patiala.

-he) had

a $eeting on

11.10.2001 in 27A Sta##, Patiala and therea#ter, he returned to the poli*e "tation. 6n 11.10.2001, he

wrote a letter to the *on*erned authoritie" to have a *all detail" o# the $o'ile re*overed #ro$ the "pot

'elonging to %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed.

4e al"o wrote a

letter to *on*erned authoritie" to have *all detail" o# all the 2o$panie" w.e.#. 9+00 p.$. to 12+00 p.$. dated 1;.10.2001. 6n 1:.10.2001, he again went to the hou"e o# 5udge %i a) Singh de*ea"ed where he re*orded the

"tate$ent o# <eepinder Kaur, wi#e and 5ana$ it Kaur, $other o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh and no$inated Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh, a**u"ed o# thi" *a"e. 4e al"o

in#or$ed a'out it to the higher authoritie" a" well a" to 7n*harge, 27A Sta##, Patiala on telephone. -hen he

raided the hou"e a" well a" ho"pital o# Ravdeep Kaur and then he raided the hou"e o# Man it Singh, a**u"ed. But the) were not #ound pre"ent in their hou"e" or in the ho"pital and then he returned to the poli*e "tation along with other o##i*ial". 4e #urther te"ti#ied on oath that on

19.10.2001 he along with other o##i*ial" raided hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur a" well a" the ho"pital o# Ravdeep Kaur

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

96

and hou"e o# Man it Singh.

-hen he *a$e 'a*& to SSP

6##i*e and too& into po""e""ion the report o# *o$plaint o# Narain Singh again"t %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed #ro$ 42 (dha$ Singh. 4e veri#ied the "aid report #ro$ Sh.

Ko"tu' Shar$a, the then ASP and he had veri#ied it to 'e the "aid report whi*h he had *on*luded. -herea#ter,

he rea*hed near ,urudwara <u&hniwaran where Satinder Singh ! 2hanni and San a) Kapila had $et hi$ and he re*orded their "tate$ent" u/" 1:1 2r.P.2. to 6ld <i"tri*t $et Poli*e hi$ 6##i*e and where -hen he went Singh, hi$ 28

<il'agh 'e#ore

photographer

produ*ed

photograph" and their negative" and tho"e were ta&en into poli*e ') po""e""ion <il'agh vide Singh $e$o and A..P-2 AS7 whi*h wa"

witne""ed

Satpal

Singh.

,ur inder Singh, $ovie $a&er produ*ed 'e#ore hi$ one 2.<. A..P-?/1 whi*h wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-? and it wa" witne""ed ') ,ur inder Singh and AS7 Satpal. -herea#ter, he went to the hou"e o# %i a)

Singh, de*ea"ed and re*orded the "tate$ent o# 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi and on hi" return when he rea*hed near 3eela Bhawan, Rupinder Singh $et hi$ and he $ade

"tate$ent a'out e.tra Ravdeep Kaur 'e#ore hi$.

udi*ial *on#e""ion o# a**u"ed

4e #urther depo"ed that on 18.10.2001 he along with other o##i*ial" had *alled S7 <hara$ <ev and $et

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

97

the$ near ,urudwara <u&h Niwaran in Patiala and then the) all raided the hou"e o# Man it Singh at hi"

village She&hupura 'ut he wa" not availa'le.

-hen the)

raided the ho"pital o# Ravdeep Kaur 'ut it wa" #ound lo*&ed. -hen the) returned 'a*& and when the) were

pre"ent on the over 'ridge near 'u" "tand, he re*eived a "e*ret in#or$ation that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur i"

pre"ent at her hou"e and "he *an 'e na''ed in *a"e the hou"e i" raided i$$ediatel). -hen the) raided her

hou"e at 19-A, Nihar Bagh, Baradari,

Patiala and when

the) rea*hed there, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" in the pro*e"" o# lo*&ing her hou"e on the inner $ain gate. 3/S7 Bindu Bala and 3/2 ,ur$eet Kaur were al"o with the$ at that ti$e. ,round" o# arre"t A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" arre"ted. were *onve)ed to her vide $e$o

A..P-1/1.

An inti$ation o# her arre"t wa" given to her 6n per"onal A..P-2:: wa"

#ather <al it Singh vide $e$o A..P-1/:. "ear*h o# the #ro$ two a**u"ed, whi*h $o'ile one two phone and lad) "$all "et pur"e

re*overed A..P-1/8,

diarie" *ontaining one

A..P-1/9, S7M No.

98119-0:001

A..P-111

another

98880;/099

A..P-2:1, a "u$ o# R".100/- *ontaining #ive *urren*) note" o# the deno$ination o# R".100/- ea*h A..P-110 to A..P-11/, one driving li*en*e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur A..P-109 and one "trip o# *ap"ule" Neutrate A..P-1/9

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

98

and

were

ta&en

into

po""e""ion

vide

$e$o

A..P-1//.

State$ent" o# witne""e" were re*orded and returned to the poli*e "tation. 4e had al"o inti$ated a'out

arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to 7n"p. 5a""a Singh, who had al"o rea*hed Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine",

Patiala and had al"o interrogated the a**u"ed. 4e #urther te"ti#ied on oath that on

19.10.2001, he again pro*eeded to 27A Sta##, Patiala and interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and "he wa" got $edi*all) e.a$ined #ro$ 2ivil <i"pen"ar), Model -own, Patiala and wa" produ*ed 'e#ore 2ourt #ro$ where "he wa" re$anded to poli*e *u"tod) #or 10 da)". 6n

20.10.2001 a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" again interrogated a#ter ta&ing her out #ro$ the 'arre& and "he di"*lo"ed that "he had got Man it Singh treated #or hi" dental pro'le$ #ro$ 2hugh 4o"pital, Patiala. -herea#ter, <r.

A$andeep Kaur #ro$ 2hugh 4o"pital, Patiala wa" *alled to Poli*e Station on telephone. <r. A$andeep Kaur,

along with her hu"'and *a$e to the poli*e "tation and on rea*hing to the poli*e "tation <r. A$andeep Kaur had identi#ied a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to 'e the "a$e per"on at who"e in"tan*e "he had treated Man it Singh, a**u"ed #or hi" dental pro'le$. -herea#ter, in the evening at

a'out :+00 p.$. the) along with Ravdeep Kaur went to 27A Sta##, Patiala where "he wa" dropped.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

99

6n 21.10.2001, he along with other o##i*ial" went to 27A Sta##, Patiala and interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and therea#ter, he dire*ted S7 <hara$dev, 7n*harge P.P. -ripati and AS7 Sohan Singh #ro$ the

poli*e "tation to rea*h to the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur at 19-A, Nihar Bagh, Baradari, Patiala and he

along with other o##i*ial" pro*eeded to the hou"e o# the a**u"ed along with the a**u"ed. 6ne lad) and "on

o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur were pre"ent at the hou"e. A**u"ed pi*&ed up &e) o# the *ar 'earing No. PB11N-0110 #ro$ the por*h and handed over the "a$e to hi$ and on "ear*h o# the *ar, one *a""ette A..P-1;1 'earing photograph o# Man it Singh and written thereon F2haran Ka$al da Aa"raF wa" re*overed. -he a'ove "aid *ar and

*a""ette were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1;/. -herea#ter, he "ear*hed the *up'oard o# 'ed

roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and re*overed two re*eipt" o# $o'ile Phone 98880;/099 and 988809/099 whi*h are A..P-1;: and A..P-1;9 re"pe*tivel) whi*h were in the na$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 6ne pa)$ent re*eipt o#

*ar nu$'er PB11-N-0110, one 7n"uran*e o# *ar and one 7n"uran*e photograph", another o# 2op) one o# a**u"ed Ravdeep with her Kaur, hu"'and G o# two and

photograph Singh o#

Man it one *ard

A..P-1;8 2hugh 2lini*

A..P-1;9 a**u"ed

re"pe*tivel),

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

100

Man it

Singh

A..P-121,

R2

o#

the

*ar

A..P-1/2

were

re*overed and the"e were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1/;. Rough "ite plan A..P-2:9 with

*orre*t $arginal note" wa" prepared ') hi$. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 22.10.2001, he

along with other o##i*ial" went to 27A Sta##, Patiala and interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and *a$e to &now a'out the 'an& detail" and therea#ter, he went to State Ban& o# Patiala, Ra indra 4o"pital, Patiala and $ade a re>ue"t to hand over the a**ount detail" o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and a**ount "tate$ent A..P-112 wa" handed over to hi$ whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion and the "tate$ent" o# witne""e" wa" re*orded. -herea#ter,

he went to Ban& o# Pun a' 3eela Bhawan #ro$ where he got "tate$ent o# Ravdeep Kaur A..P-- whi*h wa" into po""e""ion. ta&en

-hen he pro*eeded to 2anara Ban&,

3eela Bhawan #ro$ where he o'tained a**ount "tate$ent o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur A..P-N and A..P-N/1 and the "aid a**ount wa" in the na$e o# Ravdeep Kaur and her $other 5a"want Kaur and he re*orded went to the 4<?2 "tate$ent Ban&, o#

Manager.

-herea#ter,

3eela

Bhawan Mar&et and got the a**ount "tate$ent o# 5oginder Kaur, Maa"i o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur u"ed to operate her a**ount. -hen he went

to Pun a' National Ban&, Railwa) 2ro""ing 22 and too&

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

101

into poli*e po""e""ion the A**ount State$ent o# Satna$ -ru"t, ;1, A it Nagar, Patiala A..P-M. -hen on return,

S7 <hara$dev $et the$ near 3eela Bhawan and he D<SP Sewa SinghE handed over to hi$ one re>ue"t letter and dire*ted hi$ to o'tain "ear*h warrant #ro$ the 4onF'le 2ourt to "ear*h Ravi 4o"pital, Patiala. -herea#ter, he

again went to the hou"e o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh, where he re*orded the "tate$ent o# 3a&h'ir Singh 3a&hi and then the) returned to the poli*e "tation. M42 Man it Singh, produ*ed 'e#ore hi$ one "ear*h warrant got

i""ued ') S7 <hara$dev #ro$ the 4onF'le 2ourt. 6n 2;.10.2001, he again along with other

o##i*ial" and S7 <hara$dev went to 27A Sta##, Patiala #ro$ where the) along with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and <SP 5a"preet Singh went to Ravi 4o"pital, Patiala where 7n*harge PP (r'an A"tate wa" alread) pre"ent. one Pappu Ku$ar, 7ndependent witne"" wa" the poli*e part). -here

oined into

-he &e) wa" pro*ured through the

Nur"e and on opening the ho"pital, the) "ear*hed the roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in the ho"pital and #ro$ one drawer o# her ta'le, one photo*op) o# *o$plaint to 2hie# 5u"ti*e B.K.Ro), again"t %i a) Singh, 5udge

A..P-1:0, one invitation *ard o# Man it Singh, a**u"ed #or 21.08.2001 o# F,reh Prave"hF wherein telephone No. 988809/099 and the envelope wa" 'earing the na$e o# <r.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

102

Ravdeep Kaur A..P-119, one Award *erti#i*ate o# Kannel 2lu', Patiala and one *ard o# Kohinoor Kannel 2lu', 5allandhar A..P-119 G A..P-118 re"pe*tivel) were

re*overed and ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-11:. Rough "ite plan A..P-290 o# the pla*e wa" prepared. propert) 6n wa" return depo"ited to the poli*e M42 "tation, Singh *a"e and

with

Man it

a**u"ed wa" "ent to 27A Sta##, Patiala. 6n 2/.10.2001 he went to 2anara Ban&, 3eela Bhawan and in>uired a'out the withdrawal o# R".: 3a*" ') the a**u"ed and the Manager handed over hi$ two withdrawal vou*her" dated 10.09.2001 dated 0:.10.2001 o# R".; 3a*" ea*h whi*h are A..P-P and A..P-6. 4e went

to 27A Sta## and interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and in pur"uan*e o# her revelation, he went to Pun a'i

(niver"it), Patiala where he re*orded the "tate$ent o# 5oginder Singh, ,uard o# Pun a'i (niver"it) and then

he went to the hou"e o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh where Kudleep Singh ,rewal, Advo*ate, 3udhiana $et hi$ and re*orded hi" "tate$ent u/" 1:1 2r.P.2. went to A.2. o# Mar&et, ,aurav Patiala ,hai u/" where 1:1 he -herea#ter, he re*orded 4e the al"o

"tate$ent

2r.P.2.

re*orded the "tate$ent o# M42 Man it Singh.

6n return

to the poli*e "tation, the report o# "ear*h o# Ravi 4o"pital 'elonging to a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "ent to

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

103

the 3d. Magi"trate, Patiala <r. Ra nee"h. 6n produ*ed 21.10.2001 <r. a**u"ed Ravdeep the then Kaur 3d. wa" 5M72,

'e#ore

Ra nee"h,

Patiala and $oved an appli*ation to o'tain "pe*i$en hand writing o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -he 3d. 7lla>a

Magi"trate, Patiala got the *on"ent A..P-1:2 o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and then o'tained "pe*i$en hand writing o# Ravdeep Kaur on three "heet" A..P-1:; to A..P-1:9 #or it" *o$pari"on with the writing on A..P-1:0. -he "aid

"pe*i$en" were "ealed into a par*el ') the 2ourt and wa" handed over to hi$ whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1:8. 6n 21.10.2001 on return

to the poli*e "tation, he wrote letter through SSP, Patiala to the Regi"trar o# 4onF'le Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, 2handigarh #or the handing over o# the

original *o$plaint #or the purpo"e" o# inve"tigation. 6n 2:.10.2001, he along with other poli*e 6ut"ide

o##i*ial" again went to 27A Sta##, Patiala. the 27A Sta## one ,ur it Singh $et the$.

4e wa" al"o

oined into the poli*e part) and therea#ter, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" interrogated and during interrogation, "he $ade di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-% that "he had &ept *on*ealed a "u$ o# R".2 3a*" *a"h, one pi"tol .;2 'ore, one Ar$" li*en*e in her na$e, one driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed in a 'la*& 'ag and one pair o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

104

"port "hoe" 'lood "tained o# Man it Singh, a**u"ed in a pla"ti* 'ag under the >uilt in the upper portion on the *up 'oard in the 'ed roo$ o# her hou"e whi*h wa" in

her e.*lu"ive &nowledge and po""e""ion and "he *ould get the "a$e re*over. in poli*e *u"tod) -herea#ter, lead the the a**u"ed while part) at the got

poli*e

di"*lo"ed pla*e to her hou"e in her 'ed roo$ and

re*overed the a'ove "aid arti*le" #ro$ the "aid pla*e o# *on*eal$ent. 2a"h R".2 3a*" are A..P-18 to A..P-20

in three 'undle" and 20 *urren*) note" o# deno$ination o# R".1000/- A..P-21 to A..P-/0 and :0 *urren*) note" o# deno$ination o# R".100/- ea*h A..P-/1 to A..P-100,

one pi"tol .;2 'ore A..P-11, "&et*h o# whi*h i" A..P-@ wa" prepared, ar$" li*en*e A..P-19, driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh, 5udge A..P-1: along with one 'la*& 'ag A..P-1/ were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-L. Pair o# "hoe" wa" "ealed into par*el with "eal

i$pre""ion SS and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-C. Rough "ite plan A..P-291 wa" prepared

with *orre*t $arginal note" and on return to the poli*e "tation, the *a"e propert) with "eal" inta*t wa" handed over to M42 Man it Singh. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 29.10.2001, he

interrogated 'oth the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh at 27A Sta## and on 28.10.2001 a**u"ed Ravdeep

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

105

Kaur wa" produ*ed in the 2ourt and wa" re$anded to udi*ial *u"tod). 6n 09.11.2001, he veri#ied the

owner"hip o# *ar 2it) 4onda 'earing No. PB11-N-0110 #ro$ <-6, Patiala and Ar$ 3i*en*e #ro$ <M 6##i*e,

Patiala and <riving li*en*e o# a**u"ed #ro$ <-6 o##i*e ?atehgarh Sahi' and driving li*en*e o# 5udge %i a)

Singh, de*ea"ed #ro$ <-6 o##i*e 3udhiana and owner"hip o# Pi"tol #ro$ Ar$" and A$$unition dealer, Sangrur. return to the 'e#ore poli*e hi$ Station, one Pun a' "ealed G AS7 5a"winder #ro$ 6n

Singh the 2ourt

produ*ed Regi"trar,

envelope 4ar)ana

4onF'le

4igh

*ontaining original letter written ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur a" a *o$plaint to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e

B.K.Ro).

-he "aid envelope wa" opened and #ound the

original letter inta*t and it wa" re-"ealed with the "eal envelope SS and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-191. 4e #urther depo"ed that on 2:.11.2001, he

re*orded the "tate$ent" o# Nodal 6##i*er o# A7R-A3 G 4(-24 2o$pan) and therea#ter, he went to 4otel Par& Pla=a at 3udhiana and al"o re*orded the "tate$ent o# the *on*erned witne"". 4e got prepared "*aled "ite

plan and re*orded the "tate$ent" o# other witne""e" and a#ter the *o$pletion o# inve"tigation, the a**u"ed were *hallaned ') hi$.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

106

:9. 3i$ited, allot$ent

P=-%> S"&*0 R1&1/ Nodal 6##i*er, Bharti A7R-A3 proved o# on #ile the re*ord pertaining whi*h to wa"

$o'ile

nu$'er

981190:001

a*tivated on ;1.10.200; and it re$ained a*tivate till 10.11.2001. 4e #urther proved it" *o$puteri=ed *all

detail" w.e.#. 11.09.2001 to 1/.10.2001 a" A..P@-19/A. 4e #urther proved nu$'er the *o$puteri=ed w.e.#. *all detail" o# to

telephone

98119/0:18

01.10.2001

1/.10.2001 a" A..P@-19/B.

-hi" re*ord i" prepared in

the 2o$puter in due *our"e o# the 'u"ine"" #ro$ ti$e to ti$e. :8. -hi" i" the entire eviden*e led ') the

pro"e*ution. :9. 6n the other hand, the a**u"ed have e.a$ined

in their de#en*e A:*) K#50* a" D=-1 who "tated on oath that he i" the Proprietor o# M/". <elta 2on"tru*tion 2o$pan) having it" o##i*e at Patiala. 4e ha"

underta&en variou" *on"tru*tion Pro e*t" in and around Patiala and ha" a e.perien*e o# *on"tru*tion. 4e on

'ehal# o# <elta 2on"tru*tion 2o$pan) had entered into a *ontra*t with <r. Ravdeep Kaur o# Patiala #or the

*on"tru*tion o# a 2lini* Building in Man Sahia 2olon). A written agree$ent A..<-AB on 22.09.2001 wa" entered into 'etween hi$ on 'ehal# o# <elta 2on"tru*tion" and <r. Ravdeep Kaur. 6n the "aid date he had re*eived

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

107

R"./ 3a*" a" advan*e #ro$ <r. Ravdeep Kaur and he had i""ued the re*eipt A..<-A2. 6n 10.09.2001 he had

re*eived another "u$ o# R". / 3a*" again"t hi" running 'ill and he had i""ued the re*eipt A..<-A<. 6n

0:.10.2001, he had re*eived a "u$ o# R".; 3a*" and had i""ued the re*eipt A..<-AA on a**ount o# hi" running 'ill. -he "ta$p paper on whi*h A..<-AB wa" e.e*uted At

wa" pur*ha"ed #ro$ the "ta$p %endor on 21.09.2001.

the ti$e when he entered into the agree$ent with <r. Ravdeep Kaur, "o$e wor& had 'een done ') "o$e other 2ontra*tor and wa" at the initial "tage. 4e #urther

proved the *o$puteri=ed ledger a**ount A..<-A? o# <r. Ravdeep Kaur o# hi" #ir$. 90. ?7R No. D=-2 C. M1&'ee8 S*&75 proved the photo*op) o# :0 dated 18.10.2001 A..<-A, re*orded under

Se*tion" /0:, /09, /:9, /:8, /91, 120-B 7P2 and 1;D1E DdE read with 1;D2E o# Prevention o# 2orruption A*t at the in"tan*e o# Sh. Banara"i <a"", <SP, %igilan*e

Bureau, Patiala again"t <al it Singh Bahia, 7nder Sen Singla, 6$ Par&a"h, Ra$ Murti and 4ar'an" Singh. 6n

the *o$pletion o# inve"tigation, *hallan wa" pre"ented again"t Ra$ Murti onl). 91. D=-3 J1!4* S*&75 S195&e*, Senior Manager,

2anara Ban&, Patiala proved the re*ord o# 4ou"ing 3oan o# R".10 3a*" whi*h wa" "an*tioned in the na$e o# <r.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

108

Ravdeep Kaur and S$t. 5a"want Kaur on 21.01.200; #or *on"tru*tion Patiala. A" o# hou"e 'uilding a "u$ in o# Man"ahi)a R". 2 2olon), wa"

per

re*ord

3a*"

di"'ur"ed on 28.01.200; and another "u$ o# R".; 3a*" wa" di"'ur"ed in on 10.09.2001. a**ount No. -he 1088 "aid a$ount to wa" <r.

*redited

the

'elonging

Ravdeep Kaur.

4e #urther depo"ed that nor$all) #iled

o##i*er or Bran*h Manager vi"it the "ite 'e#ore the di"'ur"e$ent *on"tru*tion. 92. 191 D=-4 C. M16# dated 19.09.2009 S*&75 proved the *op) o# ?7R No. A..<-A4 re*orded with Poli*e o# in"tall$ent o# loan to "ee the

Station 2ivil 3ine, Patiala under Se*tion" ;99, /11, /89, /20, /:1, /:9, /:8, /91 o# 7P2 on the "tate$ent o# S7 <hara$dev and the "aid ?7R wa" "igned ') AS7

Ba&"hi"h Singh. 9;. ?7R No. D=-% HC G" :";5 S*&75, proved the re*ord o# /9 dated 0/.0;.2001 A..<-A7 re*orded under

Se*tion" ;99, /00, /02 7P2 and 21/1//19 o# Ar$" A*t regi"tered at P.S. Sadar, Ra pura on the *o$plaint o# 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh, o# 27A Sta##, Patiala again"t ,ur$u&h Singh, Pala Singh, Ka&a Singh, ,ur*haran Singh Alia" 2harna "on" o# Ba*han Singh, re"ident o# %illage Sultanpur, 5a"'ir Singh, ,urdeep Singh "on" o# Prita$ Singh, re"ident o# ?atehgarh Bet, Avtar Singh, Ba''al

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

109

"on" o# Santo&h Singh, re"ident o# %illage ?atehgarh Bet and other". -he *hallan wa" pre"ented in the *a"e.

-he "aid a**u"ed have 'een a*>uitted ') the *ourt o# Sh. 4arpal Singh, Addl. Se""ion" 5udge, Patiala on

09.0;.2009. 4e #urther proved the photo*op) o# ?7R No. 1/9 dated 19.09.2001 A..<-A5 re*orded under Se*tion" ;02, 201 7P2, P.S. Sadar, Ra pura, again"t Ka&a Singh,

,ur$u&h Singh "on" o# Ba*han Singh, 5a"'ir Singh "on o# Prita$ Singh and Avtar Singh "on" o# Santo&h Singh. -he *hallan wa" pre"ented and in the li"t o# witne""e" 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Signh wa" *ited a" witne"". -he

a**u"ed have 'een a*>uitted in thi" *a"e ') Sh. -.R. Ban"al, the ld. Addl. Se""ion" 5udge DAdho*E Patiala on ;0.0;.2009. 9/. ?7R No. D=-6 HC R1(55810 S*&75 proved the re*ord o# 1 dated 2.1.2001 with A..<-AK P.S. regi"tered Patiala under and

Se*tion

;02/;/

7P2

Sadar,

o##en*e" under Se*tion" ;92 and ;9: 7P2 were later on added. wa" 6n the *o$pletion o# inve"tigation, the *hallan again"t ,ur$u&h Pal Singh alia" Pala "on o#

pre"ented Singh,

Ba*han

Singh,

,ur*haran

Singh,

Ka&a

Singh, ,urdeep Singh, 5a"'ir Singh, Avtar Singh, Ba''al "on o# Santo&h Singh. 7n the li"t o# witne""e",

7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh 7n*harge, 27A Sta##, Patiala wa"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

110

*ited

a" a witne"". and a#ter

-he *hallan in the "aid *a"e wa" trial the a**u"ed have 'een

pre"ented

a*>uitted ') the *ourt o# Sh. -.R. Ban"al, ld. Addl. Se""ion" 5udge DAdho*E, Patiala on ;0.;.2009. 91. D=-> HC S";5'e2 S*&75 proved the re*ord o# ?7R

No. 1/8 dated 19.09.200/ A..<-A3 regi"tered at P.S. -appa <i"tri*t Barnala under Se*tion ;02 7P2. <uring

inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e, ,ur$u&h Singh, Pal Singh, ,ur*haran Singh, Ka&a Singh "on" o# Ba*han Singh

re"ident o# Sultanpur, <i"tri*t Ropar, Ra u "on o# 5ai Ra$, 5a"'ir Singh and ,urdeep Singh "on" o# Prita$

Singh, -aari "on o# Santo&h Singh, 4u"na "on o# A.Sarpan*h 2hhind Singh no$inated a" a**u"ed. o# thi" *a"e the re"ident o# %illage Raipur were (lti$atel), a#ter inve"tigation wa" "ent to the *ourt a"

*a"e

untra*ed. 9:. D=-8 HC K"09*&'e proved the re*ord o# ?7R No.

9: dated 08.09.200; A..<-AM regi"tered on the "tate$ent o# 5eet Singh "on o# Mu&htiar Singh re"ident o# %illage Sultanpur, P.S. 2ha$&aur Sahi' under Se*tion /;1, /29, //9, 111, 10:, 1/8, 1/9, 120-B 7P2. -he *hallan in

thi" *a"e wa" pre"ented again"t ,ur$ail Singh "on o# (da) Singh, Baldev Singh, Surinder Singh "on" o#

,ur$ail Singh, Kartar Singh, 7"har Singh "on" o# 4arna$ Singh and 4arpal Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh re"ident o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

111

%illage Sultanpur, P.S. 2ha$&aur Sahi'. 99. D=-, HC R1: K":1 proved the re*ord pertaining

to ?7R No. 9 dated 09.01.200; A..<-AN regi"tered under Se*tion ;02 7P2 with P.S. Sadar Ropar. under Se*tion 19; 2r.P.2. wa" #iled in -he report the *ourt

again"t Avtar Singh "on o# Santo&h Singh re"ident o# %illage ?atehgarh Bet, 5a"'ir Singh "on o# Prita$

Singh, Ka&a Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, ,ur$u&h Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, Pal Singh ! Pala "on o# Ba*han Singh. 7n the li"t o# witne""e" 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh,

7n*harge, 27A Sta##, Patiala wa" *ited a" a witne"". -he a**u"ed have 'een di"*harged on 08.02.200: ') the 2ourt o# Sh. Kara$ it Singh, learned Additional

Se""ion" 5udge, Ropar. 98. D=-10 S5. J1)*&'e K":1 , Sta$p %endor,

<i"tri*t G Se""ion" 2ourt", Patiala te"ti#ied on oath that he i" a li*en*ed Sta$p %endor #ro$ Patiala. -he

"ta$p paper on whi*h the agree$ent A..<-AB ha" 'een e.e*uted were "old ') hi$ vide entr) No.:2;1 dated

21.9.2001.

-he endor"e$ent i" A.. <-AB/1 and the *op) 4e #urther

o# relevant page o# regi"ter i" A..<-AB/2.

depo"ed that the "aid "ta$p paper o# R".20/- wa" "old to M/". <elta 2on"tru*tion 2o$pan). 99. D=-11 P1 1:6*) proved the re*ord o# *a"e #ile

titled a" State v". ,ur$u&h Singh and other" 'earing

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

112

Se""ion" 2a"e No. 20/21.9.2001 de*ided on 18.02.200: ') Sh. Sha$ Sunder, -hi" the *a"e then learned to Se""ion" ?7R No.21 5udge, dated 7n the

Kapurthala.

relate"

8.;.2001 under Se*tion" ;9:, ;99, 1/8, 1/9 7P2.

"aid *a"e P@ 5a""a Singh wa" e.a$ined a" P@-18 and hi" "tate$ent 29.11.2001. de*ided vide a re"olution A..<-4 4e wa" re*orded depo"ed in that thi" thi" *a"e *a"e on wa"

#urther

udg$ent A.. <-7. dated 29.08.2001

7n thi" *a"e there i" Mar& <-/ on the #ile

A..<@-;/A pa""ed ') the Pan*ha)at" o# Sahi'. 80. D=-12 P1 1:6*) S*&75,

Blo*& 2ha$&aur

A""i"tant

Kanungo,

-eh"il Patiala proved the #ile relating to "an*tioning o# $utation 'earing No. 2;0/ A..<-A6 ') the A""i"tant 2olle*tor on 2:.2.2010 on a**ount o# Private Partition having ta&en pla*e 'etween ,ian Kaur widow o# ,urdhian Singh, Bal it Kaur daughter o# ,urdhian Singh wi#e o# 4ar$inder Singh Mann, <al it Kaur, daughter o# late ,urdhian Singh wi#e o# A a) Singh and Anupa$ Kaur

daughter o# late ,urdhian Singh, wi#e o# ,urpreet Singh Se&hon. -he original $e$orandu$ o# #a$il) partition

i" al"o on the #ile on the 'a"i" o# whi*h $utation wa" "an*tioned and photo*op) o# the "a$e i" $ar& <@-12/A. -here i" a photo *op) o# the Power o# Attorne) given ') Bal it Kaur Mann daughter o# ,urdhian Singh to <al it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

113

Kaur al"o &nown a" <ipinder Kaur o# ;1// Morning Side <rive A7-So'rante 2ali#ornia and o# 2, Stadiu$ Road, Ra indra ,arden, Patiala. 81. that he D=-13 P1 :*&'e i" pra*ti*ing S*&75 S*'5" te"ti#ied on oath Advo*ate in <i"tri*t 2ourt",

Patiala "in*e 199/.

4e identi#ied hi" "ignature" on

the $e$orandu$ o# the private partition A..<-AP a" a witne"". 4e #urther depo"ed that he per"onall) &new

,ian Kaur widow o# ,urdhian Singh D,ian Kaur i" al"o &nown a" Ka$al it KaurE, Bal it Kaur daughter o#

,urdhian Singh wi#e o# Par$inder Singh Mann, <al it Kaur ! <ipinder Kaur daughter o# ,urdhian Singh wi#e o# A a) Singh and Anupa$ Kaur daughter o# ,urdhian Singh wi#e o# ,urpreet Singh Se&hon and the) have "igned the $e$orandu$ o# partition in hi" pre"en*e and he

identi#ied the "a$e. Singh Se&hon. %i a) Kaur, Singh i"

-he other witne"" wa" ,urpreet

4e #urther depo"ed that he al"o &new de*ea"ed, A a) o# Singh %i a) hu"'and Singh o# <al it

the

'rother

de*ea"ed.

-herea#ter, the "aid $e$orandu$ o# private partition wa" got atte"ted #ro$ Sh. Sudhir Ku$ar, Advo*ate Notar) Pu'li*, <i"tri*t 2ourt", Patiala. 82. D=-14 K"091&) S*&75, Patwari, 4al&a Ki"hanpura Sa ra Na"a'

! Ba&"hiwala, Patiala proved on re*ord the

DPedigree -a'leE o# %illage Ki"hanpura ! Ba&"hiwala.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

114

Sidhu

Khandaan

had

,urdit

Singh

who

had

three

"on" 4e

,urdhian Singh, ,urdev Singh and ,ur"haran Singh.

#urther proved the *erti#ied *op) o# the pedigree ta'le a" A..<-AK. 5oginder Pal Singh i" the "on o# ,urdev

Singh and <al it Kaur i" the daughter o# ,urdhian Singh o# the "a$e Khandaan. Balwant Singh had two daughter",

%arinder Kaur and Rupinder Kaur and one "on Pre$ 7nder Singh. 4e #urther proved the *op) o# "aid pedigree a$a'andi o# the )ear"

ta'le a" A.. <-AR and *op) o# 1981-82 a" A..<-AS. 8;. No. 19

D=-1% HC M10;*) S*&75 proved the re*ord o# ?7R dated 2:.12.1999 A..<-Ao# Poli*e Station

Bhad"on, Patiala re*orded under Se*tion ;02/;//201 7P2 and lateron on o##en*e under Se*tion ;9: o# 7P2 wa" added -he *hallan wa" pre"ented in thi" ?7R

28.12.1999.

again"t Pal Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, ,ur$u&h Singh, Ka&a Singh, 5a"'ir Singh and Avtar Singh ! -aari. -he

"aid *a"e ha" 'een de*ided and the a**u"ed have 'een a*>uitted ') the 2ourt o# Sh. 4arpal Singh, the learned Additional Se""ion" 5udge, Patiala vide 28.2.2009. Si$ilarl), ?7R No.18 udg$ent dated 22.;.200;

dated

A..<-A( wa" regi"tered under Se*tion" ;0/-A/201 7P2 and later on, on 2/.;.200; o##en*e under Se*tion ;://;9: 7P2 wa" added. -he *hallan wa" pre"ented again"t

,ur$u&h Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, Ka&a Singh "on o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

115

Ba*han Singh, 5a"'ir Singh "on o# Prita$ Singh, Avtar Singh ! -aari "on o# Santo&h Singh and Mangal Singh "on o# Sadhu Singh. 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh o# 7n*harge 27A

Sta## Patiala wa" *ited a" witne"" at Serial No.2/ o# the li"t o# witne""e". the a**u"ed have 'een -he *a"e ha" 'een de*ided and a*>uitted on ;0.;.2009 ') the

*ourt o# Sh. -.R. Ban"al,

the then learned Additional

Se""ion" 5udge, ?a"t -ra*& 2ourt, Patiala. 8/. D=-16 to C. G" 8 ee) No.21 S*&75 dated proved the re*ord A..<-A% Se*tion

pertaining re*orded ;9:,

?7R Poli*e 1/9

08.0;.2001 under wa"

with

Station 7P2 and

<hilwan, *hallan

;99,

1/8,

pre"ented

again"t ,ur$u&h Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, Ka&a Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, Pal Singh "on o# Ba*han Singh, Avtar Singh ! -aari "on o# Santo&h Singh and 5a"'ir Singh ! Seera "on o# Prita$ Singh. 7n the li"t o#

witne""e", 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh, 7n*harge, 27A Sta## Patiala wa" *ited a" a witne"" No.9. de*ided and the a**u"ed have -he *a"e ha" 'een a*>uitted on

'een

18.2.200: ') the *ourt o# Sh. Sha$ Sunder, the then learned Se""ion" 5udge, Kapurthala. 81. D=-1> S5. Dee81; S*&75, 5unior A""i"tant, <.2.

6##i*e, Rup Nagar proved the re*ord o# letter No. 1;/2 dated ;0.09.200; Rup A..<-A@ Nagar whi*h to wa" "ent ') <eput) Pun a'

2o$$i""ioner,

5oint

Se*retar),

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

116

State

4u$an

Right"

2o$$i""ion,

a**o$panied

')

the

report o# A<2, Rup Nagar dated 21./.200; A..<-AL with regard to an in>uir) *ondu*ted o# village Saidpur, Su' -eh"il 2ha$&aur Sahi' at that ti$e, <i"tri*t Rup Nagar. 8:. village D=-18 She&hur L1;59*&'e Ka$'oa, S*&75, <i"tri*t Me$'er Pan*ha)at depo"ed o# on

Patiala

oath that he &new a**u"ed na$el) Man it Singh and hi" #a$il) ver) well a" the) are re"iding in hi" vi*init) in the a'ove re#erred village "in*e long. 7t wa" at

a'out 8.;0 AM on 1:.10.2001 when the poli*e vi"ited their village and a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" ta&en along with ') the poli*e in hi" pre"en*e. 6ne another

Pan*ha)at $e$'er na$el) 7nder it Singh wa" al"o pre"ent when the a**u"ed wa" ta&en ') the poli*e #ro$ hi" hou"e "ituated in village She&hpura. 4e #urther depo"ed

that on hi" in>uir) #ro$ the poli*e o##i*ial he wa" told that the a**u"ed wa" 'eing ta&en along with #or *ondu*ting therea#ter. hou"e and "o$e in>uir) and he will 'e let o##

-he hou"e o# the a**u"ed i" an an*e"tral wa" 'eing repaired ') the #a$il) o# the

a**u"ed during that period.

-he #a$il) o# a**u"ed i"

well o## and the) were having the 'u"ine"" o# tran"port "in*e long. reputation -he a**u"ed Man it Singh i" having good in the village and he re$ain" alwa)"

*on*erned with hi" vo*ation.

4e i" thorough gentle$an.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

117

89.

D=-1,

I&'e 6*)

S*&75,

Me$'er

Pan*ha)at

o#

village She&hur Ka$'oa, <i"tri*t Patiala depo"ed on the line" a" "tated ') <@-18 3a&hwinder Singh. 88. Patiala D=-20 J17'*!5 C51&', Senior A""i"tant, P(<A, proved the re*ord o# Plot No. 981-2, (r'an

A"tate, Pha"e-7, Patiala whi*h wa" allotted to S$t. 5ag it Kaur wi#e o# ,ur*haran Singh and wa" *an*elled on 09.01.200; ') the A"tate 6##i*er on the ground that Ravi 4o"pital wa" 'eing run in the "aid pre$i"e", whi*h wa" a re"idential area vide order A..<-AM. -he *op) o#

"aid order wa" "ent to S$t. 5ag it Kaur through her attorne) re"ident allottee 2hie# 5eevan o# had 5)ot Singh "on o# Sh. <il it Patiala. the Singh -he

4ou"e #iled

No.20, an

A it

Nagar, 'e#ore

appeal

Additional the "aid

Ad$ini"tration

P(<A

Patiala

again"t

order whi*h wa" di"$i""ed on 09.10.200/ ') Sh. A o) Shar$a, 7AS, Additional 2hie# Ad$ini"trator vide order A..<-AM1. -herea#ter, a revi"ion wa" pre#erred ') the

allottee 'e#ore the Se*retar) to ,overn$ent o# Pun a', <epart$ent o# 4ou"ing and (r'an <evelop$ent 2handigarh whi*h wa" di"po"ed o## on 0;.01.2001 o# the where') plot the wa"

*an*ellation/re"u$ption

order

"aid

*an*elled vide order A..<-AM2 on the ground that the *o$$er*ial depo"ited. a*tivitie" 'e "topped plot and R".10,000/Pha"e 7, 'e

Si$ilarl),

No.98:

(r'an

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

118

A"tate, Patiala wa" allotted to Ra inder Singh "on o# ,ian Singh vide order A..<-AM;, o# whi*h the allot$ent wa" *an*elled and plot wa" re"u$ed on 09.01.200; ') the A"tate 6##i*er, P(<A on the ground that Ravi 4o"pital, whi*h wa" a *o$$er*ial a*tivitie" wa" 'eing run in the re"idential area. -he allottee had pre#erred an

appeal again"t the "aid order o# re"u$ption o# plot whi*h wa" di"$i""ed on 7AS, order Additional A..<-AM/. 2hie# A 09.10.200/ ') Sh. A o) Shar$a, Ad$ini"trator, wa" Patiala, ') vide the

revi"ion

pre#erred

allottee 'e#ore the Se*retar) to ,overn$ent o# Pun a', <epart$ent o# 4ou"ing and (r'an <evelop$ent 2handigarh whi*h wa" di"po"ed o## on ;.1.2001 o# the where') plot the wa"

*an*ellation/re"u$ption

order

"aid

*an*elled vide order A..<-AM1 on the ground that the *o$$er*ial depo"ited. a*tivitie" 'e "topped and R".10,000/'e

5eevan 5)ot Singh a" attorne) o# Ra inder

Singh and 5ag it Kaur vide appli*ation dated 20.09.2001 depo"ited R".10,000/ea*h #or the "aid two plot".

-herea#ter, the A"tate 6##i*er $ar&ed the appli*ation #or veri#i*ation a" to whether *o$$er*ial a*tivit) ha" 'een "topped or not and then Sh. Ra&e"h Ku$ar Singla, who wa" po"ted a" 5unior Angineer in P(<A Patiala at that ti$e went to the "pot and $ade the report A..<-AM: on ;0.8.2001 that the ho"pital ha" 'een *lo"ed and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

119

there wa" a "ign 'oard o# the re"iden*e o# the do*tor. Plot" No. 981 G 98: are ad oining plot". 89. D=-21 S5. N12'ee8 G"8)1, 4andwriting G ?inger

Print A.pert depo"ed on oath that he i" a law graduate and M.S*. in #oren"i* "*ien*e. 7n thi" *a"e he e.a$ined the di"puted date $ar&ed a" L-1 on A.. P-10:, to #ind out whether or not there i" alteration in thi" date, now reada'le a" I21-10-01JN A" per hi" opinion the date $ar&ed a" L-1 now reada'le a" I21-10-01J ha" 'een

altered/*hanged #ro$ "o$e other date ') re$oving the paper 'eneath the "e*ond digit I1J o# the da) portion and the digit" o# the $onth portion in*luding the "$all h)phen" D-E pla*ed in 'etween the da), $onth and )ear portion" and therea#ter in"erting/pa"ting a "$all pie*e o# another paper in the hole "o *reated due to

re$oving. 4e #urther depo"ed that he al"o e.a$ined the date $ar&ed a" L-2 on A.. P-12: to #ind out whether or not there i" alteration in the date, now reada'le a" I29-10-01JN A#ter e.a$ining the "a$e, he i" o# the

*on"idered and #ir$ opinion that the date $ar&ed a" L-2 now reada'le a" I29-10-01J #ro$ the on A.. P-12: ha" 'een date

altered/*hanged

a*tuall)

written

I29-10-01J into I29-10-01J ') era"ing the "e*ond digit o# the da) portion.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

120

4e al"o e.a$ined the date $ar&ed a" L-; on A.. P 189 to #ind out whether or not there i" alteration in the date now reada'le a" I18-10-01J and a#ter e.a$ining he i" o# the *on"idered and #ir$ opinion that the date $ar&ed a" L-; now reada'le a" I18-10-01J on A.. P 189 ha" 'een altered/*hanged #ro$ the a*tuall) written date I2:-10-01J into I18-10-01J ') era"ing the a*tuall)

written digit" I2J G I:J o# the da) portion. 4e #urther depo"ed that a#ter e.a$ining the portion $ar&ed a" L-/ on A.. P-182, to #ind out whether or not there i" an) era"ing 'elow the portion now

reada'le a" IPS 2/3JN opinion that there

4e i" o# the *on"idered and #ir$ i" era"ing 'eneath the portion

reada'le a" IPS 2/3J $ar&ed a" L-/ on A.. P-182. -hi" witne"" #urther e.a$ined the date $ar&ed a" L-1 on A.. < , to #ind out whether or not there i" alteration in the date now reada'le a" I21-10-01J and o# the *on"idered and #ir$ opinion that the date $ar&ed a" L-1 now reada'le a" I21-10-01J on A.. <-, ha" 'een altered/*hanged I20-10-01J into #ro$ the a*tuall) ') era"ing written the date

I21-10-01J

a*tuall)

written digit" I0J at "e*ond pla*e o# the da) portion G ') adding the "tro&e" in the #ir"t digit I2J.

4e #urther depo"ed that he al"o e.a$ined the date $ar&ed a" L-9 on A.. P-22: to #ind out whether or

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

121

not there i" alteration in the date now reada'le a" I20-10-01JN and o# the *on"idered and #ir$ opinion that there i" addition o# the oval at the 'a"e o# the now reada'le a" I2J in the date I20-10-01J. digit

-he digit

I0J o# the da) portion i" al"o "u"pi*iou" in nature. 4e, therea#ter, e.a$ined the di"puted

"ignature" o# 4ar'an" Singh, in ,uru$u&hi, in original, $ar&ed a" K-1 on A.. P-R and *o$pared thi" "ignature with the "tandard "ignature" $ar&ed a" 4-1 on the

"tate$ent given in the *ourt on 0:.09.2010, and o# the opinion that the di"puted "ignature" $ar&ed a" K-1

alleged to 'e o# 4ar'an" Singh reada'le a" 4ar'an", in ,uru$u&hi on A.. P-R ha" not 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the "tandard "ignature" $ar&ed a" 4-1. Rather the di"puted "ignature" K-1 i" the #orged

"ignature. 4e #urther depo"ed that he ha" al"o e.a$ined the "ignature" o# ,ur$ail Singh in ,uru$u&hi, in

original $ar&ed a" C-1 to C-1 on e.hi'it" A.. P-191, A.. P-189, A.. and P-191, *o$pared A.. P-219 and A.. P-211

re"pe*tivel) with the

the"e

di"puted a"

"ignature" S-1 on the

"tandard

"ignature"

$ar&ed

"tate$ent given in the *ourt on 21-12-2009 and o# the *on"idered "ignature" and $ar&ed #ir$ a" opinion C-1 to that the di"puted to 'e o#

C-1

alleged

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

122

,ur$ail

Singh,

AS7,

in

,uru$u&hi

on

e.hi'it"

A..

P-191, A.. P-189, A.. P-191, A.. P-219 and A.. P-211 re"pe*tivel) have not 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the "tandard "ignature" $ar& S-1 in*luding the word IASiJ. Rather the di"puted "ignature" are the

#orged "ignature" ') i$per"onation. 4e al"o e.a$ined the "ignature" o# Man it

Singh, in ,uru$u&hi, $ar&ed a" M-1 on A.. P-191, M-2 on A.. P-192 and M-; on A.. P-198, to #ind out whether or not all the"e "ignature" M-1 to M-; have 'een written ') one per"on and o# the opinion that the "ignature"

$ar&ed a" M-1 on A.. P-191 ha" not 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the "ignature" $ar&ed a" M-2 on A.. P-192. 4e #urther e.a$ined the di"puted "ignature" o# 4ari 2hand, 42 in $ar&ed a" <-1 on A.. P-R, <-2 on A.. P-12:, <-; on A.. P-181, <-/ on A.. P-188, <-1 on A.. P-199, <-: on A.. P-212, <-9 on A.. P-218 and *o$pared the"e di"puted "ignature" with the "tandard writing" "aid to 'e written ') 4ari 2hand, $ar&ed a" ,-1 on A.. P-182 and ,-2 on A.. P-191 and o# the opinion that the di"puted "ignature" $ar&ed a" <-1 to <-9 have not 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the "tandard

writing" ,-1 and ,-2.

Rather the"e di"puted "ignature"

are #orged "ignature" ') i$per"onation.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

123

-hi" witne"" #urther e.a$ined the word I42J and #igure I910J written a#ter the "ignature" <-1 to <-9 and *o$pared the "a$e with the writing" written on A.. P-182 and A.. P-191, and o# the opinion that the di"puted word" I42J and #igure I910J a#ter the

"ignature" <-1 to <O9 have not 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the "tandard writing" on A.. P-182 and A.. P-191. Rather the"e word" and #igure" are #orged 4e al"o proved hi" detailed report 4e al"o pla*ed on

') i$per"onation.

A..<-AC/A *on"i"ting o# ;9 page".

re*ord the photograph" A.. < AC-1 to A.. < AC-;2 o# the di"puted "ignature", writing o# date portion", era"e a'ove 11 di"puted portion" $entioned photographi* and and "tandard "tandard and and

di"puted all pa"ted the on

portion" *hart"

do*u$ent",

negative" thereo# a" A.. <-AC-;; to A.. <-AC-:/. 4e #urther depo"ed that he ha" al"o e.a$ined the di"puted writing" in Angli"h, in original, alleged to 'e o# Ravdeep Kaur, alread) $ar&ed a" K-1 written at the top o# page No.1 o# the *o$plaint A.. P-19;, K-2

on page 2 o# the a'ove "aid *o$plaint, K-;, K-/ on the envelope the"e #or the "peed po"t with A.. the P-19/ and *o$pared writing"

di"puted

writing"

"pe*i$en

alread) $ar&ed a" S-1 to S-; on the "pe*i$en "heet dated 21.10.2001 A.. P-1:;, S-/ to S-: on another

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

124

"pe*i$en "heet dated 21.10.2001 A.. P-1:/, S-9 to S-9 on another "pe*i$en "heet dated 21.10.2001 A.. P-1:1, S-10, S-11 on the "pe*i$en "heet dated 21.10.2001 A.. P-1:: and S-12 on another "pe*i$en "heet dated

21.10.2001 A.. P-1:9 and al"o with the writing" alleged to 'e the ad$itted writing" o# Ravdeep Kaur alread) $ar&ed a" A-1 to A-; on the appli*ation addre""ed to the Prin*ipal, CPS Patiala A.. P-199, A-/ to A-9 on another appli*ation addre""ed to Prin*ipal, CPS Patiala A.. P-198 to #ind out whether or not the di"puted

writing" $ar& a" K-1 to K-/ have 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who gave the "pe*i$en writing" $ar&ed a" S-1 to S-12 and ') the "a$e per"on who wrote the

writing $ar&ed a" A-1 to A-9.

A#ter e.a$ining the

a'ove "aid, he i" o# the opinion that the di"puted writing" $ar& a" K-1 to K-/ have not 'een written ') the per"on who wrote the "pe*i$en writing" $ar& a" S-1 to S-12. Rather the di"puted writing" $ar& K-1 to K-/

and "pe*i$en writing" $ar&ed a" S-1 to S-12 have 'een written ') two di##erent per"on" and the di"puted

writing $ar& a" K-1 to K-/ have al"o not 'een written ') the per"on who wrote the writing" $ar&ed a" A-1 to A-9 alleged to 'e the ad$itted writing". Rather the

di"puted writing" $ar& K-1 to K-/ and the writing" $ar& A-1 to A-9 have 'een written ') two di##erent per"on".

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

125

4i"

detailed o#

report ;2 A..

A..

<-AM/12 4e to

to

thi"

e##e*t proved

i" the the

*on"i"ting photograph" di"puted

page". <A M/1; a"

#urther A.. <A

a"

M//1 K-/,

o#

writing"

$ar&ed

K-1

to

"pe*i$en

writing $ar& a" S-1 to S-12 and the writing" $ar&ed a" A-1 to A-9 pa"ted on 1; photographi* *hart and

negative" thereo# a" A.. 90.

<A M//2 to A.. <A M/:/.

D=-22 S5. S1)810, Senior A""i"tant, 6##i*e o# Regi"trar o# So*ietie", Sarhind Road,

Additional

Patiala proved the *op) o# *erti#i*ate o# regi"tration o# "o*ietie" 2 whi*h pertain" ,arden, a" to Patiala Road Adu*ation Patiala, o#

So*iet), regi"tered

Ra indra on

Stadiu$ A..

01.08.2002

<AM/8,

original

whi*h he had 'rought in the 2ourt.

4e #urther proved

the atte"ted *op) o# $e$orandu$ o# a""o*iation o# "aid "o*iet) a" A..<-AM/9 whi*h i" "igned ') all it"

$e$'er", *op) o# the re"olution A..<-AM/10 "u'$itted ') the "o*iet) #or it" regi"tration, the rule" and regulation" o# the atte"ted *op) o# the "aid "o*iet)

*on"i"ting o# nine page" a" A..<AM/11.

4e 'rought the 4e #urther 7nder Kaur,

original" o# all the a'ove "aid do*u$ent". depo"ed that a" per the re*ord, <eep

5ana$ it Kaur o# 4ou"e No.2, Ra indra ,arden, Stadiu$ Road, Patiala, Singh ,ur eet Singh, o# Su&hdev Singh and

a"$inder

re"ident"

8-A, 4ira Nagar,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

126

Patiala, Bal'ir Singh o# %illage 2ha& 7nder Singh @ala and <r. Ran'ir Singh o# 4ira Nagar, Patiala are it" *ounter $e$'er". <eep 7nder Kaur i" the Pre"ident and

,ur eet Singh i" the Se*retar) o# the "aid So*iet). 91. 6n the 'a"i" o# eviden*e led ') the

pro"e*ution, learned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the State argued that en$it) o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed had "tarted a long 'a*&. P@-;:

<eepinder Kaur ha" "tated that <al eet Singh Bahia, retired -eh"ildar D#ather o# a**u"ed Ravdeep KaurE and her #ather-in-law D#ather o# %i a) Singh de*ea"edE were having ver) good relation" with ea*h other. %i a)

Singh de*ea"ed and Ravdeep Kaur were o# the "a$e age and the) grew up together. She #urther "tated that

a#ter her $arriage with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed, he told her that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wanted to $arr) hi$

wherea", he had no intere"t in her.

A**u"ed Ravdeep

had 'een *o$pelling her hu"'and D%i a) Singh de*ea"edE to $arr) her even 'e#ore and a#ter hi" $arriage. Both

the #a$ilie" had tried to $a&e a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur under"tand. <r. 7n the )ear 1989 Ravdeep wa" $arried to Mann o# 2handigarh 'ut "he wa" not

Raghuvinder

happ) with thi" $arriage and had 'een pur"uing %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to $arr) her. Ravdeep then had a "on.

4owever, in#atuation #or %i a) Singh de*ea"ed did not

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

127

la"t.

Ravdeep even "tarted *o$ing to her hou"e on the She even the"e #ro$

prete.t o# 'u)ing *lothe" #ro$ her 'outi>ue. told Ravdeep not to her *o$e to her hou"e *he*&ed

with her

prete.t.

Aven

$other-in-law

*o$ing to her hou"e.

6n*e her hu"'and D%i a) Singh

de*ea"edE even told her that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had 'een "ending o'"*ene SMS to hi$ and al"o $ade phone *all" to hi$. 4e al"o told that he al"o repre$inded -herea#ter, "he *a$e to her hu"'and out #ro$

Ravdeep Kaur on that a**ount. &now that Ravdeep Kaur turned

hou"e "o that he $a) not *au"e an) trou'le in her relation" with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. Another da) her

hu"'and told her that he re*eived a telephoni* *all #ro$ a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur that "he had given a threat to hi$ ') "a)ing that "he had alread) le#t her hu"'and #or hi$ and now i# de*ea"ed doe" not leave her DP@-;: <eepinder KaurE and $arr) her Da**u"ed Ravdeep KaurE, "he will get hi$ &illed. She a"&ed her hu"'and %i a)

Singh de*ea"ed to 'e *are#ul a" "u*h li&e lad) *an do an)thing at an) ti$e. P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon !

2hanni ha" al"o depo"ed that %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed told hi$ a'out eight $onth" prior to the o**urren*e that Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed had a"&ed hi$ to divor*e hi" wi#e and to $arr) her to whi*h he had de*lined. P@-10

3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi had "een the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

128

a'out

1-1B

$onth"

prior

to

the

o**urren*e

near

CPS

*how& "itting in a 4onda 2it) 2ar 'earing No. PB11N-0110 with a**u"ed Man it Singh and hinting toward" %i a) Singh. At that ti$e 3a&h'ir Singh and %i a) 3a&h'ir Singh

Singh were going #or a wal& together.

appri"ed o# thi" #a*t to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and %i a) Singh told hi$ that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wanted to

$arr) hi$ a" "he wa" not having *ordial relation" with her hu"'and. %i a) Singh al"o told hi$ that a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur had 'een "ending dirt) $e""age" to whi*h %i a) Singh had re'u&ed her 'ut "he did not relent. %i a) Singh de*ea"ed al"o told 3a&hvir Singh DP@-10E that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had threatened hi$ that i# he *ould not 'e her then "he would not let hi$ to 'e o# an)'od) el"e. witne""e" and -hu", the te"ti$on) o# the a#ore"aid the do*u$ent" pla*ed on re*ord are

"u##i*ient enough to prove that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" nouri"hing a grou"e again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and had a "trong $otive to &ill hi$. 92. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned Spe*ial Pu'li*

Pro"e*utor #or the State that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" po"ted a" Additional <i"tri*t and Se""ion" 5udge

DAdho*E, 3udhiana.

6n 29.09.200; at 2+;0 p.$. a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur entered into the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh and *reated a "*ene. She openl) threatened

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

129

%i a) Singh to li>uidate hi$.

Kuldeep Singh ,rewal,

Advo*ate who happened to 'e pre"ent in the 2ourt roo$ at that ti$e ha" appeared in the witne"" 'o. a" P@-2; and ha" narrated the entire epi"ode. -o #urther prove

the pre"en*e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur at 3udhiana on 29.09.200;, A$it -a)al, Manager o# 4otel Ma e"ti* Par& Pla=a, 3udhiana ha" "tepped into the witne"" 'o. a" P@-/2 who ha" proved that on 29.09.200; Ravdeep Kaur had got 'oo&ed a roo$ No. ;0/ at /+;1 p.$. and had *he*&ed out at 9+0: p.$. She had paid a 'ill o#

R".;/10/- vide 'ill A..P-1;;. 9;. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State #urther argued that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur got a *o$plaint $ade #ro$ her "ervant Narain Singh again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and hi" wi#e <eepinder Kaur. -he

"tate$ent o# Narain Singh wa" re*orded ') P@-1; AS7 Ra$ Ki"han. A**ordingl), a <<R A..P-2;1 dated 0;.01.200/

wa" re*orded 'ut on in>uir), the "aid *o$plaint wa" #ound #al"e and another <<R A..P-2;2 wa" re*orded.

P@-1; AS7 Ra$ Ki"han ha" $ade it *lear in hi" "tate$ent that Narian Singh wa" wor&ing with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and he lodged thi" #al"e *o$plaint at the in"tan*e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. Not onl) thi", a**u"ed Ravdeep

Kaur did not "top here and "he had pur*ha"ed the pi"tol on 0;.0;.200/ vide *a"h $e$o A..P-108 and the entr) in

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

130

the regi"ter to thi" e##e*t i" A..P-109. #a*t, P@-29 7"ht Pal Singh ha"

-o prove thi" that on

"tated

0;.0;.200/ a pi"tol @e'le) and S*ott 3i$ited 'earing No. 1;0:19 .;2 'ore wa" "old to Ravdeep Kaur w/o

Raghuvinder Singh, re"ident o# Kothi No. 19-A, Nihal Bagh, <i"tri*t Patiala. 7t i" #urther argued that

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur pur*ha"ed the "aid pi"tol in order to &ill %i a) Singh de*ea"ed 'ut did not have the

*ourage to i$ple$ent the "a$e. her"el# ad$itted $ade thi" to #a*t in

A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur her e.tra udi*ial @hen her

*on#e""ion plan"

P@-11

Rupinder Kaur

Singh. $ade

#ailed

then

Ravdeep

had

anon)$ou"

*o$plaint again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to Mr. 5u"ti*e B.K.Ro), the then 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt. wa" re*overed on -he *op) o# the *o$plaint A..P-1:0 #ro$ the drawer o# the

2;.10.2001

ta'le o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur during "ear*h o# Ravi 4o"pital owned and run ') her, ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-11:. P@-/8 Shiva Nand, 6##i*ial o# the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh al"o proved the original *o$plaint A..P-19; along with the envelope A..P-19/ whi*h i" dated 08.09.200/. P@-/9 <ara Singh,

a witne"" #ro$ CPS S*hool, Patiala where "on o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "tud)ing had produ*ed two appli*ation"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

131

A..P-198 and A..P-199 'earing ad$itted hand writing and "ignature" o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -he "pe*i$en hand

writing and "ignature" o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur were al"o ta&en 'e#ore P@-1/ <r. Ra nee"h, the then learned 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala on #ive "heet" A..P-1:; to A..P-1:9 with the *on"ent A..P-1:2 o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. and hand writing" and All the"e "pe*i$en "ignature" "ent to ?oren"i* dated S*ien*e

were it"

3a'orator)

vide

report

22.02.200:

A..P-298 it ha" 'een proved that the writing on the *o$plaint a" well a" on the envelope ha" 'een written ') one and the "a$e per"on who ha" written the

appli*ation" A..P-198 and A..P-199.

-hu", it "tand"

proved that it i" a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur who had $ade an anon)$ou" *o$plaint again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' and 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt at 2handigarh. 9/. State 3earned #urther Spe*ial argued Pu'li* to Pro"e*utor e.e*ute her #or the

that

$otive,

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur hired a**u"ed Man it Singh to &ill %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. proved that -he 'oth pro"e*ution a**u"ed had ha" ver)

"u**e""#ull)

the

*lo"e relation"hip with ea*h other.

P@-11 Rupinder

Singh ha" "tated that on 19.10.2001 at a'out :+00 p.$. a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur $et hi$ at Maharani 2lu', Patiala

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

132

and told hi$ that 9-8 da)" prior to the in*ident, "he had a FpathF at her ho"pital. Man it Singh, ,ranthi o# 7n thi" *a$e

village She&hupura *a$e #or per#or$ing path. $anner a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it

Singh

*lo"er and "he parted with a "u$ o# R"./ to 1 3a*" #or hi" hou"e and ,urudwara to Man it Singh. 6ne da) "he

had a tal& with a**u"ed Man it Singh that %i a) Singh had *heated her and "he want" to ta&e revenge #ro$ hi$. Man it Singh a**u"ed de$anded a "u$ o# R". 1 3a*" #or eli$inating %i a) Singh and "he agreed to part with a "u$ o# R".1 3a*" #or thi" purpo"e. P@-12 A$it Ku$ar,

Nodal 6##i*er o# %oda#one had "tated that one %oda#one $o'ile nu$'er 'earing 98880;/099 had 'een i""ued in the na$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. She al"o got i""ued an

add-on *onne*tion on the "aid $o'ile phone 'earing No. 988809/099. P@-12 ha" al"o produ*ed the *all detail"

A..P-229 o# the $o'ile phone No. 98880;/099 A..P-2:1 w.e.#. 01.08.2001 to 19.10.2001. -he $o'ile phone

nu$'er 98880;/099 wa" re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur at the ti$e o# her arre"t on

18.10.2001 whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1//, wherea", the S7M A..P-21: o# $o'ile

nu$'er 988809/099 wa" re*overed vide $e$o A..P-219 on 2:.10.2001 #ro$ a**u"ed Man it Singh in pur"uan*e o# hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent dated 2:.10.2001 A..P-211.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

133

-he *all detail" o# the "aid $o'ile phone are A..P-2;0 w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 19.10.2001. -here ha" 'een total

:0; *all" in 'etween a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 19.10.2001. Both the

a**u"ed were tal&ing to ea*h other on the "aid $o'ile phone" #ro$ 01.08.2001 #ro$ to 1;.10.2001 Dda) o# dail) and to

therea#ter,

1;.10.2001

o**urren*eE

1:.10.2001 there wa" no tal& in 'etween the$ on the"e telephone". -he pa)$ent o# 'ill" o# 'oth the"e $o'ile -he

phone" have 'een $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur.

re*eipt" A..P-1;: and A..P-1;9 thereo# were re*overed #ro$ the *up 'oard o# the 'ed roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 21.10.2001 ') 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh vide $e$o A..P-1/;. A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" al"o having

another $o'ile phone nu$'er 981190:001 A..P-111 whi*h wa" re*overed #ro$ a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 18.10.2001 at the ti$e o# her arre"t and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1//. proved that thi" $o'ile nu$'er P@-19 Sunil Rana ha" wa" in the na$e o#

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur.

-he *all detail" o# thi" nu$'er

ha" 'een pla*ed on #ile a" A..P@-19/A w.e.#. 11.09.2001 to 1/.10.2001. -hi" $o'ile phone wa" 'eing u"ed ')

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur #or re*eiving the SMS #ro$ a**u"ed Man it Singh. on thi" She re*eived SMS o# a**u"ed Man it Singh phone nu$'er on 21.09.2001 and

$o'ile

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

134

;0.09.2001.

-he -ower lo*ation" o# 'oth the a'ove "aid

add on *onne*tion" o# %oda#one 2o$pan) are di##erent during their *onver"ation. -hu", one per"on *annot 'e

"aid to have tal&ing on 'oth phone". 91. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State #urther argued that P@-10 5ugal Ki"hore i" having a Printing Pre"" in 3al Bagh Street, Patiala and

printed the invitation *ard #or I,reh Prave"hJ *ere$on) o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh in the $onth o# Augu"t, 2001. 4e ha" proved the invitation *ard

A..P-229.

6n the "aid invitation *ard A..P-229, the

telephone nu$'er o# a**u"ed Man it Singh i" printed a" 988809/099. on -hi" *ard wa" re*overed #ro$ Ravi 4o"pital ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh P@-1: vide

2;.10.2001

re*over) $e$o A..P-11:. A..P-2:1 o# I,reh

-wo *o$pa*t di"&" A..P-2:0 and o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed

Prave"hJ

Man it Singh were al"o produ*ed ') hi" #ather Kuldeep Singh during the *our"e o# inve"tigation whi*h were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:2. -he

"aid *o$pa*t di"&" reveal" that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur attended a**u"ed the Man it I,reh Prave"hJ *ere$on) o# hou"e Kaur o# al"o

Singh.

A**u"ed

Ravdeep

re*eived a ISiropaJ in the "aid #un*tion.

6ne *a""ette

A..P-1;1 wa" al"o re*overed #ro$ the da"h'oard o# the *ar o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur with photo o# Man it Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

135

with

title wa"

I2haran al"o

Ka$al into

Ka

Aa"raJ.

-he

"aid on

*a""ette

ta&en

poli*e

po""e""ion

21.10.2001 vide $e$o A..P-1;/. 9:. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor ha" #urther

drawn the attention o# thi" 2ourt toward" the te"ti$on) o# P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur, <enti"t wherein "he ha" depo"ed that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had 'rought Man it Singh to her #or treat$ent o# hi" teeth a'out 2B $onth" prior to thi" o**urren*e. She ha" proved the

pre"*ription "lip A..P-121.

-hi" pre"*ription "lip wa"

re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh P@-1: on 21.10.2001 during the "ear*h o# her hou"e. ta&en into poli*e -he "aid pre"*ription "lip wa" po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o

A..P-1/;.

-hi" witne"" identi#ied a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur

in the poli*e "tation a#ter her arre"t. 99. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State ha" #urther urged that in the $onth o# Ma), 2001 at a'out 8+;0 p.$. P@-;/ 5oginder Singh, ,uard had "een 'oth the a**u"ed "itting in 4onda 2it) *ar in the

(niver"it) pre$i"e" at a dar& pla*e.

6n the o' e*tion

rai"ed ') the witne"", a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur di"*lo"ed her identit) a" <o*tor o# Ravi 4o"pital and thi"

witne"" ha" identi#ied 'oth the a**u"ed in the 2ourt during hi" e.a$ination. P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

136

had

al"o

"een

a**u"ed

Man it

Singh

vi"iting

Ravi

4o"pital ver) o#ten.

4e had al"o "een a**u"ed Ravdeep

Kaur pointing Man it Singh toward" %i a) Singh de*ea"ed while "itting in her *ar No. PB11-N-0110 near CPS

2how&, Patiala.

Be"ide thi" P@-20 4ar*hand Singh ha"

over heard the *onver"ation o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and a**u"ed Man it Singh in Ravi 4o"pital, Patiala

*on"piring to &ill %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

4e had al"o

"een a**u"ed Man it Singh *o$ing out o# the roo$ with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 98. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned Spe*ial Pu'li*

Pro"e*utor #or the State that on 18.10.2001 a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" arre"ted and on hi" per"onal "ear*h, one po*&et diar) A..P-189 wa" re*overed whi*h 'ear" the $o'ile nu$'er" o# the re"iden*e and ho"pital o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -he "pe*i$en hand writing o# a**u"ed

Man it Singh wa" ta&en 'e#ore P@-1/ <r. Ra nee"h, the then learned 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala on 28.10.2001 on three "heet" and wa" got *o$pared with the hand writing o# the "aid diar). 6n *o$pari"on the

hand writing on the po*&et diar) A..P-189 tallied with the "pe*i$en hand writing. A.pert i" A..P-291. a**u"ed Ravdeep -he report o# the do*u$ent

<uring the "ear*h o# the hou"e o# on 19.10.2001 one photograph

Kaur

A..P-1;9 wa" al"o re*overed whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

137

po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1/;.

-he pro"e*ution ha"

thu", 'een a'le to prove that 'oth the a**u"ed had a ver) *lo"e relation. 99. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #urther

argued that there i" *o$plete *hain o# *ir*u$"tan*e" pointing toward" the guilt o# the a**u"ed. 7n the

$onth o# Ma), 2001 at a'out 8+;0 p.$. P@-;/ 5oginder Singh had "een 'oth the a**u"ed in the (niver"it)

Pre$i"e" in a dar& pla*e "itting in a 4onda 2it) 2ar and identi#ied 'oth the a**u"ed when he appeared in the witne"" 'o.. a**u"ed P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi had al"o "een Kaur pointing Man it Singh toward"

Ravdeep

%i a) Singh de*ea"ed while "itting in her *ar No. PB11N-0110 near CPS 2how&, Patiala. 4e had al"o "een

a**u"ed Man it Singh vi"iting Ravi 4o"pital ver) o#ten. P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal, happened to 'e *ro""ing polo ground at a'out 10+;0/10+/1 p.$. on 1;.10.2001 and had "een a**u"ed Man it Singh *o$ing o# the Polo ,round #ro$ the "ide o# 'ro&en wall on hi" $otor *)*le at a great "peed. 4e ha" #urther depo"ed that a**u"ed Man it Singh #allen on the road, got up at on*e and run awa). 4e had "een the a**u"ed Man it Singh *arr)ing one

&irpan at that ti$e and hi" 'lue &urta pa) a$a were 'lood "tained. 4e had identi#ied the a**u"ed on

19.10.2001 to 'e the "a$e per"on who$ he had "een at

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

138

a'out 10+;0-10+/1 p.$. on 1;.10.2001 *o$ing out o# the Polo ,round. P@-20 4ar*hand Singh ha" "tated that he

along with hi" wi#e went to Ravi 4o"pital #or the *he*& up o# hi" wi#e. the attendant. 4e wa" a"&ed to wait #or "o$e ti$e ') 4e over heard the *onver"ation o# 'oth

the a**u"ed hat*hing a *on"pira*) to &ill %i a) Singh. -hi" happened 11 to 20 da)" prior to the o**urren*e. 4e had al"o "een *o$ing out a**u"ed Man it Singh along with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur #ro$ the "eparate roo$. 100. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State ha" #urther argued that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" "hi#ted to A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala a#ter the o**urren*e. 6n 1/.10.2001 at the ti$e o# in"pe*tion o# the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh "o$e hair were #ound "tru*& in the right hand #i"t o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed whi*h were

ta&en into po""e""ion ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E vide $e$o A..P-B/1. A#ter arre"t o# the a**u"ed Man it

Singh, an appli*ation A..P-2;/ wa" $oved 'e#ore P@-1/ <r. Ra nee"h, the then learned 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala "ee&ing per$i""ion to ta&e the "a$ple hair o# the a**u"ed. a**u"ed Man it Singh A#ter getting the *on"ent o# the hi" "a$ple hair were ta&en ')

*o$'ing hi" hair.

-he hair were "ent to ?oren"i*

S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh #or *o$pari"on. -he report A..P-292 o# the A.pert goe" to prove that

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

139

the "a$ple hair and the hair "tru*& in the right hand #i"t o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed 'elong" to one and the "a$e per"on. 101. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #or the

State ha" #urther *ontended that a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" interrogated on 19.10.2001 and in pur"uan*e o# hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-191, he got re*overed one

&irpan with "heath #ro$ ,anda Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra Kanal #ro$ ,hanaur to village Sarala Road near S)phon in #ront o# a Ki&&ar tree. -he Kirpan A..P-; and

"heath A..P-1; were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-R. 4ar'an" Singh, diver who had

ta&en out the &irpan along with "heath #ro$ the Kanal on the pointing out o# a**u"ed Man it Singh had "tepped into the witne"" 'o. a" P@-11 and ha" *orro'orated the pro"e*ution ver"ion. photographed and a -he re*over) o# the &irpan wa" $ovie wa" al"o prepared. P@-;9

Kri"han Ku$ar too& the photograph" and ha" proved the "a$e a" A..P-122 to A..P-121. -he %ideo *a""ette

A..P-129 and the "aid photograph" A..P-122 to A..P-121 were ta&en into po""e""ion ') P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh vide $e$o A..P-12:. 6n poli*e re>ue"t dated

1/.12.2001 A..P-3, the $e$'er" o# the Board o# <o*tor" opined that the po""i'ilit) o# in urie" $entioned in the re>ue"t letter 'eing *au"ed ') "hown weapon or

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

140

"i$ilar t)pe o# weapon *annot 'e ruled out.

P@-12 <r.

K.K.Aggarwal wa" "hown the "word A..P-; and on "eeing it he "tated that it i" the "a$e &irpan whi*h wa" "hown to the$ ') the poli*e at the ti$e o# o'taining their opinion. 102. 3earned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor #urther

argued that P@-1/ Sohan Singh, 2hie# Manager, 2anara Ban& Bran*h at 3eela Bhawan Mar&et, Patiala ha" "tated that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" having a "aving 'an&

a**ount No. 1088 and vide withdrawal vou*her" dated 10.09.2001 A..P-6 and dated 0:.10.2001 A..P-P a**u"ed Ravdeep a**ount. utili=ed %i a) Kaur 7t ') had i" withdrawn argued a**u"ed R".; 3a*" ea*h #ro$ had her 'een o#

that

thi"

a$ount #or

the

Ravdeep P@-19 Patiala No.

Kaur

$urder

Singh

de*ea"ed. 6##i*e, *)*le

Nare"h ha"

Ku$ar,

5unior on 'een 4e

A""i"tant 09.09.2001

<-6

"tated

that ha"

$otor

PB/2-B-21/2

tran"#erred in the na$e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. ha" proved hi" report A..P-R/1.

P@-28 Per$inder Pal

Singh, 5unior A""i"tant in the 6##i*e o# <-6 Sangrur, Pun a' ha" "tated that -A-A 209 'earing No. <312-<-919: ha" 'een tran"#erred in the na$e o# Man it Singh on 29.0:.2001. re"pe*t. 4e ha" proved hi" report A..P-110 in thi" Be"ide thi" a**u"ed Man it Singh al"o

*on"tru*ted a hou"e and organi=ed the F,reh Prave"hF

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

141

#un*tion a" narrated a'ove.

6n 18.10.2001 7n"pe*tor

5a""a Singh DP@-/9E arre"ted a**u"ed Man it Singh and re*overed R". 10,000/- #ro$ the da"h 'oard o# -A-A 209 'earing No. <312-<-919:. 6n #urther "ear*h o# the

vehi*le one "uit *a"e *arr)ing one &urta Pa)=a$a o# 'lue *olour having 'lood "tain" were al"o re*overed and ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o

A..P-182.

A**u"ed Man it Singh then in pur"uan*e o#

hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-198 got re*overed R"./ 3a*" &ept in hi" har$oniu$ l)ing in a roo$ at hi" re"iden*e. -he *urren*) note" 'undle" No. 1 to 8

A..P-201 to A..P-208 were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-211 and the har$oniu$ wa" ta&en into poli*e di"&" po""e""ion o# the vide $e$o A..P-210. #un*tion -he *o$pa*t and

I,reh

Prave"hJ

A..P-2:0

A..P-2:1 al"o goe" to prove that a**u"ed Man it Singh announ*ed that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" given a "e*ret gi#t. A" "tated ') <r. K.K.Aggarwal DP@-12E that there

were a" $an) a" 21 in urie" on the 'od) o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. P@-;8 Mu&htiar Singh ha" proved the

potential o# a**u"ed Man it Singh to in#li*t a" $an) a" 21 in urie" to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. a**u"ed Man it Singh in I,at&aJ and 4e had trained had given two

"pell" o# three $onth" ea*h to train hi$.

A**u"ed

Man it Singh ha" al"o 'een "howing hi" "&ill o# I,at&aJ

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

142

in

INagar

Kirtan"J.

-he

?oren"i*

report

A..P-29;

#urther prove" that the *lothe" o# the a**u"ed i.e. Kurta A..P-8/, Pa)=a$a A..P-81, 'lood "tained earth and F"heathF were "tained with hu$an 'lood group I6J whi*h #urther *orro'orate" the pro"e*ution ver"ion. 10;. State 3earned #urther Spe*ial Pu'li* the Pro"e*utor add-on #or the o#

argued

that

*onne*tion

%oda#one 2o$pan) 'earing No. 98880;/099 wa" re*overed #ro$ a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wherea", the S7M o# $o'ile nu$'er 988809/099 wa" re*overed #ro$ a**u"ed Man it

Singh and the *all detail" o# the "a$e proved that the) had 'een tal&ing to ea*h other dail) w.e.#. 01.08.2001 to 1;.10.2001 and a#ter 11+19+/1 p.$. the) did not tal& on the"e telephone nu$'er" till 1:.10.2001. Be#ore the

o**urren*e on 1;.10.2001 the) tal&ed to ea*h other #or 9+09 "e*ond" at 20+1;+21 hour" and a#ter the $urder a**u"ed Man it Singh gave a phone *all to Ravdeep Kaur at 2;+19+/1 hour" #or 2:1 "e*ond". 10/. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned Spe*ial Pu'li*

Pro"e*utor #or the State that on 2:.10.2001 the driving li*en*e A..P-1: o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in pur"uan*e o# her di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-% whi*h wa" delivered to her ') a**u"ed Man it Singh a#ter *o$$itting the $urder o# %i a) Singh a" a proo# that %i a) Singh ha" 'een

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

143

&illed.

P@-/1 ,ur$it Singh ha" proved the "aid driving

li*en*e A..P-1: in the na$e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. Be"ide thi" on 2:.10.2001 the 'lood "tained "hoe" o# a**u"ed Man it Singh A..P-101 and A..P-102 have al"o 'een re*overed #ro$ the upper "hel# o# *up-'oard in 'la*& pol)thene 'ag #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in pur"uan*e o# her di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-%. -he "aid "hoe" have 'een reported to 'e "tained with 'lood vide report o# A.pert A..P-291. -he appli*ation"

A..P-198 and A..P-199 "u'$itted ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in the "*hool o# her "on reveal" that "he ha" written the na$e o# her "on a" 5a"noor Singh Bahia whi*h i" the "urna$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wherea", "he i" $arried to <r. Raghvinder Singh Mann. -he"e appli*ation" have -hi" #a*t prove" that

'een proved ') <ara Singh P@-/9.

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had no relation with her hu"'and <r. Raghvinder Singh Mann. -he *on*lu"ion a'ove in eviden*e all thu", lead" it i" to the

that

*ir*u$"tan*e"

a**u"ed

Man it Singh who ha" &illed %i a) Singh de*ea"ed in *on"pira*) with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -he a**u"ed are

thu", lia'le to 'e held guilt) #or the *o$$i""ion o# o##en*e under Se*tion ;02 read with Se*tion 120-B o# 7P2 and *onvi*ted thereunder. 101. 6n the other "ide, at the #ir"t in"tan*e,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

144

learned de#en*e *oun"el argued that the ?7R A..P-A in thi" *a"e i" anti-ti$ed and ha" 'een re*orded a#ter due *on"ultation A..P-2:9 $ade and ') deli'eration. P@-1: Sewa Singh -he on endor"e$ent the "tate$ent

A..P-A o# P@-2 Shiv Ra

Singh #or regi"tration o# the

?7R goe" to "how that it wa" re*orded at 2+/0 a.$. on 1/.10.2001. But P@-1: Sewa Singh wa" not pre"ent in P@-/ 42 <il'agh Singh had

A$ar 4o"pital at that ti$e.

"tated in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# that he re*eived a telephoni* $e""age at 2+00 a.$. to rea*h Polo ,round, Patiala DP@-9E. and he wa" a**o$panied ') ,ur inder Singh

-he) rea*hed Polo ,round at a'out 2+;0 a.$.

-herea#ter, on a"&ing o# the poli*e o##i*ial", the) went to A$ar 4o"pital and rea*hed 'a*& Polo ,round at a'out /+/1/1+00 a.$. 4e ha" *ategori*all) "tated in

hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that the) rea*hed polo ,round 'etween 2+;0/2+/1 a.$. and at that ti$e 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh wa" #ound pre"ent there. 7"npe*tor Sewa Singh

DP@-1:E too& the$ alone to A$ar 4o"pital where the) rea*hed at ;+00/;+11 a.$. 42 ,ur inder Singh DP@-9E

ha" al"o "tated in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that he and P@-/ <il'agh Singh had rea*hed Polo ,round at a'out 2+;0 a.$. and #ro$ there 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E had ta&en the$ to A$ar 4o"pital. -hu", the te"ti$on)

o# P@-/ and P@-9 $a&e" it *lear that at 2+;0 a.$.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

145

7n"pe*tor ,round.

Sewa

Singh

DP@-1:E

wa"

pre"ent

at

Polo Singh

A" "u*h, "tate$ent A..P-A o# Shiv Ra

DP@-2E and the endor"e$ent A..P-2:9 thereon ha" not 'een $ade at the ti$e when it alleged to have 'een $ade. P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha" "tated that he

had got the #ir"t in#or$ation at 1+/0 a.$. and had rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital at 2+00 a.$., wherea", P@-/9

7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh had "tated that he had re*eived a $e""age a'out the $urder o# %i a) Singh at a'out 12+;0 a.$. whi*h "how" that the $e""age alleged to have 'een re*eived at 1+/0 a.$. i" a *reated eviden*e and the poli*e wa" well aware a'out the $urder prior to 12+;0 a.$. -hi" ti$e wa" utili=ed ') the inve"tigating

agen*) to introdu*e Shiv Ra #al"e witne""e".

Singh DP@-2E and other" a"

P@-1 A'dullah Noori ha" "tated in hi"

e.a$ination in *hie# that on 1;.10.2001 at a'out 10+;0 p.$. he re*eived a *all #ro$ -ina Martin #ro$ ,er$an) who had appri"ed hi$ a'out her tal& with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and di"-*onne*tion o# the phone.

2on"e>uentl), he $ade a telephone *all to <eepinder Kaur DP@-;:E and Satinder Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni DP@-9E to veri#) the "ituation and a#ter ;1-/0 $inute" 2hanni *alled hi$ 'a*& on telephone "a)ing that %i a) Singh wa" no $ore and he had 'een a""a""inated. -hu", the

dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed $u"t have rea*hed to

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

146

A$ar 4o"pital prior to 11+11 p.$. *ro"" e.a$ination that he had

4e ha" "tated in hi" re*eived *all #ro$

Satinder Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni DP@-9E 'etween 11+00 p.$. and 11+11 p.$. -hu", the ver"ion o# Shiv Ra

Singh that Satinder Singh Se&hon had *o$e to hi$ at 12+/1 a.$. i" entirel) wrong 'e*au"e Satinder Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni wa" well aware a'out the $urder o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed prior to 11+/1 p.$. P@-9 Satinder

Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni had "tated in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# that he had re*eived a telephoni* *all #ro$

A'dulah Noori at 12+00 night to veri#) the "ituation. -hi" witne"" ha" thu", *on*ealed the true #a*t" a'out the ti$e a" hi" "tate$ent run" entirel) *ontradi*tor) to the "tate$ent o# P@-1 A'dulah Noori. @hen Satinder

Singh Se&hon P@-9 had alread) in#or$ed P@-1 A'dulah Noori a'out the death o# %i a) Singh at a'out 11+11 p.$., there wa" no #un #or hi$ to *o$e to Shiv Ra Singh to lo*ate a'out the wherea'out o# %i a) Singh whi*h lead" onl) to a *on*lu"ion that Shiv Ra neither de*ea"ed went to to Polo ,round -ina not nor too& %i a) not Singh Singh 'een

ho"pital. and wa" ha" a

Martin the

ha"

interrogated though, "he

oined

inve"tigation, A'dulah Noori

$aterial

witne"".

DP@-1E ha" 'rought thi" #a*t on #ile that -ina Martin told hi$ on phone that "he wa" tal&ing with %i a) Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

147

and

heard

hi"

*r),

therea#ter,

the

telephone

di"-

*onne*ted.

-hu", the "tate$ent o# A'dullah Noorie to

thi" e##e*t i" a hear "a) eviden*e and hit ') Se*tion 1; o# the Aviden*e A*t. do*u$ent" *learl) prove" -hu", the witne"" and the that the ?7R ha" not 'een

regi"tered at the ti$e when it i" "hown to have 'een regi"tered. the a**u"ed. 10:. 3earned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued that 4owever, no #inger wa" pointed out toward"

vide A..<-AA, the then SSP, Patiala i""ued dire*tion" to S46, Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine", Patiala to

inve"tigate the $atter with regard to the *a"e de*ided ') %i a) Singh and e##ort" to 'e $ade to tra*e out the *a"e, whi*h point" out that on 20.10.2001 SSP, Patiala wa" not a""ured a'out the a""ailant" and the

inve"tigation wa" "till on whi*h "how" that there wa" no eviden*e again"t Ravdeep Kaur till 20.10.2001 and therea#ter, all the eviden*e" have 'een *reated. -he

peru"al o# the *all re*ord A..P@-19/B o# the telephone o# the de*ea"ed "how" that thi" telephone went o## at 22+;2+01 on 1;.10.2001 and therea#ter a *all wa" $ade #ro$ thi" $o'ile phone at 0/+12+01 on 1/.10.2001 whi*h wa" outgoing *all to nu$'er 989:191119 and again a *all wa" $ade #ro$ ha" thi" not telephone e.plained at a" to 0/+;1+01. who u"ed -he thi"

pro"e*ution

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

148

telephone at thi" ti$e when Sewa Singh ha" not ta&en thi" phone in po""e""ion ') that ti$e. P@-9 ha" "tated

in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that the) were a"&ed to rea*h Polo ,round where the) rea*hed at /+/1 a.$. and "ta)ed there #or a'out one hour. Si$ilarl), P@-/ in hi"

*ro"" e.a$ination "tated that the) have 'een ta&ing photograph" at the "ite 'etween /+/1 to :+00 a.$. and 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E ha" "tated that he

re$ained in A$ar 4o"pital till /+/1 a.$. whi*h $ean" that he *ould not ta&e into po""e""ion the $o'ile whi*h i" alleged to have 'een la)ing "*attered at the "pot a" a *all wa" $ade #ro$ the "aid $o'ile at /+12 a.$. whi*h $ean" that the "tor) o# the re*over) o# phone" i" al"o a *reated one. 109. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned de#en*e

*oun"el that in#a*t Shiv Ra

Singh ha" 'een introdu*ed

a" a #al"e witne"" and he ha" 'een "u'"tituted in pla*e o# Ra$ Singh ! Kala. -he #ir"t ver"ion with the poli*e

wa" narrated ') Ra$ Singh ! Kala with regard to Bolero and he had alleged to have "een three per"on" in 'la*& Bolero and one other per"on at the "pot. P@-;:

<eepinder Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed did not want to 'ring Ra$ Singh ! Kala in to the witne"" 'o.. -he #ir"t ver"ion with regard to the o**urren*e wa" pu'li"hed in the new" paper -i$e" o# 7ndia, *op) o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

149

whi*h i" Mar&-<N wherein Ka"tur' Shar$a, the then SP Patiala had in#or$ed Media that *lo"e relation" o# the de*ea"ed on rea*hing Polo ,round had o'"erved a Bla*& Bolero "itting three per"on" therein 'ut *ould not have the regi"tration o# the "aid vehi*le a" there wa" no regi"tration nu$'er on the "aid vehi*le and the poli*e wa" inve"tigating the $atter. 7n the report under

Se*tion 19; 2r.P.2. whi*h i" "igned ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E, it ha" 'een *learl) $entioned that SP 2it) had dire*ted hi$ to in>uire a'out the 'la*&

*olored Bolero" #ro$ the <i"tri*t -ran"port 6##i*er, Patiala 5a""a and in thi" regard 27A on 1/.10.2001 Sta##, and 7n"pe*tor had

Singh,

7n*harge Rupinder Pal

Patiala Sarta

interrogated

Singh

Singh.

P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha" ad$itted in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that Rupinder Pal Singh and Sarta Singh

were two "u"pe*t" 'ut he denied to have interrogated the "aid two per"on" ever. P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon

ha" "tated in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that on 11.10.2001 he ha" gone to "ee 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh in 27A Sta## and had narrated the in*ident to hi$ 'ut he denied the #a*t o# having "een the on Bolero. 01.08.2009 7n hi" *ro"" 5a""a

e.a$ination

*ondu*ted

7n"pe*tor

Singh DP@-/9E ha" "tated that whatever wa" told to hi$ ') Satinder Singh Se&hon wa" $entioned in a i$ini.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

150

<uring hi" *ro"" e.a$ination, the witne"" wa" a"&ed to "ee the i$ini 'ut he re#u"ed to "ee the "a$e 'ut the

2ourt i" *o$petent to loo& into the *a"e diarie" a" and when re>uired #or the u"t de*i"ion. Se*tion 192 D2E

2r.P.2. e$power" the 2ri$inal 2ourt to u"e the *a"e diarie" not a" eviden*e 'ut to aid it in "u*h en>uir) or trial. 2hapter 1; Rule ; o# Rule" G order" o#

Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, it ha" 'een $entioned that the 2ourt $a) u"e the "pe*ial diar) not a" eviden*e o# an) da), #a*t" or "tate$ent re#erred to in it 'ut a" *ontaining indi*ation o# "our*e" and line" o# in>uir) and a" "ugge"ting the na$e" o# the per"on", who"e

eviden*e $a)

'e $aterial #or doing

u"ti*e 'etween the

"tate and the a**u"ed, thu", thi" 2ourt i" e$plowered to "ee the "aid i$ini. -he peru"al o# the i$ini

reveal" that 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh DP@-/9E interrogated Satinder Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni who di"*lo"ed during interrogation that a#ter having re*eipt o# in#or$ation o# the o**urren*e, he went to the hou"e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed where Kala "ervant $et hi$. -hen he $ade

Kala to "it in the *ar and went toward" Polo ,round. @hen the) got down #ro$ the 2ar then one Mohindra

Bolero vehi*le wa" *o$ing on "low $otion.

-he) thought @hen it

that 5udge Sahi' wa" in the "aid vehi*le.

rea*hed near the$ then the) "aw three per"on" "itting

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

151

on the rear "eat and all the three were wearing Kurta Pai a$a. -he widow pane" o# the vehi*le have 'een @hen the) *ro""ed the$ he *he*&ed it" 7n the $ean

rolled down.

nu$'er 'ut it wa" not availa'le on it. ti$e 'rother-in-law DShiv Ra hi$.

SinghE o# 5udge Sahi' $et

A#ter 10-11 $inute" Kala told hi$ that he #ound -hen the) rea*hed at

5udge Sahi' who wa" l)ing there.

the "pot and "aw 5udge Sahi' l)ing in the pool o# 'lood. -he) al"o #elt "*ared that the a""ailant" $a)

not 'e here and there, then he and 'rother-in-law o# 5udge Sahi', Shiv Ra Singh ran 'a*& toward" their

vehi*le".

7n the $ean ti$e, one $ore un-identi#ied

per"on pa""ed through whi*h wa" told to the$ ') Kala that "aid per"on wa" Sardar and wa" wearing Pent-"hirt and tur'an who had gone toward" 3ower Mall Road and had pa""ed ') the "ide o# @ater -u'ewell "ituated in Polo ,round. 5udge there. ver"ion @hen the) rea*hed near the *ar, $other o# hi" wi#e and hi" daughter" al"o *a$e

Sahi',

-he peru"al o# put #orth ')

i$ini, thu", de$oli"he" the Ra Singh DP@-2E in hi"

Shiv

"tate$ent A..P-A and whole o# the inve"tigation 'e*o$e" tainted. the -he theor) o# Bolero ha" 'een &ept a"ide ') 6##i*er 7t i" and he ha" intentionall) that the

7nve"tigating the a**u"ed.

roped

#urther

argued

"tate$ent o# <r. K.K.Aggarwal DP@-12E who wa" $e$'er o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

152

the Board whi*h *ondu*ted po"t$orte$ on the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed #urther $a&e" it *lear that di##erent weapon" have 'een u"ed #or in#li*ting

in urie" to the de*ea"ed. po"t$orte$ A..P-5/1 report A..P-5

-hi" witne"" ha" proved the and the pi*torial 7n diagra$ *ro""

'e"ide

hi"

opinion

A..P-3.

hi"

e.a$ination he ha" "tated that di##erent &ind o# wound" are a'ra"ion", 'rui"e", la*ertation", in*i"ed wound", "ta' wound". 4e ha" #urther ad$itted that the in ur)

No. : to 12 were in*i"ed penetrating wound", in urie" No. 1 to 1 and 1/ to 22 were in*i"ed wound" and

in urie" No. 1;, 2;, 2/ and 21 were a'ra"ion".

4e ha"

opined that po""i'ilit) o# in ur) No. 1;, 2; to 21 'eing *au"ed with a 'lunt weapon *ould not 'e ruled out. "harp 4e ha" ad$itted that in*i"ed wound" are *au"ed ') edged weapon wherea", penetrated wound" are

*au"ed ') pointed weapon.

4e ha" #urther "tated that

in *a"e o# in*i"ed wound", the depth wa" not $entioned in the po"t$orte$ report. 4e ha" #urther ad$itted that

&eeping in view the di##erent di$en"ion" o# the wound", po""i'ilit) o# in urie" 'eing *au"ed ') two di##erent weapon" *ould not 'e ruled out. 4e ha" al"o "tated

that in ur) No. : to 12 *ould 'e ') a "harp pointed weapon". -hu", the te"ti$on) o# P@-12 "how" that there

were three t)pe" o# in urie" and *ould not 'e *au"ed ')

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

153

a "ingle weapon whi*h lend" *reden*e to the theor) o# "eeing three per"on" in a vehi*le Bolero and another per"on near the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

-here were a" $an) a" 21 in urie" on the per"on o# de*ea"ed and the"e *an 'e *au"ed ') $ore than one

per"on u"ing di##erent weapon".

-he in*i"ed penetrated -he length and

wound" *ould not 'e *au"ed ') &irpan.

width o# all the in urie" are di##erent whi*h "how" that $ore than one weapon ha" 'een u"ed. 7t wa" a

'lind $urder o# %i a) Singh who wa" Additional <i"tri*t 5udge. -hu", it 'eing a ha" high 'een pro#ile *a"e, and the i"

*ir*u$"tantial

eviden*e

$aneuvered

*reated ') tainted inve"tigation. 7t i" #urther argued that to "u"tain

*onvi*tion o# a *a"e in *ir*u$"tantial eviden*e, the *ir*u$"tan*e" o# whi*h in#eren*e o# guilt i" "ought to 'e drawn $u"t 'e *ogentl) and #ir$l) e"ta'li"hed and thu", *ir*u$"tan*e" "hould 'e o# de#inite tenden*)

unerringl) pointing toward" the guilt o# the a**u"ed and the *ir*u$"tan*e" ta&en *u$ulativel) "hould #or$ a *hain "o *o$plete that there i" no e"*ape #ro$

*on*lu"ion that within hu$an pro'a'ilit) the *ri$e wa" *o$$itted ') a**u"ed and nothing le"" and it "hould al"o 'e in*apa'le o# e.planation o# an) other

h)pothe"i" 'ut the guilt o# the a**u"ed.

-he *a"e $a)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

154

'e true 'ut there i" a long di"tan*e 'etween $a) 'e true and $u"t 'e true and all thi" di"tan*e ha" to 'e traveled ') the pro"e*ution. grave *annot ta&e pla*e prove o# the -he "u"pi*ion, however, the *a"e legal proo#. -he

pro"e*ution

"hould

'e)ond

rea"ona'le

dou't and it *annot ta&e advantage o# wea&ne""e" o# de#en*e, i# an). -he pro"e*ution in thi" *a"e ha"

#ailed to e"ta'li"h the *hain o# *ir*u$"tan*e" whi*h inevita'l) *onne*t" the a**u"ed with the *ri$e. "upport o# hi" *ontention", learned de#en*e 7n

*oun"el

relied upon the authoritie" o# Hon'ble Supreme Court in *a"e Jaharlal Dass Vs. State of Orissa, 1991(2) RCR 257,

Sujoysen Vs. State of !est "en#al, 2$$7(%) Cri&inal Court Cases '55, Ru( Sin#h Vs. State of )unja , 2$$*(+) Cri&inal Court Cases 2%$, ,ani-el an. other Vs. State of /a&ilna.u 2$$*(+) Cri&inal Court +1', Su0h&an Vs. State of ,aharashtra, 2$$7(+) Cri&inal Court 1ases 11+, 2e&(arai Vs. State of 3n.hra )ra.esh, 2$1$(1) RCR 5%% (SC), "al.eSin#h Vs. State of 4aryana, 2$$9(1) RCR 252
and

authoritie" o# Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana at

Chandigarh in ,anju Vs. State of 4aryana, 2$$*(1) Cri&inal Court Cases 5$1, )ar0ash Sin#h Vs. State of )unja 1991 (1) RCR 2'7, 5ul.ee( Sin#h Vs. State of )unja , 19** (2) RCR %$5, "al0ar Sin#h Vs. State of )unja 199*(2) RCR 559.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

155

108. P@-11

3earned Rupinder $ade the

de#en*e Singh e.tra #a$il) to

*oun"el who$

#urther a**u"ed

argued Ravdeep i" and

that Kaur

allegedl) related

udi*ial o# the

*on#e""ion de*ea"ed

*lo"el) i" an

to

intere"ted witne"". <epart$ent,

4e doe" not hold an) po"t in an) a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had no

there#ore,

o**a"ion to $a&e an) "u*h e.tra 'e#ore hi$.

udi*ial *on#e""ion

No relian*e on the te"ti$on) o# P@-11

Rupinder Singh *an pla*ed to "u"tain the *onvi*tion o# the a**u"ed. P@-11 Rupinder Singh hi$"el# i" involved 6n 29.12.1988 a *a"e wa" Nav ot Singh Sidhu #or

in "everal *ri$inal *a"e". regi"tered again"t hi$ and

*o$$itting $urder o# ,urna$ Singh with Poli*e Station Kotwali, Patiala. -hough, the) were a*>uitted ') the

trial 2ourt 'ut had 'een *onvi*ted ') the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt, "o he i" *onvi*t in a $urder *a"e. -he another

?7R No. ;19 dated 19.0:.2000, under Se*tion /19, /20, /:9, /:8 and 120-B o# 7P2 wa" al"o regi"tered again"t hi$ and 5oginder Pal Singh #or "elling a plot ') wa) o# i$per"onation. -hi" *a"e wa" "till pending on the da) Moreover, he i"

he $ade "tate$ent 'e#ore thi" 2ourt.

*lo"el) related and had a*>uaintan*e with 5oginder Pal Singh -on) again"t who$ "everal *a"e" are regi"tered. 7n#a*t, P@-11 #or$ a gang with 5oginder Singh and had 'een wor&ing under patronage o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

156

P@-11 Singh,

Rupinder

Singh A"

i"

*lo"e hi"

relation

o#

%i a) he i"

de*ea"ed.

per

own

ad$i""ion

$arried at %illage Ki"hanpura Ba&"hiwala and the na$e o# hi" #ather-in-law i" Per$inder Singh. na$e o# 5oginder Singh i" ,urdev Singh. -he #atherF" Per$inder

Singh and ,urdev Singh are *ou"in". 'rother o# ,urdev Singh. Singh i" $arried Singh, to the

,urdhian Singh i"

A a) Singh, 'rother o# %i a) daughter 4al>a o# ,urdian Singh. alia"

Kulwant

Patwari

Ki"hanpura

Ba&"hiwala ha" 'een e.a$ined a" <@-1/ who ha" proved Sa ra Na"a'/Pedigree ta'le o# %illage Ki"hanpura, the photo*op) o# whi*h i" A..<-AK. ,urdit Singh had three "on" 4e ha" "tated that na$el) ,urdian Singh,

,urdev Singh and ,ur"haran Singh. i" "on o#

5oginder Pal Singh

,urdev Singh a" per the pedigree ta'le and Balwant

<al it Kaur i" the daughter o# ,urdian Singh.

Singh had two daughter" and na$e o# one wa" Rupinder Kaur and one "on Per$inder Singh, *op) o# the "aid pedigree ta'le i" A..<-AR and the *op) o# the #or the )ear 1981-82 i" A..<-AS. a$a'andi

<@-12 Para$ it Singh,

A""i"tant Kanungo ha" "tated that $utation No. 2;0/ wa" "an*tioned ') the A""i"tant 2olle*tor on 2:.02.2010, *op) o# whi*h i" A..<-A6. -he "aid $utation wa" 'a"ed

upon a $e$orandu$ o# #a$il) partition and there wa" a photo*op) o# the Power o# Attorne) given ') Bal it Kaur

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

157

to <al it Kaur al"o &nown a" <eepinder Kaur. Par$inder Singh Sidhu, Advo*ate ha" proved

<@-1; the

Me$orandu$ o# Partition A..<-AP and ha" "tated that <al it Kaur ! <eepinder Kaur daughter o# ,urdian Singh $entioned in the Me$orandu$ o# #a$il) partition wa" wi#e o# A a) Singh, 'rother o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. So, it "how" that <al it Kaur ! <eepinder Kaur wa" the daughter o# ,urdhian Singh and 5oginder Singh -on) i" the "on o# ,urdev Singh, thu", 'oth are *ou"in" and Rupinder Singh i" #ro$ their *lan. So ad$ittedl),

Rupinder Singh 'e*o$e" a *lo"e relation o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed. e.tra Moreover, the rea"on given #or $a&ing the

udi*ial *on#e""ion 'e#ore P@-11 Rupinder Singh

i" alleged to 'e that hi" #ather wa" 7rrigation Advi"or to 2hie# Mini"ter at that ti$e 'ut in hi" *ro""

e.a$ination P@-11 ha" ad$itted that in 2001 hi" #ather wa" not Advi"or to the then 2hie# Mini"ter. Rupinder Singh had no per"onal a*>uaintan*e P@-11 with

Ravdeep Kaur.

7n hi" *ro"" e.a$ination *ondu*ted on

21.01.2009, he ha" ad$itted that he ha" never gone to the hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur #or attending an) #un*tion nor "he ever *alled hi$ at her hou"e on an) #un*tion. Both were not aware o# ea*h other telephone nu$'er". -hu", P@-11 Rupinder Singh and were not &nown to ea*h other. a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur P@-11 Rupinder Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

158

ha"

not

even

proved

hi"

pre"en*e

in

the

*lu'

on

19.10.2001 a" he ha" ad$itted that the $e$'er" are to $a&e an entr) in the *lu' regi"ter at the ti$e o# entran*e and he ha" "tated that he did not $a&e entr) in the *lu' regi"ter on 19.10.2001. Moreover, he ha"

ad$itted that at the ti$e a**u"ed $et hi$ in the *lu', a'out 100 per"on" were pre"ent there. -he *on#e""ion

i" alleged to have 'een $ade in the par&ing area whi*h wa" paved with 'ri*&" and at that ti$e ;0/;1 *ar" were par&ed and "e*urit) guard" re$ain pre"ent in the

par&ing area.

A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had alread) 'een

na$ed in thi" *a"e, "o it wa" not pro'a'le that "he would go to "u*h a pu'li* pla*e to $a&e the *on#e""ion. -hough, P@-11 ha" "tated that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur al"o $et hi$ 10-11 da)" prior to the o**urren*e 'ut ha" #ailed to "pe*i#) an) date. -here are re"iden*e" o#

7.,., <7,, SSP, <eput) 2o$$i""ioner, Se""ion" 5udge and other 5udi*ial 6##i*er". -here#ore, no a**u"ed would 7# "he $ade a

go to "u*h a pla*e to $a&e *on#e""ion.

*on#e""ion in the *lu', then the natural rea*tion would have 'een to ta&e the a**u"ed to the neare"t poli*e "tation. unnatural. ad$itted in -he *ondu*t o# thi" witne"" i" thu", ver) Moreover, 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@1:E ha" hi" A..<-P *ro"" #or e.a$ination the poli*e that re$and in o# hi" the

appli*ation

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

159

a**u"ed,

he

did

not

$ention

the

re*ording

o#

e.tra

udi*ial *on#e""ion allegedl) $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 4ad there 'een an) e.tra udi*ial *on#e""ion,

"a$e would have 'een $entioned in the appli*ation #or poli*e re$and. -he e.tra udi*ial *on#e""ion i" a

wea& pie*e o# eviden*e and it i" "ettled that it ha" to 'e proved u"t li&e an) other #a*t and the value

thereo# depend" upon the vera*it) o# the witne"" to who$ it i" $ade. No 'od) would $a&e a *on#e""ion to a

per"on with who$ he had no inti$ate relation"hip and where no e.planation i" given ') the pro"e*ution

witne"" a" to wh) he did not ta&e the a**u"ed to poli*e "tation a#ter *on#e""ion, the te"ti$on) o# the witne"" 'e*o$e" dou't#ul. 7n thi" *a"e al"o, the a**u"ed ha" Ravdeep

no a*>uaintan*e with P@-11 Rupinder Singh. Kaur i" not a $e$'er o# the *lu'.

-he pre"en*e o#

P@-11 in the *lu' on the alleged date i" al"o dou't#ul 'e*au"e there i" no entr) in the regi"ter o# the *lu'. -he witne"" hi$"el# i" a *onvi*t in a $urder *a"e and al"o #a*ing trial in another *a"e o# $oral turpitude. 4e hi$"el# doe" not hold an) po"ition in the So*iet). 7t "tand" proved that he i" a *lo"e relation o# the de*ea"ed. "tate$ent re"iden*e" 7t i" not pro'a'le the a**u"ed will $a&e a at and a pu'li* o##i*e" pla*e o# "urrounded ') the

Senior

Poli*e/5udi*ial

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

160

6##i*er" . *on#e""ion.

No 'od) will $a&e "u*h a long and length) No "ane per"on would $a&e a *on#e""ion

'e#ore a per"on who i" *lo"el) related to the #a$il) o# de*ea"ed. that P@-11 -hu", it lead" to an irre"i"ti'le *on*lu"ion Rupinder Singh ha" 'een introdu*ed a" a

#al"e witne"" to prove the e.tra o# e.tra udi*ial *on#e""ion.

udi*ial *ir*u$"tan*e 7n "upport o# hi"

*ontention", learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" relied upon authorit) o# Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e titled

S. 3rul Raja Vs. State of /a&il 6a.u, 2$1$(%) RCR (Cri&inal) 91*.
109. P@-2; 3earned Kuldeep de#en*e Singh *oun"el who #urther ha" argued narrated that the

,rewal

o**urren*e alleged to have ta&en pla*e in the 2ourt o# the de*ea"ed at 3udhiana, i" an intere"ted witne"". ha" ad$itted in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that Sura 4e

Singh

<hillon, Advo*ate at Bathinda wa" hi" *la"" #ellow at Patiala while doing law. P@-;: <eepinder Kaur wi#e o#

%i a) Singh de*ea"ed had al"o ad$itted in her *ro"" e.a$ination *ondu*ted on 2;.02.2008 that Sura Singh

<hillon, Advo*ate at Bathinda wa" her #atherF" "i"terF" hu"'and. <eepinder -hu", he i" al"o *lo"el) related to P@-;: Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh, de*ea"ed.

Moreover, i# an) "u*h in*ident had ta&en pla*e in the 2ourt roo$ o# the de*ea"ed, the 'e"t witne""e" were the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

161

2ourt o##i*ial" 'ut none o# the$ ha" 'een e.a$ined. -he"e o##i*ial" alleged to have ta&en Ravdeep Kaur out o# the 2ourt i" roo$, #atal to "o the none produ*tion o# the"e P@-2;

witne""e"

pro"e*ution

*a"e.

Kuldeep Singh ,rewal ha" al"o "tated that Mr. Su&hpal Singh ,ill and K.K.Ko*har who where the *oun"el #or the 7$prove$ent -ru"t and M2? *a"e" were al"o pre"ent at the ti$e o# o**urren*e 'ut none o# the$ ha" 'een even *ited a" witne"". -he na$e o# P@-2; Kuldeep Singh al"o 4e ha" #ile, *au"e

doe" not #igure in the *au"e li"t o# "aid date. ad$itted there#ore, li"t. that hi" hi" na$e %a&alatna$a wa" not wa" not in in the

$entioned

-hu", the pre"en*e o# P@-2; Kuldeep Singh ,rewal

at the ti$e o# alleged o**urren*e i" al"o dou't#ul. P@-2; ha" not A..<-? na$ed a**u"ed under Ravdeep Se*tion Kaur 1:1 in hi"

"tate$ent

re*orded

2r.P.2.

de"pite the #a*t that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" &nown to hi$ prior to the in*ident. 4e told the poli*e that

lad) "hown in -.%. wa" "a$e who *a$e to the 2ourt and $i"'ehaved with the de*ea"ed. Not na$ing a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur in hi" "tate$ent under Se*tion 1:1 2r.P.2. de"pite the #a*t that "he wa" &nown to hi$ #urther goe" to prove that whatever thi" witne"" ha" "tated i" not *orre*t. ta&en 6therwi"e, the in*ident i" alleged to have on 29.09.200; wherea", the pre"ent

pla*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

162

o**urren*e i" dated 1;.10.2001.

-hu", there 'eing an

intervening period o# $ore than 2 )ear", thi" in*ident *annot 'e *onne*ted with the $urder o# %i a) Singh

de*ea"ed in an) $anner.

Moreover, no "u*h in*ident

wa" reported to the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt ') %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. P@-/2 A$it -a)al, e$plo)ee o# the 4otel where a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur allegedl) "ta)ed on the date o# alleged in*ident al"o *annot 'e 'elieved. 'rought the 4otel re*ord. 4e ha" not

-he 'ill A..P-1;; doe" not -he addre"" a" ;1,

'ear the "ignature o# Ravdeep Kaur. (r'an A"tate-1 i" al"o wrong. ') an) 'od).

-hi" 'ill i" not "igned No

7t i" a *o$puter generated 'ill.

identit) proo# o# Ravdeep Kaur wa" ta&en on re*ord. Moreover, thi" hotel i" owned ') Mr.5a""i Khangura, 2ongre"" M3A and in 2001 2apt. A$rinder Singh wa" the 2hie# Mini"ter o# Pun a'. #a$il) de*ea"ed vi"ited relation" and hi" on with death the o# 2apt. A$rinder Singh had #ather %i a) o# %i a) he had -a)al Singh al"o i"

Singh

hou"e.

-hu",

P@-/2

A$it

introdu*ed ') 4otelier 5a""i Khangura at the in"tan*e part) head o##i*e. -he pro"e*ution ha" thu", #ailed to

prove an) "u*h in*ident alleged to have ta&en pla*e in the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh at 3udhiana. 110. ha" al"o 7t i" #urther argued that P@-20 4ar*hand Singh 'een introdu*ed to lend "upport to the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

163

pro"e*ution *onver"ation Patiala

*a"e o# 'oth da)"

who the prior

allegedl) a**u"ed to the in

overheard Ravi

the

4o"pital, -he

11-20

o**urren*e.

"tate$ent o# thi" witne"" i" alleged to have re*orded on 20.10.2001 at the hou"e o# <eepinder Kaur when the "tate$ent" re*orded. o# the other witne""e" were allegedl)

P@-20 4ar*hand Singh ha" ad$itted to the

e.tent that he re$ained pre"ent at Patiala or at hi" hou"e #ro$ 11.10.2001 to 19.10.2001 'ut there i" no e.planation a" to wh) he &ept >uite till 20.10.2001. -hi" witne"" denied having $et 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh DP@-/9E on 11.10.2001 hi" or having $ade the an) detailed on

"tate$ent

a'out

relation"

with

de*ea"ed

11.10.2001. e.a$ination

P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh in hi" *ro"" *ondu*ted on 0/.01.2009 at page 10 ha"

"tated that he had al"o $ade in>uire" #ro$ 4ar*hand Singh DP@-20E ') going to hi" village Barren on

11.10.2001 'ut he ha" denied o# having re*orded the "tate$ent o# 4ar*hand Singh on the "aid date. -hi"

2ourt i" *o$petent to peru"e the *a"e diar) whether an) "tate$ent o# P@-20 Aven 4ar*hand otherwi"e, Singh the wa" re*orded o# on the

11.10.2001.

ho"pital

a**u"ed had 'een l)ing *lo"ed $u*h prior to Septe$'er, 2001. <@-20 5agdi"h 2hand, Senior A""i"tant, P(<A ha"

"tated that the plot No. 981-2 wa" allotted to 5ag it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

164

Kaur wi#e o# ,ur*haran Singh 'ut the "aid allot$ent wa" *an*elled on 09.01.200; ') the A"tate 6##i*er on the ground that Ravi 4o"pital wa" run in the "aid pre$i"e" whi*h wa" a re"idential area. i" A..<-AM. -herea#ter, the -he *an*ellation order allottee had #iled an

appeal 'e#ore the Additional 2hie# Ad$ini"trator, P(<A on 09.10.200/ whi*h wa" di"$i""ed vide order A..<-AM-1. -herea#ter, revi"ion wa" pre#erred 'e#ore the Se*retar) to ,overn$ent o# Pun a' whi*h wa" di"po"ed o# on

0;.01.2001 vide order A..<-AM-2 where') the re"u$ption order wa" *an*elled on the ground that the *o$$er*ial a*tivitie" 'e "topped and R".10,000/'e depo"ited.

Si$ilar were the order" with regard to plot No. 98: and the order o# re"u$ption o# plot i" A..<-AM-;, order o# di"$i""al o# appeal i" A..<-AM-/ and di"$i""al o# the revi"ion petition i" A..<-AM-1. 5iwan ot Singh,

'rother o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur i" the attorne) o# the "aid Ra inder Singh and 5ag it Kaur. wa" depo"ited vide appli*ation R".10,000/- ea*h dated 20.09.2001.

-herea#ter, the A"tate 6##i*er $ar&ed the appli*ation #or veri#i*ation a" to whether *o$$er*ial a*tivit) ha" 'een "topped and Sh. Ra&e"h Ku$ar Singla, who wa"

po"ted a" 5unior Angineer in P(<A, Patiala at that ti$e went to the "pot and $ade the report on ;0.08.2001 to the e##e*t that the ho"pital ha" 'een *lo"ed. -he *op)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

165

o# "aid report dated ;0.08.2001 i" A..<-AM-:.

7# there

wa" no *o$$er*ial a*tivit) 'eing run in the pre$i"e" then there wa" no >ue"tion o# 4ar*hand Singh vi"iting the alleged pre$i"e". P@-20 4ar*hand Singh ha" al"o

#ailed to prove an) pre"*ription "lip whi*h $ight have 'een pre"*ri'ed ') Ravdeep Kaur #or hi" wi#e. 7n hi"

*ro"" e.a$ination he ad$itted that he did not po""e"" an) pre"*ription given ') Ravdeep Kaur. 4e ha" #urther

"tated that he did not po""e"" an) re*ord regarding the treat$ent o# hi" wi#e alleged to have 'een given ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 4ad an) "u*h o**urren*e too&

pla*e, P@-20 4ar*hand Singh or hi" wi#e $u"t have gone to the hou"e o# %i a) Singh to *onve) the "aid

*onver"ation 'ut no "u*h in#or$ation wa" pa""ed either to %i a) Singh or hi" #a$il), $eaning there') that

in#a*t no "u*h *onver"ation ever too& pla*e or ever heard ') 4ar*hand Singh. pu'li* o##i*e ha" -he do*u$entar) re*ord o# the the *lo"ure o# the

e"ta'li"hed

4o"pital and the genuinene"" and authenti*it) o# it *annot 'e dou'ted. 111. 7t i" #urther argued that P@-;/ 5oginder Singh

allegedl) "een a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh in *lo"e pro.i$it) in Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala 'ut he ha" not di"*lo"ed an) date on whi*h the "aid o**urren*e i" alleged to have ta&en pla*e. 4e i" una'le to tell

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

166

the nu$'er o# the *ar and the na$e o# the *aller who in#or$ed hi$. alleged to 4i" "tate$ent under Se*tion 1:1 2r.P.2. 'een re*orded on 2/.10.2001 at the

have

*a'in o# the (niver"it).

-here i" nothing on re*ord a" No te"t

to how the poli*e *a$e into *onta*t with hi$.

identi#i*ation parade wa" *ondu*ted de"pite the #a*t that the a**u"ed were not &nown to hi$ prior to the in*ident or therea#ter. -he identi#i*ation o# the

a**u"ed #ir"t ti$e in the 2ourt i" $eaningle"".

4e did

not $a&e an) entr) with regard to the alleged in*ident nor the in*ident wa" reported to the Senior 6##i*er". 4ad thi" in*ident ,uard wa" a*tuall) o'liged ta&en to pla*e then hi" the

"e*urit)

in#or$

Senior

6##i*er" whi*h goe" to "how that no "u*h in*ident ha" ever too& pla*e. 112. 3earned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued that

P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur ha" #al"el) 'een introdu*ed a" a witne"" to prove the relation"hip o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur with a**u"ed Man it Singh. -he alleged

pre"*ription "lip A..P-121 i" al"o a #orged do*u$ent. -he hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" allegedl) raided on 21.10.2001 and the pre"*ription "lip A..P-121

alleged to have 'een re*overed along with "o$e other do*u$ent"/arti*le". No witne"" #ro$ the lo*alit) wa"

oined while *ondu*ting "ear*h o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

167

Ravdeep

Kaur

and

the

Provi"ion"

o#

Se*tion

100D/E

2r.P.2. have not 'een *o$plied with.

P@-/; AS7 Sohan

Singh alleged to have $et P@-// <hara$ <ev at the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 21.10.2001 when the hou"e wa" raided 'ut P@-// ha" not "tated an)thing regarding oining o# poli*e arti*le on 21.10.2001. A..P-121 i" No other to

in*ri$inating

e.*ept

alleged

have 'een re*overed and the re*over) i" thu", planted one. P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur ha" "tated in her *ro""

e.a$ination that "he wa" not $aintaining an) re*ord. 7t i" i$pro'a'le that a <o*tor will not &eep the re*ord o# her patient". She #urther "tated that "he vi"ited

the poli*e "tation pro'a'l) in the $onth o# ?e'ruar), wherea", re*overed the on pre"*ription 21.10.2001. "lip No i" alleged to ha" have 'een

e.planation

put#orth ') the pro"e*ution a" to wh) thi" witne"" wa" not *onta*ted i$$ediatel) a#ter re*over) o# the

pre"*ription "lip. date when a**u"ed

-hi" witne"" doe" not re$e$'er the Ravdeep Kaur 'rought her "on #or

treat$ent.

She al"o doe" not re$e$'er the date and

$onth when a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur alleged to have 'rought Man it Singh to her. She ha" #urther ad$itted that "he

wa" "hown the photograph o# Man it Singh in the poli*e "tation. 7n her e.a$ination in *hie# "he ha" "tated

that pre"*ription "lip A..P-121 i" in her hand 'ut in

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

168

her *ro"" e.a$ination "he ha" "tated that it i" in the hand o# her a""i"tant. -he pre"*ription "lip A..P-121

neither 'ear" the "ignature" o# P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur nor the "ignature" o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. -he

pro"e*ution ha" not produ*ed the alleged a""i"tant o# P@-;9 in the witne"" 'o. to prove the pre"*ription "lip A..P-121. 7t ha" al"o not 'een $entioned in the

pre"*ription "lip that who had re#erred a**u"ed Man it Singh #or treat$ent. -hu", the te"ti$on) o# P@-;9 <r.

A$andeep Kaur i" nothing el"e 'ut 'undle o# lie". 11;. 3earned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued that

the re*over) o# *ertain arti*le" alleged to have 'een $ade on 2:.10.2001 #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur, i" planted one. P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh in

hi" *ro"" e.a$ination ha" "tated that on 2:.10.2001 he interrogated a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in 27A Sta##, Patiala and upon interrogation "he $ade a di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-%. 7n pur"uan*e o# the "aid di"*lo"ure "tate$ent

"he got re*overed R".2 3a*" *a"h, one pi"tol .;2 'ore, one ar$" li*en*e in her na$e, one driving li*en*e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed in 'la*& 'ag and one pair o# "port "hoe" 'lood "tained o# Man it Singh in a pla"ti* 'ag under the >uilt in the upper portion o# the *up 'oard. @herea", in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# at page No. 8, $ade on 21.12.2009, P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

169

alleged that on 21.10.2001 he along with other poli*e o##i*ial" had gone to 27A Sta##, Patiala and

interrogated Ravdeep Kaur and therea#ter pro*eeded to the hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur where the "ear*h o# *ar and the hou"e wa" *ondu*ted and #ro$ the *up'oard o# the 'ed roo$ two re*eipt" o# $o'ile nu$'er" 98880;/099 and 988809/099 A..P-1;1 and A..P-1;: were re*overed. 6ne

*ard A..P-121 o# 2hugh 2lini* o# a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" al"o allegedl) re*overed. "tated that there i" P@-1: ha" "pe*i#i*all)

one *up 'oard in ea*h 'ed roo$ -hu",

and even the *up'oard were generall) "ear*hed.

when the *up'oard o# 'ed roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" alread) 'een "ear*hed on 21.10.2001, how the

re*over) *ould 'e e##e*ted #ro$ the "a$e *up 'oard on 2:.10.2001. 4ad the re*over) 'een e##e*ted on

21.10.2001, then the in*ri$inating arti*le" alleged to have 'een re*overed on 2:.10.2001 *ould not e"*aped the e)e" o# the poli*e on 21.10.2001. 7t i" #urther argued oined ') the

that P@-22 ,ur it Singh wa" allegedl)

inve"tigating agen*) during the "ear*h o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 2:.10.2001 'ut he *annot 'e ter$ed a" an independent witne"". 4e had "tated that

he had gone on*e to 27A Sta## #or pur"uing thi" *a"e onl). 4e ha" ad$itted that there i" S. A$ar it Singh

Me$orail 7n"titute o# 3aw at village <hainthal and thi"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

170

in"titute i" 'eing run ') a So*iet).

<eepinder Kaur

DP@-;:E i" the 2hairper"on o# the "aid in"titute and he i" the Se*retar). 4e ha" #urther ad$itted that he i"

al"o the $e$'er o# Patiala Adu*ation So*iet) and the other $e$'er" are <eepinder Kaur DP@-;:E wi#e and

5ana$ it Kaur, $other o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

4e ha"

#urther ad$itted that <eepinder Kaur DP@-;:E i" the Pre"ident o# Patiala Adu*ation So*iet), he i" Se*retar) and hi" 'rother i" -rea"urer o# the So*iet), "o thi" witne"" ha" *lo"e pro.i$it) with the #a$il) o# P@-;:. Moreover, thi" witne"" *ould not tell the dire*tion" in whi*h *up 'oard wa" there. 4e al"o *ould not "tate

that how $an) 'ed roo$" are there in the "aid hou"e or the "aid hou"e wa" a "ingle "tore) or wa" having one "tore) or two "torie". 4e al"o *ould not tell the

dire*tion in whi*h the entran*e o# the hou"e o# the a**u"ed wa". 4e *ould not tell the e.a*t nu$'er o# -hu",

*up'oard" in the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur.

he i" an intere"ted witne"" having *lo"e relation" with the #a$il) o# the de*ea"ed and hi" te"ti$on) *annot 'e 'elieved at all. 11/. per the 3earned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued that a" pro"e*ution allegation", Ravi 4o"pital o#

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "ear*hed on 2;.10.2001 and one invitation *ard A..P-119 o# I,reh Prave"hJ o# a**u"ed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

171

Man it

Singh

and

the

*op)

o#

*o$plaint

A..P-1:0

allegedl) $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e, Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, 2handigarh were re*overed 'e"ide" other do*u$ent". 6ne Pappu wa" oined a" an

independent witne"" 'ut he ha" not 'een e.a$ined ') the pro"e*ution. <SP 5a"preet Singh alleged to have

a**o$panied the "ear*h part) to the ho"pital 'ut the re*over) $e$o A..P-11: doe" not 'ear hi" "ignature". P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha" ad$itted in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that there i" a ro=na$*ha in 27A Sta## 'ut neither the departure nor arrival i" re*orded in "aid Ro=na$*ha. P@-1: #urther "tated that *a"e propert) wa"

depo"ited with M42 on return to poli*e "tation 'ut in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination he ha" "tated that "in*e there were re*over) o# do*u$ent", thu", the "a$e were not depo"ited with M42 and the do*u$ent ha" 'een written in routine. 2ourt, it 7n ha" appli*ation 'een #or "ear*h ') warrant to the

$entioned

the

inve"tigating

o##i*er that "o$e do*u$ent" *an 'e "ei=ed #ro$ the "aid ho"pital. -hu", the ver) word o# $entioning o#

do*u$ent" in the appli*ation *learl) "how" that the inve"tigating o##i*er had in $ind to plant do*u$ent" and to "how the "a$e a" re*over) thereo#. 7t i"

#urther argued that Parveen Kaur i" alleged to have

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

172

'rought pre"ent

the at

&e)" the

o# ti$e

ho"pital o#

and

ha"

"hown

to

'e her

alleged

"ear*h

'ut

"ignature" doe" not appear on an) o# the do*u$ent". She ha" al"o not 'een e.a$ined ') pro"e*ution de"pite the #a*t that "he i" the 'e"t witne"" to depo"e a'out the alleged re*over). $ade the e.tra Moreover, Ravdeep Kaur allegedl)

udi*ial *on#e""ion on 19.10.2001 and a"

"u*h, i# the "aid do*u$ent" reall) 'elong" to her, "he would have re$oved tho"e do*u$ent" on 19.10.2001 it"el# or even prior to that. No *ulprit *ould &eep "u*h

do*u$ent" in hi" own *u"tod) #or "u*h a long period whi*h *ould i$pli*ate the "aid per"on in a *ri$inal *a"e. 6therwi"e al"o, the invitation *ard wa" o# $u*h

earlier period and the alleged #un*tion had alread) ta&en pla*e. -he *o$plaint wa" al"o earlier one.

-hu", a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur have no "u*h o**a"ion" to &eep the alleged do*u$ent" in the drawer. a'ove, <@-20 5agdi"h 2hand, Senior A" di"*u""ed P(<A

A""i"tant,

de$oli"he" the *a"e o# the pro"e*ution who ha" proved the order o# re"u$ption A..<-AM o# the plot" on whi*h Ravi 4o"pital i" *on"tru*ted. 6n 20.09.2001 Ravdeep

Kaur in#or$ed the A"tate 6##i*er that the *o$$er*ial a*tivitie" had 'een "topped. Sh. Ra&e"h Ku$ar Singla -herea#ter, on ;0.08.2001 wa" po"ted a" 5unior

who

Angineer in P(<A $ade a report that the ho"pital ha"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

173

'een *lo"ed.

-hu", the ho"pital had 'een *lo"ed prior

to 20.09.2001 and no 'od) will get an) do*u$ent in the pre$i"e" e"pe*iall) when the drawer i" "hown to 'e

l)ing unlo*&ed.

-he pro"e*ution ha", thu", *oo&ed up a

#al"e "tor) o# "ear*h o# Ravi 4o"pital. 111. Ravdeep 7t i" #urther argued that hou"e o# a**u"ed Kaur i" "hown to have 'een "ear*hed on

21.10.2001 and *ar and *a""ette A..P-1;1 were ta&en into po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-1;/. -wo

re*eipt" pertaining to two $o'ile phone" A..P-1;: and A..P-1;9, two photograph" A..P-1;8 and A..P-1;9, two do$e"ti* diarie" A..P-1/0 and A..P-1/1, original R2 o# 2ar A..P-1/2 and one pre"*ription "lip o# 2hugh 2lini* A..P-121 are alleged to have 'een re*overed vide $e$o A..P-1/;. 18.10.2001 A**u"ed then wh) Ravdeep the *ar Kaur wa" wa" not arre"ted ta&en on into

po""e""ion on the da) o# her arre"t parti*ularl) when 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi had alread) $ade hi" "tate$ent to the poli*e. 7t $ean" that either 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi

had not $ade an) "tate$ent or a**u"ed wa" not arre"ted #ro$ her hou"e on 18.10.2001 or hou"e wa" not "ear*hed on 21.10.2001. @hile "ear*h o# the hou"e o# the

a**u"ed, the provi"ion" o# Se*tion 100D/E 2r.P.2. were al"o not *o$plied with. A" per the ver"ion o# P@-/; AS7 Sohan Singh, P@-// S7 <hara$dev wa" al"o pre"ent at the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

174

ti$e o# "ear*h on 21.10.2001 'ut the "tate$ent o# P@-// <hara$ <ev entirel) run" *ontradi*tor) to the "tate$ent o# AS7 Sohan Singh P@-/; who ha" "tated that he onl) oined the inve"tigation o# thi" *a"e on 18.10.2001, 2;.10.2001 do*u$ent" and 21.10.2001. to have -he 'een onl) in*ri$inating i" the

alleged

re*overed

pre"*ription "lip o# 2hugh 2lini* A..P-121. A$andeep Kaur had alread) 'een allegedl)

P@-;9 <r.

oined in the

inve"tigation and "he had identi#ied a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 20.10.2001. an) pre"*ription o# She doe" not tal& o# i""uan*e o# on that "lip da). i" -he "u'"e>uent whi*h

"lip

re*over)

pre"*ription

$eaningle""

*ould have 'een pro*ured ea"il) #ro$ P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur. -he another in*ri$inating "tand i" the alleged o# a *a""ette. -he *a""ette" are ea"il)

re*over)

availa'le in the open $ar&et, a" "u*h *an 'e planted ') having the "a$e #ro$ an)where. -hu", it "tand" proved

that the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur i" not "ear*hed on 21.10.2001. 11:. -he learned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued

that the arre"t o# Ravdeep Kaur ha" 'een #al"el) "hown #ro$ her hou"e on 18.10.2001 wherea", "he wa" alread) in *u"tod) "in*e 1:.10.2001. -he pro"e*ution ha"

e.a$ined P@-// S7 <hara$ <ev and P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh to prove the arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 7n

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

175

hi" *ro"" e.a$ination P@-// S7 <hara$ <ev ha" "tated that he did not &now that 'oth the a**u"ed were in *u"tod) #ro$ 1:.10.2001. 4ad the arre"t reall) ta&en

pal*e on 18.10.2001, P@-// <hara$ <ev would have denied the #a*t that a**u"ed Moreover, the Ravdeep no Kaur wa" arre"ted witne"" the ti$e on wa" o#

1:.10.2001. oined ')

independent 6##i*er at

7nve"tigating

alleged arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur de"pite the #a*t that it wa" a re"idential area and there wa" no dearth o# an) independent witne"". A" per the pro"e*ution

"tor), the poli*e part) rea*hed Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine", Patiala at a'out 11+;0 a.$. and re$ained there till 2+;0 p.$. -he entr) in the <<R regi"ter i" $ade

at 2+00 p.$. wherein arre"t o# Ravdeep Kaur i" "hown and the ti$e o# arre"t ha" 'een given $u*h earlier. <<R entr) i" to 'e $ade at the ti$e o# departure #ro$ the Poli*e Station and "oon a#ter rea*hing there. -he

e.planation that the poli*e part) re$ained out"ide the poli*e "tation in *o$pound and &ept on $a&ing the

en>uir) #ro$ the a**u"ed i" not a**epta'le.

Na$e o#

P@-// S7 <hara$ <ev doe" not #igure in <<R No. 19 dated 18.10.2001, however, he wa" alleged to 'e pre"ent at the ti$e o# arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. P@-//

<hara$ <ev wa" *ro"" e.a$ined on 0/.09.2009 wherein he alleged that he $ade the entr) in the <<R regi"ter at

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

176

Poli*e Po"t -ripri.

-hen he wa" a"&ed to 'ring that

regi"ter 'ut he wanted to *reate a regi"ter *ontaining the "aid entrie". 7n hi" *ro"" e.a$ination *ondu*ted

on 08.08.2009 he had ad$itted that on 0/.09.2009 he wa" dire*ted to 'ring <<R regi"ter *ontaining entrie" dated 18.10.2001, 2;.10.2001 and 21.10.2001. 4e al"o

ad$itted that he did not appear in 2ourt on 11.09.2009. -he re*ord "how" that on 11.09.2009 S7 <hara$ <ev had "ent hi" $edi*al *erti#i*ate "howing hi" ina'ilit) to attend the 2ourt and the 6P< "lip i" Mar&-M whi*h i" alleged to have 'een o'tained #ro$ Model -own, 2ivil 4o"pital <i"pen"ar). da) and it i" a" 7n#a*t, he wa" not ill on that #ro$ hi" "u'"e>uent FA itF *ro"" dated

*lear a

e.a$ination,

new"paper

Mar&-C

1;.09.2009 wa" put to the witne"" wherein he identi#ied hi" photograph regarding the arre"t o# 2ar thieve" and the *op) o# ?7R i" Mar&-L. 4e ha" ad$itted that on

11.09.2009 he wa" along with poli*e part) at @a=idpur --point and a" "u*h "ought ad ourn$ent on #al"e ground. Again on 18.09.2009 he "ent a re>ue"t #or non

attendan*e on a**ount o# illne"" o# hi" relative, when *on#ronted he "tated that on 19.09.2009 he had got

regi"tered ?7R No. 191 dated 19.09.2009 and the *op) o# the "aid ?7R i" Mar&-M/1 whi*h "how" that he had "hown hi$"el# 'u") in the inve"tigation o# that *a"e.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

177

7n#a*t,

the"e

two

ad ourn$ent"

were

"ought

')

thi"

witne"" to gain ti$e to *orre*t the <<R regi"ter a" he had alread) 'een *ro"" e.a$ined with regard to the

report" $ade in the <<R regi"ter.

-hi" witne"" al"o

tried to withheld the in#or$ation #ro$ the 2ourt that one 3ov it ! 5it again"t who$ P@-// S7 <hara$ <ev

regi"tered the ?7R No. 1 dated 0/.01.200:, ha" 'een a*>uitted and the ver"ion o# thi" witne"" wa" #ound to 'e #al"e ') the 2ourt. -he "tate$ent o# P@-// <hara$ udg$ent o#

<ev in the "aid *a"e i" A..<-7 and the a*>uittal i" A..<-5.

<uring hi" *ro"" e.a$ination in

thi" *a"e a#ter "ee&ing ad ourn$ent" $entioned a'ove, thi" witne"" 'rought a *reated regi"ter without an) atte"tation either in the 'eginning or in the end. -he

regi"ter wa" privatel) o'tained and wa" not "upplied ') the ,overn$ent whi*h *ontain" the #a'ri*ated entrie". 7t i" #urther argued that at the ti$e o# arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur, <al it Singh i" alleged to have 'een pre"ent there. An ?7R had alread) 'een lodged

again"t <al it Singh Bahia on 18.10.2001 and had he 'een there he would have 'een i$$ediatel) arre"ted

whi*h "how" that the date, ti$e and pla*e have 'een wrongl) "hown and #urther "trengthen the de#en*e

ver"ion that no "ear*h a" alleged wa" *ondu*ted on the "aid date and nothing wa" re*overed #ro$ the per"on o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

178

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 119. -he learned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued

that the "tate$ent o# P@-1; Ra inder Pal 5airath, P@-1/ Sohan Singh and P@-21 %ipul Par&a"h do not help the pro"e*ution at all. proved the P@-1; Ra inder Pal 5airath who ha" o# a**ount A..P-N w.e.#.

"tate$ent

01.01.2001 to 11.10.2001 whi*h pertain" to Satna$ -ru"t alleged to 'e operated ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and

5a"want Kaur w/o <al it Singh.

7n A..P-M an a$ount o#

R".90,000/- i" alleged to have 'een withdrawn through *he>ue on 2:.0;.2001 whi*h ha" 'een tran"#erred to

State Ban& o# Patiala, on 29.0;.2001.

R".21,000/- ha"

'een tran"#erred to the Po"t$a"ter and on ;1.0;.2001 an a$ount o# R".;0,000/ha" 'een tran"#erred to an

a**ount $aintained in 72727 and R".2:,21;/- wa" 'alan*e a" #ro$ 01.09.2001 a#ter adding intere"t o# R"./11/- on the "aid date and the la"t withdrawal wa" on

;1.0;.2001.

So there i" nothing in thi" a**ount whi*h Sohan Singh P@-1/ A..P-N 2anara and Ban&. and -he

$ight help the pro"e*ution at all. ha" proved the #or$" #or$ #or$ "tate$ent A..P-6 A..P-6 A..P-P and i" i" o#

a**ount o#

withdrawal @ithdrawal withdrawal

A..P-P dated dated

10.09.2001 0:.10.2001.

"tate$ent o# a**ount A..P-N "how" that R". ; 3a*" have 'een tran"#erred to thi" a**ount on 10.09.2001 and wa"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

179

withdrawn on that da). that the a**ount wa"

-he word there are I33J $ean" o# loan a**ount. Si$ilarl),

5a"'ir Singh ha" 'een e.a$ined a" <@-; who i" #ro$ 2anara Ban& and ha" "tated that R". 10 3a*" were

"an*tioned a" loan to Ravdeep Kaur out o# whi*h R".2 3a*" were di"'ur"ed on 28.01.200; and another "u$ o# R". ; 3a*" on 10.09.2001. -he "aid a$ount o# R". ;

3a*" wa" *redited in her a**ount whi*h i" *orro'orated ') A..P-N. Now the >ue"tion ari"e" whether thi" a$ount A$it Kohli that on

wa" utili=ed #or rai"ing o# *on"tru*tion. ha" 'een e.a$ined a" <@-1 who ha"

"tated

22.09.2001 a written agree$ent wa" e.e*uted 'etween hi$ and Ravdeep Kaur #or *on"tru*tion and the original

agree$ent i" A..<-AB.

6n the "aid date he had re*eived

R". / 3a*" a" advan*e and the re*eipt o# pa)$ent i" A..<-A2. 4e ha" al"o proved another re*eipt dated

10.09.2001 vide whi*h he had re*eived R". / 3a*" a" part o# running 'ill and re*eipt i" A..<-A<. 6n

0:.10.2001 he had re*eived another "u$ o# R". ; 3a*" on a**ount o# running 'ill and the "aid re*eipt i" A..<AA. -o prove the genuinene"" o# the agree$ent,

5atinder Ku$ar, "ta$p vendor ha" 'een e.a$ined a" <@-10 who ha" proved hi" endor"e$ent A..<-AB/1 on the 'a*& o# A..<-AB and ha" "tated that he had "old the "ta$p vide entr) No.:2;1 dated 21.09.2001. 4e had al"o proved the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

180

entr) o# the regi"ter A..<-AB/2 vide whi*h the "ta$p paper wa" "old. So 'oth the withdrawal o# a$ount o# <@-; 5a"'ir Singh ha" "tated

R". ; 3a*" are e.plained.

that nor$all) an o##i*er or Bran*h Manager vi"it the "ite 'e#ore the di"'ur"e$ent o# the in"tal$ent o# the loan to "ee the *on"tru*tion. -he"e do*u$ent" are

genuine and *annot 'e *reated a" Ravdeep Kaur wa" in *u"tod) atlea"t #ro$ 18.10.2001. So #ar a" the

"tate$ent o# P@-21 %ipul Par&a"h i" *on*erned, he ha" proved the "tate$ent o# a**ount A..P-( and the "aid a**ount i" in oint na$e o# 5oginder Kaur and Ravdeep

Kaur and during *ro"" e.a$ination he had ad$itted that in A..P-(, na$e o# Ravdeep Karu doe" not #igure.

6therwi"e, al"o there i" nothing in*ri$inating in the "tate$ent o# a**ount A..P-( a" no $u*h a$ount wa"

withdrawn #ro$ the "aid a**ount. 118. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned de#en*e

*oun"el that the pro"e*ution ha" #ailed to prove that the invitation *ard A..P-229 wa" got printed ') Man it Singh or wa" "ent to a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. P@-10 5ugal

Ki"hore who ha" allegedl) printed thi" *ard "tated that he $aintain" *a"h 'oo&", ledger and write the na$e and addre"" o# the *u"to$er on *a"h $e$o 'ut no "u*h *a"h $e$o ha" 'een produ*ed. No re*ord o# the printing o# No

the "aid invitation *ard ha" 'een 'rought on #ile.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

181

'u"ine""$an *an re$e$'er a'out a parti*ular printing $aterial. 4i" na$e or the na$e o# the printing pre"" 4e wa" al"o not a**u"ed

doe" not #igure an) where on the *ard. oined in the inve"tigation #or

identi#)ing

Man it Singh. 4e ha" identi#ied a**u"ed Man it Singh #ir"t ti$e in the 2ourt. -he identi#i*ation o# the 4e ha"

a**u"ed #ir"t ti$e in the 2ourt i" $eaningle"".

#urther "tated in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that poli*e *a$e to hi$ a#ter 2/2B $onth" o# printing o# *ard". -he invitation *ard A..P-229 reveal" that the #un*tion wa" #or 19.08.2001 and 2/2B $onth" e.pired in the end o# 6*to'er or atlea"t in the #ir"t wee& o# Nove$'er. -he na$e o# thi" witne"" doe" not #igure in the report under Se*tion 19; 2r.P.2. A "upple$entar) *hallan wa"

#iled in whi*h hi" na$e wa" introdu*ed 'ut the "a$e wa" re e*ted ') the 2ourt. -herea#ter, an appli*ation

under Se*tion ;11 2r.P.2. wa" $oved whi*h wa" allowed. 4i" "tate$ent wa" re*orded ') the poli*e on 02.01.200: a#ter pre"entation o# *hallan. -hi" witne"" ha" "tated

that the *ard" were printed in the #ir"t wee& o# Augu"t 2001 and the poli*e i" alleged to have $et hi$ in 5anuar), 200: a#ter a "pan o# a'out #ive $onth". -hu",

no per"on *an re$e$'er a'out the *u"to$er who ha" got printed the *ard. 6therwi"e, al"o the photograph" o#

Man it Singh were "hown in new"paper" and -.%. 2hannel"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

182

a#ter

hi"

arre"t

and

i#

the

*ard

would

have

'een

printed #ro$ hi$ he would have ru"hed to the poli*e with regard to the "aid #a*t, whi*h "how" that the *ard ha" 'een *reated and P@-10 5ugal Ki"hore ha" 'een

introdu*ed a" a #al"e witne"".

-he "ole purpo"e o#

*reating thi" *ard i" to *orro'orate the $o'ile nu$'er having 'een with Man it Singh. 119. *oun"el -he ne.t li$' o# argu$ent o# learned de#en*e i" that the pro"e*ution ha" al"o #ailed to

prove that the *o$plaint A..P-19; wa" $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to the honF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e, Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -he

"pe*i$en hand writing o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" ta&en on 21.10.2001 ') the poli*e 'e#ore the 2ourt o# <r. Ra nee"h, the then 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala DP@-1/E #or the purpo"e o# *o$pari"on. "pe*i$en hand writing o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur -he are

A..P-1:; to A..P-1:9.

-here wa" no law on 21.10.2001

wherein the learned Magi"trate *ould ta&e the "a$ple handwriting o# an a**u"ed and a" "u*h, the order it"el# wa" illegal. A..P-291 o# -he pro"e*ution ha" tendered the report <eput) <ire*tor, ?oren"i* S*ien*e

3a'orator), wherein it ha" 'een $entioned that it wa" not po""i'le to e.pre"" de#inite opinion regarding

their *o$$on author"hip or otherwi"e on the >ue"tioned

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

183

writing" "ta$ped and $ar&ed K-1 to K-/ in *o$pari"on with "pe*i$en handwriting "i$ilarl) "ta$ped and $ar&ed a" S-1 to S-12 and "uita'le and "u##i*ient ad$itted writing" were *alled #or *o$paring the "a$e with

>ue"tioned writing" Mar&ed K-1 to K-/.

-hu", a" per

the "aid report, S-1 to S-12, K-1 to K-/ *annot 'e *o$pared. 7n#a*t, it wa" a pro*ured report. Be*au"e

the writing did not tall) with ea*h other "o in"tead o# giving the report that the writing did not tall), a vague report ha" 'een given "o a" to *reate #urther eviden*e. letter" P@-/9 <ara Singh, alleged to have given two and A..P-199 allegedl) written ')

A..P-198

Ravdeep Kaur in hi" pre"en*e, to AS7 Satpal whi*h wa" ta&en -hi" in the poli*e ha" po""e""ion $aterial vide $e$o A..P-200. in hi"

witne""

$ade

i$prove$ent"

"tate$ent in the 2ourt.

7n hi" *ro"" e.a$ination he

ha" "tated that a" per letter o# SSP, two appli*ation" written ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to the Prin*ipal CPS S*hool were de$anded and a" per the "aid letter the"e appli*ation" were handed over ') hi$ to the poli*e. 7t

i" not under"tanda'le a" to how the SSP *a$e to &now on 19.12.2001 that there are two appli*ation" in the

o##i*e o# the S*hool.

Both the"e appli*ation" are in

di##erent in&" and ') di##erent writing in"tru$ent", "o the "aid appli*ation *ould not written at one and the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

184

"a$e

ti$e.

-he"e

appli*ation"

are

thu",

*reated

eviden*e, "o a" to "end the$ again to ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) to get a pro*ured report. A..P-298 i" the

"e*ond report in whi*h it ha" 'een o'"erved that K-1 to K-/ ha" 'een written ') the "a$e per"on who ha" written "tandard writing", "ta$ped and $ar&ed a" A-1 to A-9 and S-1 to S-12. 7n the that earlier S-1 to report, S-12 it were wa" not

"pe*i#i*all)

$entioned

"u##i*ient #or *o$pari"on then how in the "e*ond report the) have 'een #ound to 'e "u##i*ient #or *o$pari"on. <@-21 Navdeep ,upta ha" "u'$itted hi" ela'orate and *o$prehen"ive report and ha" opined that the writing" S-1 to S-12 are independentl) the author" "u##i*ient o# the #or

*o$pari"on.

Moreover,

report" -he "aid

A..P-291 and A..P-298 ha" not 'een e.a$ined.

report" are not per"e ad$i""i'le and 'oth the report" were e.hi'ited "u' e*t to o' e*tion. -he "aid report"

*annot 'e read again"t the a**u"ed a" the) had got no opportunit) to *ro"" e.a$ination thi" witne"". -he

peru"al o# envelope A..P-19/ reveal" that thi" letter i" alleged to have 'een "ent ') 5ag it Singh, 29, 4ira Nagar, Patiala. -he pro"e*ution ha" not 'rought an)

eviden*e on re*ord that the "aid 5ag it Singh wa" ever oined in the inve"tigation or he had denied to have $oved an) "u*h appli*ation. No eviden*e ha" 'een

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

185

'rought to prove that there i" no per"on ') the na$e o# 5ag it Singh living in the hou"e No. 29, 4ira Nagar, Patiala. -he letter ha" 'een "ent through Speed Po"t

'ut no "tate$ent o# an) witne"" #ro$ the po"t o##i*e ha" 'een re*orded. the "aid letter i" -he envelope A..P-19/ "howed that alleged to have 'een po"ted on

08.09.200/ i.e. $ore than a )ear prior to the pre"ent o**urren*e. inve"tigation A..P-19; ha" -hu", non *learl) 'een oining o# 5ag it Singh in the prove" that thi" upon *o$plaint a**u"ed

wrongl)

#oi"ted

the

"howing it to 'e written ') her. 120. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned de#en*e

*oun"el that the re*over) o# the S7M *ard o# *ell phone No. 988809/099 ha" 'een planted upon Man it Singh.

P@-12 ha" 'rought the *all detail" o# the *ell phone nu$'er" 988809/099 and 98880;/099 w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 2/.10.2001. -he *ell phone detail" A..P-229 pertain"

to *ell phone nu$'er 98880;/099 and A..P-2;0 pertain" to *ell phone nu$'er 988809/099. -he inve"tigating

o##i*er re*orded the "tate$ent o# one Muni"h Sria"tava in thi" re"pe*t 'ut he wa" "u'"tituted 'e*au"e hi" Said under

"tate$ent wa" not "uita'le to the pro"e*ution. Muni"h Sriva"tava in hi" "tate$ent re*orded

Se*tion 1:1 2r.P.2. on 2:.11.2001 ') 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh P@-1: had "tated that on 1;.10.2001 a telephoni*

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

186

*all wa" $ade #ro$ 988809/099 to 98880;/099 at 08+1;+;1 p.$. and had a telephoni* tal& #or 909 "e*ond" and therea#ter, 988809/099 again to out going at *all wa" $ade #ro$ P@-11

98880;/099

11+19+/1

p.$.

Rupinder Singh ha" al"o tried to "a) that Ravdeep Kaur ha" *on#e""ed 'e#ore hi$ that "he had re*eived two

telephoni* *all" on 1;.10.2001 #ro$ Man it Singh 'ut the *all detail" A..P-229 and A..P-2;0 de$oli"he" the *a"e o# the pro"e*ution. -he peru"al o# A..P-229 "how"

that there wa" a out going *all #ro$ telephone nu$'er 98880;/099 and in *o$ing *all in A..P-2;0 whi*h i" o# telephone appeared nu$'er in the 988809/099. witne"" 'o. 4ad he Muni"h would Sriva"tava have 'een

*on#ronted with hi" earlier "tate$ent a" hi" "tate$ent ran *ontradi*tor) to A..P-229 and A..P-2;0. Both the"e

telephone" were with the #a$il) o# Ravdeep Kaur and had 'een tal&ing with ea*h other. -hu", the *all detail"

A..P-229 and A..P-2;0 ha" de$oli"hed the *a"e o# the pro"e*ution. 121. *oun"el -he ne.t li$' o# argu$ent o# learned de#en*e i" that a" nur"e" have 'een li"ted a"

pro"e*ution witne""e" at "erial nu$'er 29, 28, ;0, ;1 and ;2 who are alleged to have 'een wor&ing in Ravi 4o"pital 'ut none o# the$ have 'een e.a$ined ') the pro"e*ution. -he) were the i$portant witne""e" to

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

187

depo"e

a'out -he

the

vi"it

o#

Man it thu",

Singh with

to held

Ravi the

4o"pital.

pro"e*ution

ha"

$aterial eviden*e and an adver"e in#eren*e i" lia'le to 'e ta&en again"t it. 122. 7t i" #urther argued that P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh

! 3a&hi told whatever he allege" to have 'een told to hi$ ') %i a) Singh de*ea"ed, thi" "tate$ent doe" not #all within the a$'it o# Se*tion ;2 o# Aviden*e A*t a" the *ir*u$"tan*e" narrated doe" not lead to *au"e o# death and i" not part o# to the *au"e tran"a*tion". o# death $u"t -he 'e 4ad the

*ir*u$"tan*e"

relating

i$$ediate 'ut there i" no "u*h thing in thi" *a"e. the allegation" o# pro"e*ution 'een true then

*on"pira*) $ight have 'een hat*hed ') Ravdeep Kaur to do awa) with <eepinder Kaur and not a per"on with who$ he wanted to get her"el# re$arried. -he pro"e*ution

ha" not proved an) eviden*e that Ravdeep Kaur u"ed to "end dirt) $e""age" to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -he

$e""age" are "tored in $o'ile and the $o'ile detail o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed *ould have 'een o'tained to prove thi" #a*t. No "u*h e##ort" were $ade ') the

pro"e*ution whi*h lead" to the *on*lu"ion that i# "u*h *all detail" were 'rought on re*ord, the"e would have gone again"t the pro"e*ution. -here i" not a "ingle

*all detail on the #ile whi*h $ight reveal that Ravdeep

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

188

Kaur had tal&ed with %i a) Singh. !3a&hi ha" al"o alleged that

P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh 1B $onth" prior to

1;.10.2001 he had "een Ravdeep Kaur "itting in a *ar 'earing No. PB11-N-0110 with Man it Singh and "he wa" hinting %i a) Singh and telling "o$ething. 4e ha"

#urther alleged that he had "een Man it Singh roa$ing in Polo ,round twi*e at odd hour". 4e had #urther

depo"ed that he had $ade en>uire" that he wa" regular vi"itor to Ravi 4o"pital and wa" a re"ident o# village Shei&hupura and hi" ante*edent" were not good. -he

"tate$ent o# thi" witne"" *annot 'e 'elieved a" he ha" "tated during hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that he had rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital i$$ediatel) on *o$ing to &now o# $urder o# %i a) Singh and re$ained in the hou"e o# %i a) Singh during the da) and had gone with the #a$il) o# %i a) Singh to Kiratpur Sahi' ne.t da). not di"*lo"e an)thing to the But thi" witne"" did poli*e a'out a**u"ed

Man it Singh on the da) o# o**urren*e.

4e ha" "tated

in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that it did not "tri&e hi" $ind that Man it Singh ha" $urdered hi$ and #or that rea"on he did not diverged an)thing to an)'od). "tate$ent wa" re*orded ') the poli*e on 19.10.2001. &ept "ilent #or three da)". 4i" 4e

4e ha" tried to e.plain

the dela) "a)ing that hi" #ather-in-law #ell ill and a" "u*h, in the evening o# 11.10.2001 he le#t #or village

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

189

<hanaula and *a$e 'a*& to Patiala on the ne.t da) at a'out 8/9+00 p.$. 4e ha" #urther "tated that when he

rea*hed village <hanaula, hi" #ather-in-law wa" alread) di"*harged and there wa" no "eriou" pro'le$ with hi$ whi*h "how" that in#a*t he ha" tried to give a #al"e e.planation a'out the dela) in getting hi" "tate$ent re*orded. that Man it 7# thi" witne"" wa" aware a'out the #a*t Singh i" a $an o# 'ad *hara*ter and

#ollowing %i a) Singh de*ea"ed then wh) he had not told the"e #a*t" to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed or an) o# hi"

#a$il) $e$'er.

-hi" witne"", thu", ha" 'een introdu*ed

to *reate a #al"e eviden*e. 12;. 3earned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued that

the "tate$ent $ade ') P@-;: <eepinder Kaur with regard to the $otive i" o# inad$i""i'le Se*tion ;2 in o# eviden*e the 'eing in

*ontravention

Aviden*e

A*t,

whether Ravdeep Kaur wanted to $arr) %i a) Singh 'e#ore her $arriage o# *ould onl) 'e told ') who 5ana$ eet wa" *ited Kaur, a" a

$other

%i a)

Singh

de*ea"ed

witne"" 'ut ha" not 'een e.a$ined.

7# Ravdeep Kaur had

ever *o$e to the 'outi>ue o# <eepinder Kaur, "he $u"t have "old "o$e *lothe" to her and $u"t have i""ued the 'ill" 'ut no "u*h re*ord ha" 'een relied upon. She ha"

#urther a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur o# $a&ing phone *all" to her hou"e 'ut no "u*h re*ord ha" 'een produ*ed. No

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

190

re*ord o# alleged o'"*ene SMS ha" al"o 'een pla*ed on #ile. No $onth" and )ear" have 'een "pe*i#i*all) P@-;: had

$entioned with regard to the alleged in*ident. #urther ad$itted that 2hie# Mini"ter, Pun a'

vi"ited her hou"e and new" wa" pu'li"hed in new"paper dated 1:.10.2001 A..<-A. "he had "een the new" She ha" #urther ad$itted that in F2hardi Kalan <ail)F on

18.10.2001 whi*h i" A..<-? wherein it i" pu'li"hed that I-een <ar an -o %adh (*h ,haraane <e Aurtan Nal Sa'andh <a Khula"aJ. She ha" #eigned her ignoran*e that "he

had no &nowledge a'out the #a*t that three do=en ladie" were 'eing interrogated a" "u"pe*t" in *onne*tion with $urder o# her hu"'and. *hara*ter o# %i a) Singh. <eepinder paper. Kaur or hi" -he"e new" ite$" "how" the No a*tion wa" ta&en ') P@-;: again"t the "aid New"

#a$il)

7n#a*t, "he ha" 'een in"tru$ental in #al"el)

i$pli*ating the a**u"ed. 12/. re*orded 7t i" #urther <<R No. 1/ argued that the *o$plaint ') Narain

vide

A..P-2;1

lodged

Singh wa" not properl) in>uired a" it wa" again"t the wi#e, $other and 5udi*ial 6##i*er hi$"el#. -he poli*e

did not regi"ter an) ?7R de"pite the #a*t that the o##en*e wa" *ogni=an*e. P@-;: <eepinder Kaur had a

$i"apprehen"ion that the "aid *o$plaint wa" got lodged ') Ravdeep Kaur. AS7 Ra$ Ki"han,P@-1; wa" the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

191

inve"tigating 6##i*er o# the "aid en>uir) and M3R o# Narain Singh Mar&-<? ha" 'een put to hi$, he denied to have re*orded o# the "tate$ent Singh Kaur o# an) witne""e". a -he grudge wa" her

#a$il) again"t "ervant.

%i a)

de*ea"ed

nuri"hed Singh

Ravdeep

'e*au"e

Narain

So the) no$inated Ravdeep Kaur a" an a**u"ed

and 'rought #orward Man it Singh a" *o-a**u"ed *reating a #al"e eviden*e o# *on"pira*). 121. 7t i" #urther argued that on 18.10.2001 a *a"e

wa" al"o got regi"tered again"t <al it Singh Bahia, #ather o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur under Prevention o#

2orruption A*t and variou" other provi"ion" o# 7P2 at the in"tan*e o# Banar"i <a"", <SP %igilan*e Bureau, Patiala, the *op) o# the ?7R i" A..<-A2. on the 'a"i" o# a *o$plaint )ear" 'a*&. -he ?7R wa"

and o**urren*e o# a'out 21

<r. R.S.Mann, hu"'and o# Ravdeep Kaur wa" 4er

po"ted at Na'ha and wa" in ,overn$ent Servi*e.

#ather wa" involved in thi" *a"e "o that the *a"e o# Ravdeep Kaur *ould not 'e pur"ued. 12:. 7t i" #urther argued that the 7nve"tigating

6##i*er o# thi" *a"e P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh ha" "hown a #al"e re*over) o# &irpan on the alleged

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent o# a**u"ed Man it Singh and to prove the re*over) o# &irpan, Singh, the P@-;9 pro"e*ution Kri"han ha"

e.a$ined

P@-11

4ar'an"

Ku$ar,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

192

P@-/9 Singh.

7n"pe*tor P@-11

5a""a 4ar'an"

Singh Singh

and who

P@-11 i" a

AS7

,ur$ail and

diver

allegedl) ta&en out the &irpan #ro$ the ,anda Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra 2anal #ro$ ,hanour to village Sarala Road near S)phon in #ront o# Ki&&ar tree. -hi" witne""

i" re"ident o# Ropar and ha" ad$itted in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination at page three that ,hanour i" at a di"tan*e o# 121 &ilo$eter" #ro$ Ropar. a'out 11/12+00 noon. -he) rea*hed ,hanour at

At page "i. he ha" #urther "tated

that "o$e poli*e per"on" *a$e to hi$ with $e""age that he wa" *alled ') S46, Ropar and went to Ropar Poli*e Station at a'out 10+00 a.$. P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a

Singh at page 9 o# hi" *ro"" e.a$ination *ondu*ted on 12.12.2008 ha" "tated that he had le#t 27A Sta## at 10/10+;0 a.$. and wa" a**o$panied ') 9/8 poli*e

o##i*ial" in*luding AS7 ,ur$ail Singh and 42 4ari 2hand #or re*over) o# the "word and the "aid pla*e i" at a di"tan*e o# 2;/2/ &ilo$eter" #ro$ 27A Sta##, Patiala. 4e ha" #urther "tated that a#ter oining photographer,

$ovie $a&er and diver, the) rea*hed Bha&hra 2anal at 12+;0 or 1+00 p.$. 4e ha" #urther "tated that the

diver" were *alled through S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar ') $a&ing a telephone *all to hi$. 4e #urther *all to

"tated that at a'out 9/9+;0 a.$. he $ade a

S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar #or the "aid purpo"e, "o

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

193

a" per hi" ver"ion, the di"*lo"ure "tate$ent $u"t have 'een $ade prior to 9/9+;0 a.$. At page 11 o# hi" *ro""

e.a$ination, he ha" #urther depo"ed that Man it Singh wa" got $edi*o legall) e.a$ined ') 42 ,ur$ail Singh on 19.10.2001 in the $orning and he had #urther "tated that Man it Singh had ta&en out #ro$ poli*e lo*& up a#ter re*ording <<R at 9+01 a.$. A" per *a"e diar)

=i$ni No. A dated 19.10.2001, a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" "ent to the ho"pital #or $edi*al e.a$ination and he *a$e 'a*& a#ter getting $edi*al e.a$ination *ondu*ted. AS7 ,ur$ail Singh, P@-11 who alleged to have gone along with Man it Singh #or hi" $edi*al e.a$ination at 9+;0 a.$. and i" alleged to have 'een returned at 10+11 a.$. 4e ha" #urther "tated that therea#ter, he interrogated a**u"ed Man it Singh and at 10+;0 a.$. re*orded hi" "tate$ent under Se*tion 29 o# the Aviden*e A*t. 7# the

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent ha" 'een $ade at 10+;0 a.$., then how 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh *ould telephone S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar a"&ing hi$ to "end diver to ,hanour at 9/9+;0 a.$. P@-;1 <r. Moni&a had "tated that on

19.10.2001 at 10+;1 a.$. "he *ondu*ted $edi*o legal e.a$ination o# Man it Singh. A..P-111. -he *op) o# the M3R i"

7n her *ro"" e.a$ination "he ha" "tated that

"he had re#erred the patient to Ra inder 4o"pital #or L-ra) and #urther Manage$ent on 19.10.2001 at 11+00

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

194

a.$. and a" per L-ra) report Man it Singh wa" L-ra)ed at Ra indra 4o"pital on 19.10.2001. have 'een *on"u$ed to rea*h -hu", ti$e $u"t 4o"pital,

Ra indra

*onta*ting the do*tor" there and getting the patient Lra)ed and therea#ter, Man it Singh *ould have 'een

'rought to 27A Sta##.

P@-11 AS7 ,ur$ail Singh had At page #ive o# hi" 09.0;.2009, he had

put#orth entirel) a new ver"ion. *ro"" e.a$ination *ondu*ted on

"tated that on that da) he le#t 27A Sta## at 9+01 a.$. #or produ*ing a**u"ed Man it Singh in the 2ourt and got hi" poli*e re$and. 4e wa" produ*ed 'e#ore the

Magi"trate at 10+11 a.$. and therea#ter, he along with a**u"ed Man it Singh rea*hed 27A Sta## at a'out 10+12 a.$. At a'out 12/12+01 p.$. 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh,

Man it Singh and ,ur$ail Singh rea*hed -own ,hanour #or re*over) o# Kirpan. di"*lo"ure "tate$ent 4e ha" #urther "tated that the a'out Kirpan wa" re*orded on

return #ro$ 2ourt to 27A Sta##, Patiala at 11+00 a.$. -hu", the te"ti$on) o# the a#ore"aid witne""e" goe" to "how *ould that not the have di"*lo"ure 'een "tate$ent prior o# to Man it 11H00 Singh a.$.

re*orded

wherea", P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh had alread) $ade a *all to S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar at 9/9+;0 a.$. -hi" goe" to "how that P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh had alread) $ade up hi" $ind to "*ri'e a di"*lo"ure

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

195

"tate$ent, #i.ed pla*e o# re*over) o# hi" own, *alled the diver" o# and therea#ter, Man it re*orded Singh. the At di"*lo"ure 9+;0 a.$.

"tate$ent

a**u"ed

7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh *ould not #ore"ee at all that Man it Singh would $a&e a di"*lo"ure "tate$ent at 11+00 a.$. and a 2anal would 'e di"*lo"ed ') hi$ a" a pla*e where the Kirpan wa" thrown. 7n#a*t, no di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent had 'een "u##ered ') a**u"ed Man it Singh. P@-;9 Kri"han Ku$ar, photographer in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# depo"ed the date o# re*over) o# the Kirpan a" 20.10.2001. even in 4e wa" de*lared ho"tile on thi" point 'ut *ro"" e.a$ination ') learned Pu'li*

hi"

Pro"e*utor #or the State, he ha" "tu*& to the date o# re*over) *are#ull) a" 20.10.2001. there 7# i" a the photograph" are

"*reened,

photograph

A..P-12;

"howing a rope i" going into the 2anal water #ro$ the end whi*h i" ad$itted ') P@-;9 Kri"han Ku$ar. -hu", it

"how" that in#a*t, there wa" no Kirpan in the 2anal and it wa" ta&en ') the diver hi$"el#. Moreover, P@-11

4ar'an" Singh alleged to have dived into the river and *a$e out with the Kirpan in the #ir"t atte$pt. -he

video i" alleged to have 'een prepared ') So$ Nath who ha" not 'een e.a$ined. No independent witne"" ha" 'een -he

a""o*iated while getting the re*over) e##e*ted.

Kirpan i" ea"il) availa'le in the $ar&et and a" "u*h,

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

196

ha" 'een planted upon a**u"ed Man it Singh.

7# the

"tate$ent re*orded under Se*tion 29 o# the Aviden*e A*t i" #ound to 'e #al"e, the *on"e>uent a*t o# re*over) ha" no value. 7n "upport o# hi" *ontention" he ha"

relied upon the authorit) o# Hon'ble High Court of Punjab

& Haryana in *a"e titled 5hushia alias 4a((y Vs. State of )unja , 2$$7, Vol. 77, Cri&inal Court Cases 1$1$ wherein it
i" o'"erved that "in*e re*over) o# arti*le" wa"

e##e*ted on the 'a"i" o# di"*lo"ure "tate$ent #ive da)" a#ter the da) to o# $urder one #ro$ and the river whi*h the i"

a**e""i'le

ever)

there#ore,

"aid

"tate$ent *ould not 'e u"ed a" to #a"ten the guilt. 129. 7t i" #urther argued ') learned de#en*e

*oun"el that a #a&e re*over) o# R"./ 3a*" ha" 'een "hown #ro$ the 4ar$oniu$ o# a**u"ed Man it Singh on 20.10.2001 in pur"uan*e o# the alleged di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent o# a**u"ed Man it Singh.

P@-11 AS7 ,ur$ail

Singh at "e*ond page o# hi" e.a$ination in *hie# ha" "tated that he along with 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh had re*eived a "e*ret in#or$ation and it wa" told that

Man it Singh i" riding hi" vehi*le -A-A 209 and i" going #ro$ the "ide o# Ra indra 4o"pital toward"

Sangrur *arr)ing in the "aid vehi*le all the luggage $eant #or &irtan in*luding 4ar$oniu$, 'ut there i" no re#eren*e o# 4ar$oniu$ in the re*over) $ade #ro$ the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

197

"aid vehi*le whi*h $ean" that when the 4ar$oniu$ wa" in -A-A 209 how the re*over) o# R". / 3a*" #ro$ the

4ar$oniu$ *an 'e $ade #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. -he di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-198 o# a**u"ed

Man it Singh 'ear" the "ignature" o# 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh 'ut he ha" #ailed to di"*lo"e a" to in who"e hand thi" "tate$ent wa" re*orded. Singh ha" "tated in hi" *ro"" P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a e.a$ination that the

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-198 wa" written while "itting in -ra. vehi*le 'ut he did not re$e$'er when thi"

"tate$ent wa" written, however, it wa" evening ti$e. 7t i" $o"t unnatural that the a**u"ed would $a&e

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent in a $oving vehi*le while 'eing ta&en to the 2ourt pre$i"e" "ee&ing hi" poli*e re$and. 7t i" #urther argued that there wa" alread) a

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent o# 19.10.2001, then there wa" no rea"on #or P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh to #urther

interrogated Man it Singh in the $orning o# 20.10.2001 in"tead o# getting the re*over) e##e*ted o# the alread) re*orded di"*lo"ure "tate$ent a da) prior. to the onl) *on*lu"ion that in#a*t on -hi" lead" wa" no No

there

di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent

$ade

19.10.2001.

independent witne"" wa" re*over).

oined at the ti$e o# alleged

-he hou"e o# Man it Singh i" "ituated in

village having "urrounding o# variou" hou"e" whi*h i"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

198

u"t near the Pun a'i (niver"it).

-hu", there i" *lear 7t ha" 'een held

violation o# Se*tion 100 D/E 2r.P.2.

in 3sho0 5u&ar Vs. State, 19**(1) RCR %25 that 'e#ore $a&ing the "ear*h, the o##i*er "hall 'e dut) 'ound to *all upon two or $ore independent and re"pe*ta'le

inha'itant" o# the lo*alit) where the pla*e i" to 'e "ear*hed. 7t ha" 'een #urther held that thi" Se*tion re>uire" a hone"t e##ort on the part o# the o##i*er in*harge o# the "ear*h and to "e*ure the pre"en*e "hould o# go

re"pe*ta'le

witne""

the"e

provi"ion"

"tringent and $eant to 'e "tri*tl) #ollowed in a" $u*h a" re#u"al or negle*t to oin the "ear*h ') the witne""

when *all upon to do "o, $a&e out an o##en*e under Se*tion 189 o# 7P2. 7t wa" a *a"e under Se*tion ;02

7P2 and the "ear*h wa" alleged to have 'een $ade a" per di"*lo"ure "tate$ent. -hu", the $andator) provi"ion"

have not 'een #ollowed at the ti$e o# "ear*h whi*h goe" again"t the pro"e*ution. he ha" relied 7n upon "upport the o# hi" o#

*ontention",

authoritie"

Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in *a"e

Rattan Vs. State of )unja , 19*+(1) RCR %$5.

o# 'oth the"e witne""e", the hou"e o# Man it Singh wa"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

199

open and one lad) wa" pre"ent in the hou"e.

-he pla*e

where the 4ar$oniu$ wa" l)ing wa" vi"i'le on entering the roo$ and thi" roo$ wa" al"o open. the one roo$ wa" *ondu*ted, -he "ear*h o# no other

however,

in*ri$ination arti*le i" alleged to have 'een re*overed in"pite o# "ear*h. -he 4ar$oniu$ had not 'een "ealed.

Moreover, a $ere allegation o# re*over) o# $one) i" not an in*ri$inating "u'"tan*e. 129. -he ne.t li$' o# argu$ent o# learned de#en*e

*oun"el i" that P@-1: <SP Sewa Singh ha" "tated in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# that he *alled the photographer, $ovie $a&er and other" and therea#ter, he i" alleged to have e.a$ined the dead 'od) and #ound 20/21 in urie". -he de*ea"ed wa" having "o$e hair in hi" right hand whi*h were put in the pla"ti* 'ag and "ealed. 7t i"

not $entioned in the ?7R that there were hair in the right hand o# in the the de*ea"ed in>ue"t nor thi" #a*t ha" 'een P@-9

$entioned

pro*eeding"

A..P-K.

Satinder Singh in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination at page "i. *ondu*ted on 2;.02.2009 ha" ad$itted that the re*over) o# hair had alread) ta&en pla*e prior to the in>ue"t pro*eeding". 4ad the hair reall) 'een in the hand" o#

de*ea"ed then it would *ertainl) #ind $entioned in the in>ue"t pro*eeding" A..P-K. hair in "tate$ent A..P-A o# -here i" no $ention o# Shiv Ra Singh. -he

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

200

photograph

A..P-2//1

to

A..P-2/1/

ta&en

')

P@-/

42

<il'agh Singh al"o doe" not depi*t" hair in the hand o# de*ea"ed. P@-/ ha" #urther "tated that the hand" o#

de*ea"ed were in the pant" at the o# photograph, "o the) do not #igure in the photograph ') the 7.6. and $aterial thing" having alread) 'een re$oved. P@-9 42

,ur inder Singh ha" denied o# having video graphed the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -he video 2< ha"

'een with held ') the pro"e*ution 'e*au"e it did not "upport the pro"e*ution ver"ion o# having the hair in the right hand o# de*ea"ed. P@-9 ,ur inder Singh,

Movie Ma&er had ad$itted that he had prepared the $ovie at the "pot, that o# dead 'od) at A$ar 4o"pital and al"o at the ti$e o# po"t$orte$. 7n $e$o A..P-?/1 it

ha" 'een $entioned that P@-9 ,ur inder Singh, Movie Ma&er had prepared the $ovie at the "pot, o# the dead 'od) l)ing in A$ar 4o"pital, o# the $ortuar) and the po"t$orte$ e.a$ination. -hu", i# ,ur inder Singh P@-9

had not %ideo graph the dead 'od) then wh) he had gone to A$ar 4o"pital, Patiala. -he onl) in#eren*e i" that

the %ideo 2< i" with held 'e*au"e the de*ea"ed wa" not having an) hair in hi" hand and i# the $ovie had 'een produ*ed, it would have de$oli"hed the entire

*ir*u$"tan*e. Singh in hi"

7t i" #urther argued that P@-2 Shiv Ra "tate$ent A..P-A ha" not $ade an)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

201

re#eren*e o# the hair in the hand o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. 7# the hair had 'een ta&en into po""e""ion ')

7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh DP@-1:E then how he got it o$itted to $ention the "aid #a*t in A..P-A whi*h "how" that on e.a$ination o# the 'od) there were no hair. 7t i"

#urther argued that a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" arre"ted on 18.10.2001 wherea", the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) report A..P-292 reveal" that the par*el *ontaining hair wa" re*eived in ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh on 19.10.2001 through 2. 5a winder Singh. P@-;; 2. 5a winder Singh ha" "tated in hi" a##idavit A..P-99 that he ha" ta&en the "a$ple to ?oren"i*

S*ien*e 3a'orator) on 18.10.2001 'ut it wa" returned on that da) with an o' e*tion. 7n hi" *ro"" e.a$ination

he ha" "tated that the o' e*tion wa" that the *op) o# the ?7R wa" not legi'le. wa" not even -he re>uired ?oren"i* 7n#a*t, the *op) o# the ?7R ') the ?oren"i* 3a'orator) S*ien*e report

3a'orator).

S*ien*e

doe" not depi*t an) o' e*tion alleged to 'e $ade on 18.10.2001. 4air are alleged to have 'een ta&en in

po""e""ion on the intervening night o# 1;/1/.10.2001 'ut no e.planation ha" 'een given a" to wh) it wa" not "ent i$$ediatel) to ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator). 6n

18.10.2001 the hair alleged to have 'een re*overed #ro$ the hand o# de*ea"ed, were &ept in Poli*e Station 2ivil

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

202

3ine" and the a**u"ed wa" al"o lodged in the poli*e "tation. -he "eal wa" al"o with the inve"tigating

o##i*er o# the *a"e. depo"it o# the *a"e

-here i" no <<R "howing the propert) 'a*& to the Mal&hana

*on"e>uent upon the o' e*tion o# the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) on 18.10.2001. -hu", it goe" to "how that

neither the par*el *ontaining alleged hair wa" ta&en out or depo"ited 'a*& on 18.10.2001. A" "tated ')

P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal when he "aw the a**u"ed in the night o# 1;.10.2001 *o$ing out o# the Polo ,round, he wa" wearing a Parna on hi" head and tur'an whi*h "how" that the hair o# the head *ould not 'e in the hand" o# de*ea"ed a" the head wa" *overed with Parna and -ur'an. No "a$ple o# hair o# 'eard wa" ta&en.

-here i" a di##erent with regard to the nature o# hair o# head and 'eard. 7n "upport o# hi" *ontention he ha"

relied upon the authorit) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e titled Ja#ta Vs. State of 4aryana, 37R 197+ SC

15+5 wherein it i" o'"erved that in>ue"t pro*eeding" i"

$entioned in the in>ue"t pro*eeding" 'ut "u*h i$portant *ir*u$"tan*e ha" 'een le#t out whi*h "how" that there wa" no hair in the hand o# de*ea"ed. -he report o# No <NA

?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) i" al"o ver) vague.

te"t ha" 'een got *ondu*ted whi*h i" the onl) te"t

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

203

whi*h *ould deter$ine that the "aid hair 'elonged to the "a$e per"on. per the guide -he hair have al"o not 'een ta&en a" i""ued #or ?oren"i* 4u$an 4air

line"

e.a$ination.

-hu", the pro"e*ution to *onne*t a**u"ed

Man it Singh with the alleged o##en*e ha" "hown a #al"e *ir*u$"tan*e o# having hair in the right hand o#

de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. 1;0. 7t i" #urther argued that the pro"e*ution ha"

al"o planted a S7M *ard having $o'ile nu$'er 988809/099 upon a**u"ed Man it Singh. -he re*over) #ro$ the hou"e

o# the a**u"ed Man it Singh ha" alread) 'een $ade on 20.10.2001 "tate$ent. the hou"e in pur"uan*e o# the alleged di"*lo"ure

-hu", had there 'een an) S7M on that da) in o# Man it Singh, it "hould have 'een

re*overed on that da) onl).

No independent witne"" wa"

oined ') the pro"e*ution at the ti$e o# re*over) o# the "aid S7M in violation o# the provi"ion o# Se*tion 100D/E o# 2r.P.2. -he pro"e*ution ha" al"o alleged

that a $o'ile phone No&ia ;220 wa" al"o re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# the a**u"ed. P@-21 Narinder Ku$ar

who "old the "aid $o'ile to Man it Singh ha" proved the 'ill A..P-101. -he 7MA7 nu$'er o# thi" $o'ile i"

;1;980008919102.

A$it Ku$ar P@-;2 ha" "tated in hi"

*ro"" e.a$ination that #ro$ 7MA7 nu$'er and the S7M *ard, $o'ile nu$'er *an 'e identi#ied. 4e ha" #urther

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

204

ad$itted that to &now that i# a parti*ular "et i" u"ed on a parti*ular date, it *an onl) 'e identi#ied #ro$ 7MA7 nu$'er o# the "et 'ut the *all detail" A..P-229 and A..P-2;0 reveal" that the telephone "et having the "aid 7MA7 nu$'er wa" never u"ed. wa" -hu", never the u"ed S7M in

'earing

$o'ile

nu$'er

988809/099

$o'ile phone No&ia ;220.

-he re*over) o# the "aid

$o'ile phone alleged to have 'een $ade #ro$ a**u"ed Man it Singh i" thu", o# no help to the pro"e*ution. 1;1. 7t i" #urther argued that the "hoe" allegedl)

re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur have not 'een proved to 'e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. A" per the

pro"e*ution ver"ion there were hu$an 'lood on the "aid "hoe" 'ut that doe" not $ean that the 'lood on the "hoe" wa" o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. -he 'lood group ha"

not 'een even $entioned in ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) report A..P-29;. -he hu$an 'lood o# F6F group wa"

#ound on --"hirt, pent, 'elt, underwear, pair o# "o*&", pair o# "hoe" and pat&a 'ut there i" no eviden*e that the 'lood group o# the de*ea"ed or a**u"ed i" F6F. Moreover, the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) i"

inad$i""i'le a" it doe" not *o$pl) with the provi"ion" o# Se*tion 29; o# 2r.P.2. 7t i" the report #ro$

S*ienti#i* 6##i*er DSerolog)E and the de"ignation o# the "aid per"on i" not $entioned therein.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

205

1;2.

7t

i"

#urther

argued

')

learned

de#en*e

*oun"el that P@-/9 5a""a Singh ha" a re*ord o# tainted inve"tigation". 4e regi"tered a *a"e vide ?7R No. /9

dated 0/.0;.2001 under Se*tion ;99, /00, /02, 1/8, 1/9 7P2 again"t ,ur$u&h Singh, Ka&a Singh, 5a"'ir Singh, Pala Singh, Avtar Singh ! -ari and other". the -he 2ourt 4i" o#

"tate$ent 3earned

A..<-4 Se""ion"

wa"

re*orded

'e#ore

5udge,

Kapurthala.

learned

Se""ion" 5udge a*>uitted the a**u"ed in the "aid *a"e and "tri*ture" have 'een pa""ed again"t P@-/9 5a""a Singh 'e*au"e he lodged a #al"e *a"e to help hi"

relation". 'rought again"t the

<@-11 Para$ it Singh, Re*ord Keeper had #ile in whi*h #or "tri*ture" were pa""ed ,ur$u&h

5a""a

Singh

#al"el)

i$pli*ating

Singh et*. A..<-AL

<@-19 <eepa& Singh ha" proved the report ') the then Additional <eput)

$ade

2o$$i""ioner, Roop Nagar again"t P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh. <@-1 42 ,ur$u&h Singh proved on re*ord the ?7R

No. /9 dated 0/.0;.2001 A..<A-7 re*orded under Se*tion" ;99, /00, /02 7P2 at poli*e Station Ra pura. -hi"

witne"" #urther proved the *op) o# ?7R No. 1/9 dated 19.09.2001 A..<-A5 re*orded under Se*tion" ;02, 201

7P2, Poli*e Station Sadar, Ra pura.

<@-9 42 Su&hdev

Singh #urther proved the ?7R No. 1/8 dated 19.09.200/ A..<-A3 re*orded under Se*tion ;02 o# 7P2 and <@-9 42

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

206

Ra$ Ku$ar proved the *op) o# ?7R No. 9 dated 09.01.200; A..<-AN re*orded under Se*tion ;02 o# 7P2. were 5a""a regi"tered Singh at the in"tan*e the o# P@-/9 -he"e ?7R" 7n"pe*tor 'een

wherein

a**u"ed

have

di"*harged/a*>uitted. o# #orgerie" and

7n the pre"ent *a"e al"o a lot have 4e 'een ha" *o$$itted te$perred ') the

padding

7n"pe*tor

5a""a

Singh

P@-/9.

re*over) $e$o A..P-10: o# the $o'ile phone No&ia ;220. 4e ha" #urther te$pered with the "ite plan A..P-22:, the re*over) $e$o o# the 'lood "tained *lothe" A..P-82, the re*over) $e$o o# the 'o. o# phone No&ia ;220

A..P-189 and the"e alteration" have 'een dul) proved ') <@-21 Navdeep ,upta, 4and @riting A.pert. 4e ha" al"o

#orged the "ignature" o# P@-11 4ar'an" Singh on A..P-R, the "ignature o# P@-11 AS7 ,ur$ail Singh on A..P-191, A..P-189, A..P-191, A..P-211 and A..P-219. o# 4ari 2hand on A..P-12:, A..P-181, Signature" A..P-188,

A..P-199, A..P-212 and A..P-218 and the "ignature" on the a#ore"aid e.hi'it" doe" not tall) with their

ad$itted "ignature" on *o$pari"on o# the e.hi'it" ') <@-21 Navdeep ,upta. P@-1: Shavinder Singh 4e ha" al"o #al"el) introdu*ed ,rewal a" a *han*e witne"".

P@-1: wa" &nown to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

A" ad$itted

in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that he wa" *la"" $ate o# %i a) Singh in B.A. ?inal a" well a" in 3aw. %i a)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

207

Singh de*ea"ed al"o re$ained po"ted a"

udi*ial o##i*er

at Na'ha where thi" witne"" wa" a pra*ti*ing law)er. 7n "upport o# hi" *ontention he had relied upon the authorit) o# Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e 2uli

Chan. Vs. State of Rajasthan 37R 197+ SC 27' wherein it

witne""e" although, $a) not 'e ne*e""aril) #al"e 'ut to rel) upon hi$ i" pro'a'l) un"a#e. upon the authorit) o# 4e #urther relied

Hon'ble Supreme Court in *a"e

"ahhal Sin#h Vs. State of 4aryana, 37R 197' SC 2$%2

o**urren*e

*alled

*han*e

witne""

per"on i" relative or #riend o# the vi*ti$ then hi" 'eing a *han*e witne"" ha" to 'e "een with "u"pi*ion. Su*h a pie*e o# eviden*e re>uire" *autiou" and *lo"e "*rutin). -hi" witne"" wa" al"o pre"ent in the

ho"pital at ;+00 a.$. on the da) o# o**urren*e and thi" #a*t ha" 'een ad$itted ') P@-1: <SP Sewa Singh in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination 'ut thi" witne"" did not di"*lo"e an)thing to the poli*e that he had "een one per"on *o$ing out o# the Polo ,round on a $otor *)*le having 'lood "tain" on hi" *lothe". Khanna ha" not "hown an) Moreover, P@-;0 7ndre"h wall in "ite plan

'ro&en

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

208

A..P-11; whi*h $a&e" the te"ti$on) o# P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal dou't#ul 'e*au"e he had "tated that

a**u"ed wa" "een *o$ing on $otor *)*le #ro$ the "ide o# 'ro&en wall o# the Polo ,round. -he photograph o#

a**u"ed Man it Singh had 'een "hown in new"paper and on -.%. 2hannel" on 19.10.2001 'ut thi" witne"" did not di"*lo"e an)thing to the poli*e and #a$il) $e$'er" o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed that he had "een the "aid per"on on the night o# 1;.10.2001. P@-1: Sewa Singh had al"o

not *onta*ted P@-1: "o a" to veri#) i# Man it Singh wa" the "a$e per"on who had 'een "een ') hi$ on that night. No identi#i*ation parade o# a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" *ondu*ted a#ter hi" arre"t. -hu", the identi#i*ation

o# the a**u"ed #ir"t ti$e in the 2ourt ha" no value. P@-1: ha" al"o not di"*lo"ed the nu$'er, *olour and $a&e o# the $otor *)*le. -he whole *ro"" e.a$ination

o# P@-1: onl) reveal" one thing that he i" a #al"el) introdu*ed witne"" and it i" not proved that an) "u*h o**urren*e too& pla*e a" "tated ') hi$. 1;;. -he learned de#en*e *oun"el #urther argued

that P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha" *ondu*ted a tainted inve"tigation and *reated #al"e *ir*u$"tan*e. P@-;:

<eepinder Kaur *lai$" that "he had di"*lo"ed the na$e o# Ravdeep Kaur to hi$ on 1/.10.2001 'ut he doe" not "a) that he had ta&en an) a*tion again"t Ravdeep Kaur

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

209

till

1:.10.2001. the

4e

ha" o#

#urther Satinder

"tated Singh

that Se&hon

he !

re*orded

"tate$ent

2hanni and San a) Kapila on 19.10.2001 'ut there i" no "u*h "tate$ent o# Satinder Singh Se&hon ! 2hanni o# 19.10.2001 rather the "a$e i" o# 1/.10.2001. A" per

eviden*e #oot print" were li#ted 'ut he doe" not tal& o# an) #oot print". 4e ha" #ailed to give an) rea"on 7n

a" to wh) the #oot print" have 'een withheld.

report under Se*tion 19; 2r.P.2. he had $entioned the na$e o# 4arpreet Singh a" a witne"" alleged to 'e "een handing over 'undle" o# *urren*) note" to Man it Singh ') Ravdeep Kaur near ,urudwara <u&hniwaran Sahi' 'ut hi" na$e doe" not #ind $entioned in the li"t o#

witne""e" rather hi" na$e i" "u'"tituted ') 5oginder Singh -on) who"e na$e i" not $entioned in the *hallan. 4e i" in the ha'it o# *ondu*ting 'ia"ed inve"tigation. 7n 2ivil @rit Petition No. /:;99-M #iled at the

in"tan*e o# Ran it Singh, the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' and 4ar)ana dire*ted hi$ and "o$e other poli*e o##i*ial" not to pro*eed with the #urther inve"tigation o# the *a"e ?7R No. /12 dated 0;.01.2001 'e*au"e there were allegation" o# un#air inve"tigation. thi", the "tri*ture" #or again"t to hi$ 'e wa" un#air Not onl) vide the

pa""ed during

udg$ent

A..<-M

tr)ing

inve"tigation o# the *a"e.

-he a**u"ed wa" a*>uitted

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

210

in thi" *a"e. 1;/. 7t i" #urther argued that the *ontention"

rai"ed a'ove lead" to an irre"i"ti'le *on*lu"ion that none o# the a**u"ed were involved in the *o$$i""ion o# o##en*e. -he pro"e*ution ha" tried to #or$ a *hain o# ') introdu*ing #al"e witne""e" and

*ir*u$"tan*e"

*reating #al"e eviden*e 'ut #ailed to prove it" *a"e 'e)ond rea"ona'le dou't. -he a**u"ed are thu", lia'le

to 'e a*>uitted o# the *harge" levelled again"t the$. 1;1. rival 7 have given $) an.iou" *on"ideration to the *ontention" o# the learned Spe*ial Pu'li*

Pro"e*utor #or the State and learned de#en*e *oun"el. 7 #ind no $erit in the *ontention" o# learned de#en*e *oun"el that the ?7R i" anti-ti$e. P@-1: Sewa Singh

ha" "tated that he re*eived the in#or$ation o# $urder o# %i a) Singh at 1+/0 a.$. in the intervening night o# 1;/1/.10.2001 and therea#ter, he rea*hed A$ar 4o"pital. 4e ha" $ade endor"e$ent A..P-2:9 on the "tate$ent A..PA o# P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh. 6n re*eiving new" o# $urder

o# %i a) Singh, the poli*e o##i*ial" were running in 'etween the pla*e o# o**urren*e i.e. Polo ,round and the A$ar 4o"pital where %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" ta&en a#ter the o**urren*e. -hu", *ertain *ontradi*tion" in

the ti$ing" narrated ') the poli*e o##i*ial" are 'ound to o**ur. -he Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

211

titled a" Vijay 8 Chinni Vs. State of ,a.hya )ra.esh

2$1$(%) RCR (Crl.) 795 ha" o'"erved that +While appreciating the evidence of a witness, minor discrepancies or trivial matters which do not affect the core of the prosecution case, may not prompt the Court to reject the evidence in its entirety. any An way undue Apparent details which do not in the credibility should not of be a witness to corrode

cannot be levelled as omissions or commissions. importance attached omissions, contradictions and discrepancies which do not go in to hurt the matter and shake the prosecution version. considered in The evidence of the witness of the circumstances. must be read as a whole and the cases are to be totality Mental capabilities of a human being cannot be e pected to be attuned to absorbe all the details. 7n the *a"e in hand the in*ident too& pla*e at Polo l)ing ,round, in wherea", dead 'od) o# the %i a) Singh o# wa" the

A$ar

4o"pital, agen*) wa"

thu", to

priorit) the

inve"tigating

*olle*t

eviden*e

availa'le at the "pot and at that ti$e the witne""e" *annot 'e e.pe*ted to note down the ti$ing" o# their pre"en*e at a parti*ular pla*e. -here $ight have 'een

a huge ru"h o# #riend" and relative" o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. P@-1: had ad$itted that the entire poli*e

$a*hiner) o# the <i"tri*t in*luding the <7, and 7, *a$e at the "pot. -hu", to e.plain the e.a*t ti$e o# ea*h

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

212

and ever) a*t per#or$ed at the that ti$e i" not hu$anl) po""i'le. Moreover, the di"*repan*ie" detailed ') the

learned de#en*e *oun"el do not e##e*t the *ore o# the pro"e*ution *a"e. 7t "tand" proved that %i a) Singh -hu",

wa" $urdered at a'out 10+;0 p.$. on 1;.10.2001.

an) *ontradi*tion with regard to the re*ording o# the endor"e$ent A..P-2:9 i" not "u##i*ient to "hatter the pro"e*ution *a"e. thi" *a"e i" -he another $o"t i$portant #a*tor in P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh, on who"e

that

"tate$ent the ?7R ha" 'een regi"tered, ha" not na$ed either o# the a**u"ed in hi" "tate$ent A..P-A. -hu",

even i# #or the "a&e o# argu$ent" it i" dee$ed to 'e *orre*t that the ?7R wa" anti-ti$ed, it ha" *au"ed no pre udi*e to the a**u"ed. 1;:. 7 al"o #ind no "u'"tan*e in the *ontention o#

learned de#en*e *oun"el that on 20.10.2001 SSP, Patiala i""ued dire*tion" vide A..<-AA to S46, 2ivil 3ine", Patiala to inve"tigate the $atter with regard to the *a"e" de*ided ') %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and there#ore, till 20.10.2001, there wa" no eviden*e again"t a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -he learned Spe*ial Pu'li* Pro"e*utor

#or the State during the *our"e o# argu$ent" *lari#ied thi" #a*t that thi" letter wa" not written on

20.10.2001. in di"pat*h

7t wa" written $u*h earlier and wa" l)ing whi*h wa" ulti$atel) di"pat*hed on

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

213

20.10.2001.

A**u"ed

Ravdeep

Kaur

wa"

arre"ted

on

18.10.2001, there#ore, an o##i*er o# the ran& o# Senior Superintendent o# Poli*e *annot *o$$it "u*h a 'lunder. Moreover, it al"o doe" not appeal to the *o$$on "en"e that when a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" arre"ted on

18.10.2001, the SSP, Patiala will write a letter on 20.10.2001 to the S46, Poli*e Station 2ivil 3ine",

Patiala to inve"tigate the $atter #ro$ another angle. 1;9. 7 do *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el

that a" per the *all detail A..P@-19/B o# the telephone o# de*ea"ed on %i a) Singh, hi" and telephone two *all" went o## at

22+;2+01

1;.10.2001

were

$ade

therea#ter, #ro$ thi" phone at 0/+12+01 and 0/+;1+01 on 1/.10.2001 'ut 7 #ind nothing unu"ual in it. phone wa" #ound l)ing di"$ental at the "pot. -hi" 7t wa"

re-arranged and i# an) *all wa" $ade ') an) poli*e o##i*ial to veri#) that whether thi" phone i" wor&ing doe" not *reate an) "u"pi*ion in pro"e*ution *a"e. 7t

i" not di"puted that the phone wa" l)ing di"-$ental at the "pot, there#ore, with regard to the ti$ing when thi" phone wa" ta&en into po""e""ion ') the poli*e i" i$$aterial. 1;8. -he another *ontention o# the learned de#en*e

*oun"el i" that three per"on" were "een at the pla*e o# o**urren*e in a 'la*& Bolero 5eep and one per"on wa"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

214

al"o

"een

running

#ro$

the

"pot

when

P@-9

Satinder

Singh Se&hon rea*hed at the "pot.

-he learned de#en*e

*oun"el ha" tried to rai"e a "u"pi*ion that %i a) Singh $ight have 'een $urdered ') the per"on" who were "een running in a Bolero 5eep and ') the other per"on who wa" al"o "een running #ro$ the pla*e o# o**urren*e. -hi" *ontention o# the learned de#en*e *oun"el #ind no #avour with hi$. A" per the pro"e*ution *a"e when the

o**urren*e too& pla*e %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" tal&ing on phone with -ina Martin, a ,er$an 2iti=en. @hen -ina

Martin heard the *r) o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh on phone and when hi" phone di"-*onne*ted, "he rang up to a *o$$on #riend A'dulla Noorie DP@-1E. A'dulla Noori

then rang up P@-;: <eepinder Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. @hen the phone di"-*onne*ted, he $ade

another *all and "o$e *hild told that her $other i" not #eeling well and di"*onne*ted the phone. -herea#ter,

he rang up P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon who in turn rang up to P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh. P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh then

rang up to the hou"e o# de*ea"ed #ro$ where he *a$e to &now that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed had gone #or a wal& to Polo ,round. -hen he along with P@-9 Satinder Singh -hu", #or the "a&e o#

Se&hon rea*hed at Polo ,round.

argu$ent" it i" dee$ed to 'e *orre*t that three per"on" "itting in a Bolero and one another per"on were "een ')

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

215

the$ at the "pot, the per"on" in Bolero 5eep *annot 'e "aid to have *o$$itted the o##en*e 'e*au"e no *ulprit will re$ain at the pla*e o# o**urren*e #or "u*h a long ti$e Singh 'e*au"e Se&hon P@-2 had Shiv ta&en Ra Singh and P@-9 Satinder the

"u##i*ient

ti$e

a#ter

o**urren*e to rea*h at the "pot.

Moreover, it wa" a

'lind $urder and the inve"tigating agen*) wa" 'ound to inve"tigate the *a"e #ro$ ever) angle and in ever)

po""i'le dire*tion.

P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha"

hi$"el# ad$itted that he wa" dire*ted ') the SP 2it) to in>uire a'out the Bla*& 2oloured Bolero" #ro$ the

<i"tri*t -ran"port 6##i*er, Patiala and on 1/.10.2001 P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh had interrogated Rupinder Pal Singh and Sarta Singh. But de"pite inve"tigation

in thi" dire*tion no one #ound to 'e involved in thi" o**urren*e. told the P@-;: <eepinder Kaur ha" ad$itted that "he inve"tigating o##i*er on 1/.10.2001 that

Ravdeep Kaur i" involved in thi" o##en*e 'ut "he wa" advi"ed to &eep "ilent ') the 7nve"tigating 6##i*er 'e*au"e the inve"tigation wa" in progre"". -hu", i#

thi" *ontention o# learned de#en*e *oun"el i" ta&en to 'e *orre*t, it i" not going to help the a**u"ed per"on" in an) $anner. 1;9. 7 al"o #ind no $erit in the *ontention o#

learned de#en*e *oun"el that a" per the te"ti$on) o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

216

P@-12 <r. K.K.Aggarwal, the in urie" $ight have 'een in#li*ted ') $ore than one per"on. 7t "tand" proved

that all the in urie" were in#li*ted ') the Kirpan. P@-12 ha" "tated in hi" e.a$ination in *hie# that on poli*e re>ue"t dated 1/.12.2001 A..P-3, the $e$'er" o# 'oard o# <o*tor" opined that po""i'ilit) o# in urie" $entioned in the re>ue"t letter 'eing *au"ed ') "hown weapon or "i$ilar &ind o# weapon *annot 'e ruled out. @hen P@-12 <r. K.K.Aggarwal appeared in the witne"" 'o., Kirpan A..P-; wa" "hown to hi$ and he "tated that it i" the "a$e &irpan whi*h wa" "hown to the$ ') the poli*e at the ti$e o# o'taining their opinion regarding whether all the in urie" $a) 'e *au"ed ') thi" weapon i.e. Sword D&irpanE. he ha" Ad$ittedl), that the in hi" *ro"" o#

e.a$ination

"tated

po""i'ilit)

in urie" No. 1;, 2;, 2/ G 21 'eing *au"ed ') 'lunt weapon *annot 'e ruled out. 4e ha" #urther "tated that

in*i"ed wound" are *au"ed ') "harp edged weapon and penetrated wound" are *au"ed ') pointed weapon.

7n urie" No. : to 12 were in*i"ed penetrated wound" wherea", in urie" No. 1 to 1 and 1/ to 22 were in*i"ed wound" a" $entioned in the po"t$orte$ report. #urther "tated that &eeping in view the 4e ha"

di##erent

di$en"ion" o# the wound" po""i'ilit) o# in urie" 'eing *au"ed ') two di##erent weapon" *annot 'e ruled out.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

217

But

thi"

witne""

ha"

#urther

volunteered

that

the

in urie" *ould have al"o 'een *au"ed ') one weapon. T5*! $1() !5#"0' &#) 0##!e !*)e )51) )5e ;* 81& *! 1 !51 8 e'7e' 1! 9e00 1! 8#*&)e' 9e18#&, there#ore, 7 *on*ur with P@-12 <r. K.K.Aggarwal that the in urie" have 'een *au"ed ') the &irpan. 21 in urie" on the per"on o# Ad$ittedl), there were the de*ea"ed 'ut the

pro"e*ution ha" "u**e""#ull) proved that a**u"ed Man it Singh P@-;8 a**u"ed ha" the potential Singh Singh, ha" who to in#li*t the "u*h in urie". o# had

Mu&htiar Man it

proved ha"

potential that he

depo"ed

trained the a**u"ed in F,at&aF. $onth" training in two "pell".

4e wa" i$parted three 4e ha" #urther "tated

that Man it Singh ha" 'een "howing hi" "&ill o# ,at&a in Nagar Kirtan", thu", to "a) that Man it Singh *ould not have in#li*ted a" $an) a" 21 in urie" i" apparentl) in*orre*t. 1/0. 7 al"o #ind no $erit in the *ontention o# the

learned de#en*e *oun"el that P@-11 Rupinder Singh ha" 'een introdu*ed a" a #al"e witne"" to who$ a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur $ade e.tra denied that P@-11

udi*ial *on#e""ion. Singh i" the

7t i" not $e$'er o#

Rupinder

Maharani 2lu', there#ore, $erel) the #a*t that no entr) wa" $ade in the regi"ter with regard to hi" entr) in the *lu' on 19.10.2001 *reate" an) "u"pi*ion in hi"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

218

pre"en*e in the *lu'.

?ather o# P@-11 re$ained a"

7rrigation Advi"or to the 2hie# Mini"ter o# Pun a'. P@-11 along with #ro$ Nav ot A$rit"ar Singh ha" Sidhu, 'een Me$'er o# #or

Parlia$ent

*onvi*ted

*o$$i""ion o# o##en*e under Se*tion ;02 o# 7P2 ') the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana at 2handigarh and their appeal i" pending 'e#ore the 4onF'le Supre$e 2ourt. -hu", the"e #a*t" goe" to "how that P@-11 i" a

politi*all) in#luen*ial per"on and *ertainl) he *ould help out a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. A" per hi" te"ti$on)

Ravdeep Kaur onl) wanted to "ave her #ro$ the poli*e hara""$ent and thi" $u*h help *ould have 'een provided ') thi" witne"". -he learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" tried

to e"ta'li"h that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" not &nown to P@-11 Rupinder Singh 'ut he DP@-11E ha" "tated that he al"o $et Ravdeep Kaur 10-11 da)" earlier al"o. Kaur wa" &nown to hi$. atte$pted to Ravdeep

-he learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" the relation"hip o# P@-11

e"ta'li"h

Rupinder Singh with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

-he $aterial

'rought on re*ord ') the de#en*e re#erred a'ove it"el# goe" to "how that P@-11 Rupinder Singh i" not even di"tantl) related to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. relative o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" 7# "o$e the

having

#riendl) relation" with P@-11 Rupinder Singh that doe" not $ean that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" dire*tl) and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

219

*lo"el) related to hi$.

-here i" nothing on #ile to

"ugge"t that P@-11 Rupinder Singh ever $aintained an) relation"hip e.tra with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -hu", the

udi*ial *on#e""ion $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur

to P@-11 Rupinder Singh *annot 'e "traightwa) thrown out. i" -he regi"tration o# the *a"e again"t P@-11 it"el# not "u##i*ient to di"*ard hi" te"ti$on).

Ad$ittedl), the e.tra pie*e o# eviden*e 'ut

udi*ial *on#e""ion i" a wea& *ertainl) it i" an i$portant

pie*e o# eviden*e to *orro'orate the other eviden*e 'rought on re*ord ') the pro"e*ution. -here i" no

di"pute on the authorit) re#erred ') learned de#en*e *oun"el in S. 3rul Raja 9s 1ase D"upraE and 7 do *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el that e.tra *on#e""ion re>uire" to 'e "tri*tl) "*rutini=e. a" the non $entioning o# the e.tra in the re$and appli*ation o# udi*ial So #ar

udi*ial *on#e""ion Ravdeep Kaur,

a**u"ed

$oved to the learned 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala i" *on*erned, the poli*e wa" not re>uired to plead ea*h and ever) #a*t in the re$and appli*ation. -he #a*t" relating to the re*over) o# in*ri$inating arti*le" are re>uired to 'e $entioned in the

appli*ation #or the poli*e re$and, thu", the a**u"ed *annot derive an) 'ene#it o# thi" #a*t. 1/1. -here i" apparentl) no "u'"tan*e in the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

220

*ontention o# the learned de#en*e *oun"el that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur never vi"ited the 2ourt o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed in 3udhiana to *reate a "*ene. Kuldeep Singh,

Advo*ate ha" appeared in the witne"" 'o. a" P@-2; who i" a pra*ti*ing law)er at <i"tri*t 2ourt", 3udhiana and happened ru*&u" to 'e pre"ent 2ourt o# when Ravdeep Kaur *reated a

in

the

de*ea"ed

%i a)

Singh.

-he

learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" tried to e"ta'li"h *lo"e relation"hip o# P@-2; Kuldeep Singh with P@-;: 7t i"

<eepinder Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

alleged that P@-2; Kuldeep Singh ,rewal i" a #riend o# Sura Singh <hillon, Advo*ate o# Bathinda and Sura

Singh <hillon i" #atherF" "i"terF" hu"'and o# P@-;: <eepinder Kaur. that Sura Aven i# it i" pre"u$ed to 'e *orre*t

Singh <hillon and P@-2; Kuldeep Singh ,rewal

"tudied together at one point o# ti$e that doe" not $ean that the) are "till $aintaining an) relation"hip. Merel) the #a*t that P@-2; Kuldeep Singh ,rewal wa" the *la"" $ate o# Sura Singh <hillon doe" not even

e"ta'li"h their #riend"hip.

-here#ore, the te"ti$on)

o# P@-2; Kuldeep Singh *annot 'e di"*arded onl) 'e*au"e he wa" *la"" $ate o# Sura Singh <hillon, the #atherF" So #ar a"

"i"terF" hu"'and o# P@-;: <eepinder Kaur.

the *ontention" that the o##i*ial" o# the 2ourt were not e.a$ined i" *on*erned, it i" >ualit) o# eviden*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

221

whi*h $atter" and not the >uantit) o# eviden*e.

7 #ind

no rea"on to dou't the te"ti$on) o# P@-2; 'e*au"e hi" te"ti$on) ha" 'een #urther *orro'orated ') P@-/2 A$it -a)al who ha" "tated that on 29.09.200; a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had "ta)ed in their 4otel a" per the re*ord o# the 2o$puter. She wa" allotted roo$ No. ;0/ and had "ta)ed A 'ill No. :989 A..P-1;; -hu", the te"ti$on) pre"en*e o# a**u"ed

#ro$ /+;1 p.$. to 9+0: p.$.

#or a "u$ o# R".;/10/- wa" i""ued. o# P@-/2 A$it -a)al prove" the

Ravdeep Kaur at 3udhiana on 29.09.200;.

-he learned

de#en*e *oun"el ha" tried to "hatter the *redi'ilit) o# thi" witne"" alleging that thi" hotel i" owned ') one Mr. 5a""i Khangura, M3A o# 2ongre"" part). Merel) that

2apt. A$rinder Singh, the then 2hie# Mini"ter Pun a', who vi"ited the hou"e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed at the ti$e o# hi" death and Mr. 5a""i Khangura 'elong" to one politi*al part) i" not "u##i*ient to e"ta'li"h that P@-/2 A$it -a)al had i""ued a #orged 'ill A..P-1;;. -he re*ord pertain" to the )ear 200; and the o**urren*e too& pla*e in the )ear 2001, there#ore, no 'od) had anti*ipated the o**urren*e and $anipulated the re*ord to 'e produ*ed at a later "tage. -he re*ord 'rought ')

P@-/2 i" *o$puter generated and wa" not re>uired to 'e "igned ') an)'od). P@-/; A$it -a)al and Mr. 5a""i

Khangura had no en$it) with the a**u"ed,there#ore, the)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

222

had no o**a"ion to #orge an) "u*h do*u$ent. #ind no rea"on to dou't the "an*tit) o#

-hu", 7 the hotel

re*ord produ*ed 'e#ore the 2ourt to prove the pre"en*e o# Ravdeep Kaur in the "aid hotel on 29.09.200;. 1/2. 7 do *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el

to the e.tent that no relian*e *an 'e pla*ed on the te"ti$on) o# P@-20 4ar*hand Singh. P@-20 alleged to

have vi"ited Ravi 4o"pital #or the treat$ent o# hi" wi#e prior to the o**urren*e 'ut he ha" not pla*ed on re*ord an) treat$ent re*ord o# hi" wi#e. not di"*lo"ed the e.a*t date when he 4e ha" even vi"ited the

ho"pital.

7t i" al"o not po""i'le that when a per"on

i" planning to $urder will "pea& in "u*h a loud voi*e whi*h *an 'e over heard ') a per"on "itting in the ad oining roo$. -he ho"pital i" 'eing vi"ited ')

nu$'er o# patient".

-here#ore, hat*hing o# *on"pira*)

at "u*h a pla*e in the pre"en*e o# a nu$'er o# patient" i" not po""i'le. 6therwi"e al"o, a per"on who ha" over

heard the *onver"ation with regard to the $urder o# a 5udge i" e.pe*ted to in#or$ the poli*e i$$ediatel) 'ut he had not ta&en an) "u*h "tep" whi*h *reate" a dou't with regard to the #a*t" narrated ') hi$ in hi"

te"ti$on). 1/;. 4owever, 7 #ind no "u'"tan*e in the *ontention

o# learned de#en*e *oun"el that P@-;/ 5oginder Singh

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

223

ha" 'een introdu*ed a" a #al"e witne"".

P@-;/ i" not 7t i"

related to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed in an) $anner. the a**u"ed per"on" #a*t who o# during their their pre"en*e

interrogation in Pun a'i

di"*lo"ed

the

(niver"it), Patiala and on the 'a"i" o# thi" lead given ') the a**u"ed the$"elve", the inve"tigating o##i*er interrogated planted P@-;/ 5oginder he $u"t Singh. have 4ad he the 'een a

witne"",

"tated

entire

parti*ular". #a*t" in hi"

-hi" witne"" ha" onl) depo"ed a'out the &nowledge. 6therwi"e, he would have

$entioned the e.a*t date when he had "een 'oth the a**u"ed in the Pun a'i (niver"it) pre$i"e". "tated that Ravdeep Kaur told hi$ that "he 4e ha" i" the

<o*tor o# Ravi 4o"pital.

P@-;/ had "een and identi#ied

the$ at that point o# ti$e and therea#ter, ha" again identi#ied the$ in the 2ourt, there#ore, it i" not the *a"e where the a**u"ed ha" identi#ied the a**u"ed

per"on" #ir"t ti$e in the 2ourt.

-he witne"" wa" not

e.pe*ted to $a&e the entr) in hi" regi"ter o# ever) per"on vi"iting Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala. 4ad thi"

witne"" 'een intended to #al"el) i$pli*ate the a**u"ed, he would have told the nu$'er o# the *ar. no rea"on to di"-'elieve thi" witne"". 1//. te"ti$on) 7 al"o o# #ind <r. no ground" to Kaur, di"*ard <enti"t the who -hu", 7 #ind

P@-;9

A$andeep

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

224

treated a**u"ed Man it Singh at the in"tan*e o# Ravdeep Kaur. -hi" witne"" ha" *ategori*all) "tated that the

pre"*ription "lip A..P-121 ha" 'een i""ued #ro$ her ho"pital. e.a$ination Ad$ittedl), in *hie# "he ha" thi" "tated in hi" "lip

that

pre"*ription

A..P-121 i" in her hand and in her e.a$ination "he ha" "tated that it wa" written ') her a""i"tant 'ut $erel)

thi" #a*t wa" not "u##i*ient to di"*ard her te"ti$on). She had identi#ied 'oth the a**u"ed pre"ent in the

2ourt and ha" *ategori*all) "tated that a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" 'rought to her ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. i$portantl) the pre"*ription "lip A..P-121 More wa"

re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur on 21.10.2001. -hu", the >ue"tion o# #orging pre"*ription "lip

A..P-121 doe" not ari"e at all.

No eviden*e ha" 'een

'rought ') the a**u"ed to prove that P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur had an) en$it) with the a**u"ed. P@-;9 i"

a'"olutel) an independent witne"".

Rather it "tand"

proved that Ravdeep Kaur earlier had ta&en her "on to P@-;9 #or treat$ent. -here#ore, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur

and P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur were &nown to ea*h other and thu", "he DP@-;9E ha" no rea"on to *reate an) #al"e do*u$ent" to #al"el) i$pli*ate the a**u"ed. 1/1. the 3earned de#en*e *oun"el drawn the attention o# 2ourt toward" the #a*t that the hou"e o# the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

225

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "ear*hed on 21.10.2001 and the 'ed roo$ and the *up 'oard" o# the 'ed roo$" were "ear*hed. -he *up 'oard #ro$ whi*h the re*over) o#

*ertain arti*le" have 'een "hown on 2:.10.2001 wa" al"o "ear*hed on 21.10.2001 a" well. 4ad there 'een

an)thing in*ri$inating in the "aid *up 'oard, the "a$e would poli*e have on al"o 'een ta&en into the po""e""ion re*over) ') $ade the on

21.10.2001.

-hu",

2:.10.2001 i" planted one.

7 #ind no "u'"tan*e in thi" Ad$ittedl), "ear*hed on

*ontention o# the learned de#en*e *oun"el. the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa"

21.10.2001 and one *a""ette A..P-1;1 wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide re*over) $e$o A..P-1;/ #ro$ the *ar o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. Be"ide thi" two re*eipt"

pertaining to two $o'ile phone" A..P-1;: and A..P-1;9. -wo photograph" A..P-1/0 A..P-1;8 and and A..P-1;9, original two R2 do$e"ti* o# *ar

diarie"

A..P-1/1,

A..P-1/2 and one pre"*ription "lip A..P-121 o# 2hugh 2lini* were al"o re*overed and ta&en into poli*e

po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1/;. Ravdeep Kaur wa" again

-he hou"e o# a**u"ed on 2:.10.2001 in

"ear*hed

pur"uan*e o# her di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-%.

A**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur led the poli*e part) to her hou"e and got re*overed R". 2 3a*" *a"h, one pi"tol .;2 'ore, one ar$" li*en*e in her na$e, one driving li*en*e o# %i a)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

226

Singh de*ea"ed in 'la*& 'ag and one pair o# "port" "hoe" 'lood "tained in a pla"ti* 'ag &ept under the -he the

>uilt in the upper portion o# the *up 'oard. re*overed arti*le di"*lo"e" that 'e"ide

in*ri$inating arti*le" "o$e non in*ri$inating arti*le" were al"o re*overed. -he re*over) $ade on 2:.10.2001

*annot 'e dou'ted 'e*au"e it wa" $ade in pur"uan*e o# the di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-% $ade ') the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 6n 2:.10.2001 one pi"tol .;2 'ore and -hi" *annot 'e

the ar$ li*en*e wa" al"o re*overed.

"aid to 'e a #orged re*over) 'e*au"e the pi"tol and the ar$ li*en*e i" in the na$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 4ad the in*ri$inating arti*le" 'een planted upon the a**u"ed, the inve"tigating agen*) would not have "hown the re*over) o# the non in*ri$inating arti*le". 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh, 7nve"tigating 6##i*er o# P@-1: thi"

*a"e had $ade it *lear that the re*over) on 21.10.2001 wa" $ade #ro$ the lower portion o# the *up 'oard

wherea", the re*over) o# 2:.10.2001 wa" $ade #ro$ the upper portion o# the *up 'oard. 7t i" pertinent to

$ention here that the in*ri$inating arti*le" $u"t have 'een &ept *on*ealed ') the a**u"ed whi*h *ould onl) 'e re*overed at her in"tan*e. -he re*over) on 2:.10.2001

wa" $ade in the pre"en*e o# P@-22 ,ur it Singh who "tood a" a witne"" to the "a$e. 4i" te"ti$on) *annot

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

227

'e di"*arded $erel) 'e*au"e he ha" *lo"e pro.i$it) with the #a$il) o# P@-;: <eepinder Kaur, rather hi" pre"en*e at the ti$e o# re*over) i" natural. 6n 2:.10.2001 he

went to 27A Sta##, Patiala and then a**o$panied the poli*e to the hou"e o# Ravdeep Kaur. -here wa" nothing

a'nor$al i# he wa" pur"uing the *a"e 'eing a #a$il) #riend. 7# an) un&nown per"on would have 'een oined

a" a witne"" to the re*over) then the de#en*e would have dou'ted hi" pre"en*e at the pla*e o# re*over) at the given ti$e. $ade #ro$ the and Moreover, the re*over) o# the arti*le" hou"e o# a**u"ed *annot o# 'e Ravdeep dou'ted $o'ile Kaur on

21.10.2001 *ertain

2:.10.2001 li&e

'e*au"e phone,

arti*le"

re*eipt

the

pi"tol and the ar$" li*en*e *annot 'e the out *o$e o# the alleged $anipulation o# poli*e "howing #al"e

re*over). 1/:. 7 al"o #ind no $erit in the *ontention o# the

learned de#en*e *oun"el that the invitation *ard o# F,reh Parve"hF o# a**u"ed Man it Singh and the *op) o# *o$plaint A..P-1:0 allegedl) $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e, Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt, 2handigarh have 'een planted and no

re*over) a" alleged wa" $ade on 2;.10.2001 #ro$ Ravi 4o"pital. 2;.10.2001 7t i" pertinent to $ention here that on Ravi 4o"pital wa" *lo"ed 'e*au"e a**u"ed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

228

Ravdeep Kaur had alread) 'een arre"ted on 18.10.2001. -he &e)" o# the pre$i"e" wa" with Parveen Kaur and the pre$i"e" wa" opened ') her. Parveen Kaur wa" e$plo)ee

o# Ravdeep Kaur, there#ore, it "tand" proved that the inve"tigating 2;.10.2001. 1/9. 7 *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el that agen*) "ear*hed Ravi 4o"pital on

the plot" where the Ravi 4o"pital wa" "ituated were re"u$ed ') P(<A 'ut it doe" not $ean that the Ravi 4o"pital wa" "ealed. Moreover, <@-20 5agdi"h 2hand,

Senior A""i"tant o# P(<A "tated that vide appli*ation dated 20.09.2001 5eevan 5ot Singh, 'rother o# Ravdeep Kaur in#or$ed ha" the 'een A"tate "topped 6##i*er and that *o$$er*ial Ra&e"h

a*tivit)

therea#ter,

Singla, the then 5unior Angineer o# P(<A ha" $ade the report that the Ravi 4o"pital ha" 'een *lo"ed. re"u$ption order o# the plot wa" *an*elled. -he

Be"ide the

invitation *ard A..P-119 and the *op) o# the *o$plaint A..P-1:0, the other arti*le" i.e. Award *erti#i*ate" A..P-119 and A..P-118 were al"o re*overed and ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-11:. -hu", the

poli*e *annot it"el# *reate the Award *erti#i*ate" and plant it upon the a**u"ed. do*u$ent", re*over). thu", goe" to -he re*over) o# the other "how that it wa" genuine

A" "tated a'ove, the *ontradi*tion" whi*h

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

229

have no $aterial 'earing" on the pro"e*ution *a"e are not re>uired to 'e given undue i$portan*e 'e*au"e the) do not #or$ the ground to re e*t the eviden*e a" a whole. 6n to 19.10.2001 P@-11 while $a&ing Singh, e.tra a**u"ed udi*ial Ravdeep

*on#e""ion

Rupinder

Kaur $ight 'e not having an apprehen"ion that *op) o# the *o$plaint and the inve"tigation *ard will lead to "u*h "eriou" *on"e>uen*e". 1/8. -he *ontention" o# the learned de#en*e *oun"el

that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" arre"ted on 1:.10.2001 and her arre"t ha" 'een #al"el) "hown on 18.10.2001, i" al"o devoid o# $erit. arre"t o# a**u"ed 6n 18.10.2001 at the ti$e o# Kaur two "$all diarie"

Ravdeep

A..P-1/9 G A..P-1/8, "trip o# *ap"ule" A..P-1/9 and *urren*) note" A..P-110 to A..P-11/ and the $o'ile

phone A..P-111 were re*overed. the"e arti*le" wa" al"o prepared. 1/9. learned

-he re*over) $e$o o#

7 #ind no "u'"tan*e in the *ontention o# the de#en*e *oun"el that the <<R entr) o# the

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur i" #orged one.

Merel) 'e*au"e

P@-// S7 <hara$ <ev *ould not appear 'e#ore the 2ourt twi*e to produ*e the <<R regi"ter doe" not lead to a *on*lu"ion that <<R" are #orged. *ro"" e.a$ination that on 7t ha" *o$e in hi" he "end hi"

11.09.2009

$edi*al *erti#i*ate "howing hi" ina'ilit) to attend the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

230

2ourt 'ut he ha" #urther ad$itted that on 11.09.2009 he wa" along with the poli*e part) at @a=id Pur --point and arre"ted the *ar thieve". 4e al"o #ailed to appear

'e#ore the 2ourt on 18.09.2009 and "end a re>ue"t #or non attendan*e on a**ount o# illne"" o# hi" relative 'ut on 19.09.2009 he had got regi"tered ?7R No. 191 dated 19.09.2009 whi*h "how" that he wa" 'u") in the inve"tigation o# that *a"e. thu", "how" that though, he -he eviden*e on re*ord "end a re>ue"t #or

ad ourn$ent on #al"e ground" 'ut a*tuall) he wa" 'u") in the inve"tigation o# "o$e other *a"e". 4i" a'"en*e

'e#ore the 2ourt on given date thu", *annot 'e "aid to have 'een utili=ed #or *reating a #a'ri*ated <<R

regi"ter.

So #ar a" the a*>uittal o# the a**u"ed in a

*a"e regi"tered at hi" in"tan*e i" *on*erned, ever) *a"e i" not 'ound to 'e "u**e""#ul. the *a"e doe" not $ean that the Regi"tration o# a**u"ed will 'e

*onvi*ted. ground".

4i" te"ti$on) *annot 'e di"*arded on the"e -he <<R regi"ter *annot 'e "aid to 'e #orged

onl) 'e*au"e it wa" a private regi"ter and not "upplied ') the ,overn$ent. atte"tation would -hough, the <<R regi"ter having *arr) $ore value 'ut i# the

atte"tation i" not there, the "a$e *annot 'e re e*ted "traightwa). -he arre"t o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa"

$ade in the pre"en*e o# her #ather <al it Singh Bahia.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

231

Ad$ittedl), a ?7R had 'een regi"tered again"t hi$ under the Prevention o# 2orruption A*t and other Se*tion" o# 7P2 'ut he wa" never arre"ted in thi" *a"e a" *ontended ') the learned de#en*e 2oun"el hi$"el#. -hu", the

arre"t o# the a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 18.10.2001 *annot 'e dou'ted. 110. A..P-229 A" wa" o'"erved re*overed a'ove, during the the invitation "ear*h o# *ard Ravi

4o"pital on 2;.10.2001.

P@-10 5ugal Ki"hore ha" "tated -hi"

that the *ard A..P-229 wa" printed in hi" pre"".

witne"" ha" no $otive or o**a"ion to #al"el) i$pli*ate the a**u"ed per"on". @hen he appeared in the witne""

'o. identi#ied Man it Singh a" the per"on who got the "aid *ard printed. -hi" witne"" ha" not di"*lo"ed the

e.a*t date o# printing 'ut the date o# o**a"ion i.e. 19.08.2001 ha" 'een "pe*i#i*all) $entioned. 2ertainl),

thi" *ard wa" printed prior to the "aid date and a $inor *ontradi*tion in hi" "tate$ent to the e##e*t a" to when the poli*e $et hi$ i" not "u##i*ient to di"*ard hi" whole te"ti$on). -hi" witne"" ha" "tated that he

$aintain *a"h 'oo&", ledger" and write the na$e and addre"" o# the *u"to$er" on *a"h $e$o". -hough, thi"

witne"" had not 'rought the "aid re*ord on the da) hi" te"ti$on) wa" re*orded 'ut no re>ue"t wa" ever $ade ') learned de#en*e *oun"el to de#er the *ro"" e.a$ination

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

232

o#

thi"

witne""

#or

the

produ*tion

o#

"aid

re*ord.

-hough, the photograph o# the a**u"ed were "hown in new"paper" and the -.%. 2hannel" a#ter their arre"t, it i" not ne*e""ar) that witne"" had "een the photograph o# the a**u"ed in new"paper or on televi"ion. witne"" had not ad$itted o# having "een the -hi" "aid

photograph, there#ore, he had no o**a"ion to in#or$ the poli*e. not an Moreover, the invitation *ard in it"el# i" in*ri$inating eviden*e, thu", P@-10 5ugal

Ki"hore wa" not re>uired to in#or$ the poli*e to 'ring in it" noti*e that he printed the invitation *ard o# F,reh Prave"hF o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. the invitation *ard i" a #orged -hu", neither nor P@-10

do*u$ent

5ugal Ki"hore ha" 'een #al"el) introdu*ed a" a witne"". 111. -he *ontention o# learned de#en*e *oun"el doe"

not #ind #avour with $e that the *o$plaint A..P-19; wa" not $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to the then 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana 4igh 2ourt at 2handigarh. writing A..P-1:; to A..P-1:9 were -he "pe*i$en hand ta&en 'e#ore the

2ourt o# <r. Ra nee"h, the then 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", S*ien*e report Patiala DP@-1/E and were "ent to 'ut ?oren"i* in hi"

3a'orator), A..P-291

Pun a',

2handigarh

<eput)

<ire*tor,

?oren"i*

S*ien*e

3a'orator) ha" $entioned that it wa" not po""i'le to

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

233

e.pre""

de#inite

opinion

regarding

the

*o$$on

author"hip o# >ue"tioned and ad$itted hand writing and "uita'le and "u##i*ient ad$itted hand writing" were

*alled #or *o$paring the "a$e.

-hen the inve"tigating

o##i*er o'tained two letter" A..P-198 and A..P-199 #ro$ CPS S*hool, Patiala. P@-/9 <ara Singh, A""i"tant, CPS

S*hool, Patiala ha" "tated that 'oth the"e letter" were written ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in hi" pre"en*e and he handed over the "a$e to AS7 Sat Pal vide $e$o A..P-200. -hi" witne"" ha" no $otive to *reate an) "u*h letter" to #al"el) i$pli*ate the a**u"ed. -he "on o# a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur wa" "tud)ing in CPS S*hool, Patiala at the given ti$e. A" the ad$itted hand writing o# the

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" re>uired #or *o$paring the hand writing o# the *o$plaint A..P-19;, there#ore, the ever) po""i'le e##ort wa" 'eing $ade ') the

7nve"tigating Agen*) to "ear*h out the "a$e.

-here i"

nothing unu"ual i# the inve"tigating agen*) *onta*ted the "*hool o# the "on o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to o'tain an) "u*h do*u$ent in whi*h the) ulti$atel) "u**eeded. Both the"e letter" were "ent to ?oren"i* S*ien*e

3a'orator) and the report A..P-298 reveal" that the hand writing in the "aid letter" $at*hed with the hand writing in the *o$plaint A..P-19;. 2oun"el ha" tried to a""ail the 3earned <e#en*e o# ?oren"i*

report

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

234

S*ien*e 3a'orator) alleging that the report i" pro*ured one 'ut ha" #ailed to e.plain wh) the <eput) <ire*tor, ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) will #urni"h an in*orre*t report. -he u"e o# di##erent in& and di##erent writing while not writing a ground the to letter" dou't A..P-198 and

in"tru$ent A..P-199 thereo#. i"

the

genuinene""

7 do not *on*ur with the report o# <@-21 4e ha" 'een engaged ') the a**u"ed to

Navdeep ,upta.

prepare the report and the po""i'ilit) *annot 'e ruled out that he ha" prepared a report 'e"t "uited to hi" pa) $a"ter. -hi" report *annot 'e ad$itted to *ounter

the report A..P-298 "u'$itted ') the <eput) <ire*tor, ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator). A..P-1:0 4o"pital wa" on re*overed 2;.10.2001 -he *op) o# the *o$plaint the "ear*h o# o# Ravi the

during and on

*o$pari"on

original *o$plaint A..P-19; with the writing o# the appli*ation" A..P-198 and A..P-199 it "tood *on#ir$ed that thi" *o$plaint wa" $ade ') Ravdeep Kaur, then

there wa" no rea"on with the poli*e to

oin 5ag it

Singh who"e na$e wa" written on the envelope A..P-19/ o# the *o$plaint. that -hi" #a*t Singh, *an 'e "een o# in the

'a*&ground Ravdeep

Narain a

"ervant again"t

a**u"ed Singh

Kaur

$ade

*o$plaint

%i a)

de*ea"ed and hi" wi#e <eepinder Kaur. A..P-2;1 wa" lodged.

A <<R No. 1/

P@-1; AS7 Ra$ Ki"han inve"tigated

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

235

the "aid $atter and the *o$plaint wa" #ound to 'e #al"e whi*h wa" lodged ') Narain Singh at the in"tan*e o# Ravdeep Kaur. al"o *reated a A" "tated a'ove a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur "*ene in the 2ourt o# %i a) Singh

de*ea"ed at 3udhiana, there#ore, it "tand" proved that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" nouri"hing a grou"e again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and hotl) pur"uing the "a$e. 112. 7 do *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el

that the *all detail" A..P-229 pertaining to the phone nu$'er 98880;/099 and *all detail" A..P-2;0 pertaining to the *ell phone nu$'er 988809/099 depi*t" two digit" F1F and F2F in the la"t *olu$n. -he digit F1F

repre"ent" the outgoing *all and digit F2F repre"ent" the in*o$ing *all. -he *all detail" A..P-229 "how"

that there wa" an outgoing *all #ro$ telephone nu$'er 98880;/099 and *all detail" A..P-2;0 reveal" that there wa" an in*o$ing *all #ro$ telephone nu$'er 98880;/099. But "till it "tand" proved that on 1;.10.2001, the da) o# o**urren*e, Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh tal&ed with ea*h other at 20+1;+21 hour" #or 909 "e*ond".

-he) again tal&ed with ea*h other at 2;+19+/1 hour" #or 2:1 "e*ond" on the "a$e da) a#ter the o**urren*e.

-hu", it i" irrelevant whether a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur $ade a *all to a**u"ed Man it Singh or a**u"ed Man it Singh $ade a *all to Ravdeep Kaur. -he S7M o# the *ell

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

236

phone nu$'er 988809/099 ha" 'een re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Man it Singh, there#ore, there i" no #or*e in that the 'oth *ontention the o# the learned were de#en*e the

*oun"el

$o'ile

phone"

with

#a$il) o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur.

No eviden*e ha" 'een

addu*ed to prove that who wa" u"ing the *ell phone nu$'er 988809/099 i# it wa" with the #a$il) o# Ravdeep Kaur. -hu", the *all detail" in"tead o# *reating a

dou't in the pro"e*ution "tor), ha" "trengthened it on $aterial point not onl) to prove the relation"hip o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh 'ut the #a*t that the) tal&ed with ea*h other prior to and a#ter the o**urren*e. 11;. Ad$ittedl), the pro"e*ution li"ted the na$e"

o# "o$e nur"e" at "erial nu$'er 29, 28, ;0, ;1 and ;2 in the li"t o# witne""e" 'ut ha" opted not to e.a$ine the$. -here i" a$ple eviden*e on #ile to prove the

relation"hip o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and a**u"ed Man it Singh, there#ore, no $ore eviden*e to prove their

relation"hip wa" re>uired. the nur"e" ') the

-hu", non e.a$ination o# ha" not in an) wa)

pro"e*ution

a##e*ted the pro"e*ution *a"e adver"el). 11/. Ad$ittedl), the pi"tol and ar$" li*en*e

re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur in pur"uan*e o# the "ear*h on 2:.10.2001 are not the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

237

in*ri$inating arti*le".

But the re*over) o# the pi"tol

and ar$" li*en*e "pea&" a lot a'out the "tate o# $ind o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. -hi" "how" that "he ha" gut"

to po""e"" a pi"tol and u"e that i# needed. 111. te"ti$on) 7 al"o o# #ind no rea"on Singh to ! di"'elieve 3a&hi and the P@-;:

P@-10

3a&h'ir

<eepinder Kaur with regard to the $otive to *o$$it the o##en*e. wherea" Singh 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi wa" a *lo"e #riend, P@-;: <eepinder Kaur wa" to the wi#e ') o# %i a)

de*ea"ed.

An)thing

told

the$

de*ea"ed

%i a) Singh with regard to hi" "trained relation" with Ravdeep Kaur are *ertainl) a $aterial #a*t to 'e ta&en into *on"ideration to prove the $otive o# o##en*e

again"t the a**u"ed.

7 do *on*ur with the learned

de#en*e *oun"el that i# Ravdeep Kaur intended to $arr) %i a) Singh de*ea"ed than "he "hould have &illed P@-;: <eepinder Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed in"tead o# %i a) Singh hi$"el#. otherwi"e. But the #a*t" o# thi" *a"e are

7t i" not P@-;: <eepinder Kaur who wa"

*reating hurdle" in their relation"hip 'ut it i" %i a) Singh de*ea"ed who hi$"el# wa" not intere"ted in an) relation"hip with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and thi" wa" the rea"on lodged through a**u"ed again"t her Ravdeep %i a) Kaur got and a hi" #al"e *o$plaint $e$'er" in the

Singh and

#a$il) ru*&u"

"ervant

al"o

*reated

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

238

2ourt o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed at 3udhiana.

-here#ore,

in"tead o# <eepinder Kaur, %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" the target o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. 11:. 7 al"o do not agree with the learned de#en*e

*oun"el on the point that %i a) Singh got $arried in the )ear 1989 and therea#ter, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur got $arried in the )ear 1989, there#ore, a#ter "u*h a long period, the relation"hip, i# an), would have *o$e" to an end 'ut the #a*t" narrated a'ove "how" that a**u"ed Ravdeep Singh. Kaur wa" *on"tantl) *ha"ing de*ea"ed %i a)

P@-;: <eepinder Kaur and P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh !

3a&hi have *ategori*all) "tated that %i a) Singh told the$ that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur i" $a&ing *all" and SMS to hi$ and threatening hi$ to $arr). -he #a*t"

narrated a'ove $a) not lead to the *au"e o# death and $a) not 'e the part the o# the tran"a*tion o# the 'ut are o#

de#initel)

prove"

$otive

*o$$i""ion

o##en*e and thu", *annot 'e 'ru"hed a"ide. 119. 7 do *on*ur with the learned de#en*e *oun"el

that the te"ti$on) o# *han*e witne"" although, $a) not 'e ne*e""aril) #al"e 'ut to rel) upon hi$ i" pro'a'l) un"a#e and i# the *han*e witne"" i" a relative or

#riend o# the vi*ti$ then hi" 'eing a *han*e witne"" ha" to 'e "een with "u"pi*ion. #ile that %i a) Singh, -here i" no eviden*e on wa" a #riend or

de*ea"ed

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

239

relative o# P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal.

P@-1: ha"

onl) ad$itted to the e.tent that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" &nown to hi$ and wa" hi" *la"" $ate in B.A. ?inal a" well a" in 3aw. re$ained po"ted a" %i a) Singh de*ea"ed had al"o udi*ial o##i*er, Na'ha, where thi"

witne"" i" pra*ti*ing a" a law)er 'ut having *la"" $ate and having #riend"hip are two di##erent a"pe*t". A

*la"" $ate $a) not 'e a #riend and having po"ted at Na'ha in it"el# i" not "u##i*ient to prove the -hi"

relation"hip o# P@-1: and %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

witne"" ha" "pe*i#i*all) depo"ed that on 1;.10.2001 he had *o$e to Patiala along with hi" 'rother-in-law

Ra 'arinder Singh to the hou"e o# hi" $aternal un*le late Sh. A$rao Singh at Patiala in order to di"tri'ute the *ard" o# the 'irth da) o# "on o# Ra 'arinder Singh whi*h wa" to ta&e pla*e on 19.10.2001 and when the) were *o$ing 'a*& to Na'ha it wa" a'out 10+;0/10+/1

p.$., a#ter *ro""ing Modi 2ollege toward" lower Mall he "aw a $otor *)*le rider *o$ing out #ro$ the 'ro&en wall o# the polo ground and he "lipped on the road due to whi*h hi" $otor *)*le #ell on the ground. -he rider

then got up at on*e, pi*&ed up hi" &irpan whi*h had #allen down. "tained. ran awa). 4i" 'lue *oloured Kurta Pa a$a wa" 'lood

4e i$$ediatel) "tarted hi" $otor *)*le and -hi" witne"" ha" not di"*lo"ed the nu$'er o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

240

$otor *)*le.

4ad he 'een introdu*ed a" a #al"e witne""

he would have narrated the *o$plete parti*ular" along with the $a&e and regi"tration nu$'er o# the $otor

*)*le.

-hi" witne"" ha" "tated that the de*ea"ed wa"

having a &irpan and wa" wearing 'lue *oloured &urta pa) a$a whi*h ha" 'een re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. -hi" witne"" ha" al"o alleged

that the $otor *)*le rider *a$e out o# the 'ro&en wall o# the Polo ,round and P@-;0 7ndre"h Khanna who

prepared the "ite plan A..P-11; had "tated that the wall o# the Polo ,round wa" 'ro&en at "o$e pla*e", though, he ha" not "hown the 'ro&en wall in hi" "ite plan. -hi" witne"" narrated thi" in*ident to P@-1:

Sewa Singh on 1/.10.2001 when he *a$e to A$ar 4o"pital a#ter *o$ing to &now that %i a) Singh ha" 'een &illed. 4i" "tate$ent wa" #urther re*orded on 20.10.2001 when he "aw the photograph o# Man it Singh and Ravdeep Kaur on 19.10.2001 and identi#ied Man it Singh a" the "a$e per"on who$ he had "een on 1;.10.2001. witne"" ha" alread) identi#ied a**u"ed -hu", when the Man it Singh

when hi" photograph" were "hown in the new"paper and -.%. 2hannel" on 19.10.2001, the identi#i*ation o#

a**u"ed Man it Singh a#ter hi" arre"t ') thi" witne"" wa" no $ore re>uired. -hi" witne"" ha" identi#ied the

a**u"ed in the 2ourt and "tated that he i" the "a$e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

241

per"on

who$

he

had

"een

on

1;.10.2001

in

'etween

10+;0/10+/1 p.$. *o$ing out on hi" $otor *)*le #ro$ the 'ro&en wall o# the Polo ,round. @hen thi" witne"" "aw

a**u"ed Man it Singh *o$ing out o# the Polo ,round, there wa" no the apprehen"ion $ruder, that the the a**u"ed >ue"tion ha" o#

*o$$itted

there#ore,

reporting the $atter to the poli*e doe" not ari"e at all. o# -hu", even a#ter the *autiou" and *lo"e "*rutin) o# thi" witne"" it i" 7 a #ind it a relia'le lin& to

te"ti$on) and

witne""

*ertainl)

i$portant

*o$plete the *hain o# *ir*u$"tan*e" pointing toward" the guilt o# the a**u"ed per"on". 118. re*over) -he learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" a""ailed the o# &irpan re*overed in pur"uan*e o# the

di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-191 o# a**u"ed Man it Singh on the ground that at 9/9+;0 a.$. P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh $ade a *all to the S46, Poli*e Station 2it) Ropar to *all the diver" to re*over the &irpan #ro$ Bha&hra 2anal wherea" the di"*lo"ure "tate$ent o# the a**u"ed ha" it"el# 'een doe" re*orded not #ind a#ter #avour 11+00 with a.$. $e -hi" 'e*au"e

*ontention

whatever $a) 'e the di"*repan*) in the pro"e*ution *a"e 'ut the #a*t re$ain" that re*over) o# the &irpan #ro$ ,anda Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra 2anal #ro$ ,hanour to village Sarala road near S)phon in #ront o# Ki&&ar tree

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

242

i" proved 'e)ond dou't.

P@-11 4ar'an" Singh diver ha"

*ategori*all) "tated that on poli*e in"tru*tion" he got re*overed the "aid &irpan A..P-; along with F"heathF A..P-1; #ro$ the ,anda Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra 2anal. -hi" entire pro*e"" o# re*over) wa" photographed and %ideo graphed. A**u"ed wa" pre"ent along with the

poli*e part) at Bha&hra 2anal at the ti$e o# re*over) o# the &irpan. -hough, P@-;9 Kri"han Ku$ar ha" *reated

*on#u"ion with regard to the date o# re*over) o# the &irpan and ha" "tated that the re*over) wa" $ade on 20.10.2001 in"tead o# 19.10.2001 'ut "till it "tand" proved that the re*over) o# the &irpan wa" $ade in hi" pre"en*e and the re*over) pro*eeding" were photographed ') hi$. 7# upon the the re*over) a**u"ed, o# the the &irpan wa" to 'e

planted

inve"tigating

agen*)

"hould not have *ho"en a di"tant pla*e #or the re*over) thereo# and it *ould have 'een "hown re*overed ver) ea"il) #ro$ the hou"e o# the a**u"ed and in that *a"e there wa" no need o# *alling a diver, arranging the photographer and then "howing the re*over) o# &irpan #ro$ the Bha&hra 2anal. So #ar a" the *ontention that

the "*reening o# photograph A..P-12; "how" that a rope i" going into the 2anal water i" *on*erned, the rope wa" u"ed ') P@-11 4ar'an" Singh, diver to tied hi$"el# to avoid an) ri"& o# #lowing awa) with the 2anal water.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

243

7t i" *orre*t that in the #ir"t dive the &irpan wa" ta&en out. P@-11 ha" $ade it *lear that there were

"tone" at the 'otto$ o# the 2anal and thi" &irpan wa" "tu*& in the "tone". -hi" #a*t al"o doe" not loo"e

"ite that thi" &irpan wa" re*overed at the in"tan*e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. 7t i" the a**u"ed who hi$"el# -hu", atte$pt

indi*ated the pla*e where he thrown the &irpan. the ta&ing out o# the &irpan in the #ir"t

*reate" no dou't in the pro"e*ution "tor). 119. 7 have gone through the authorit) in 5hushia

8 4a((y9s 1ase D"upraE re#erred ') the learned de#en*e

alleged to 'e $ade #ro$ the 4ar$oniu$ o# a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" never that hi" e##e*ted. a**u"ed -A-A 209 i" -here going wa" a "e*ret Sangrur in*luding

in#or$ation riding on

toward"

having

luggage

4ar$oniu$. No "u*h 4ar$oniu$ wa" re*overed #ro$ the "aid vehi*le. But the poli*e ha" onl) the "e*ret R". /

in#or$ation whi*h $a) and $a) not 'e *orre*t.

3a*" were re*overed #ro$ the 4ar$oniu$ o# the a**u"ed l)ing in hi" hou"e on the 'a"i" o# hi" di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent A..P-198.

No'od) *an even thin& o# that the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

244

$one) *an 'e &ept in a har$oniu$ and the re*over) o# R"./ 3a*" wa" not po""i'le unle"" the a**u"ed hi$"el# had told the poli*e a'out the "a$e. 7t wa" the a**u"ed An

onl) who *ould point out the pla*e o# re*over).

a$ount o# R". / 3a*" ha" 'een re*overed, there#ore, there *annot 'e a re$ote po""i'ilit) o# planting "u*h a huge a$ount upon the a**u"ed. 1:1. So #ar a" the *ontention that the a**u"ed

earlier al"o $ade a di"*lo"ure "tate$ent and he *ould get re*over a$ount at that ti$e a" well i" *on*erned, it depend" how the a**u"ed di"*lo"e" the in#or$ation during interrogation. A" and when the a**u"ed

di"*lo"ed thi" #a*t to the poli*e during inve"tigation, hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent wa" re*orded. 7t i" the

a**u"ed who hi$"el# led the poli*e part) to the pla*e o# re*over) and A" got re*overed the non R"./ 3a*" #ro$ o# the the

4ar$oniu$.

regard"

*o$plian*e

provi"ion" o# Se*tion 100D/E 2r.P.2., the re*over) wa" $ade #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. wa" "urrounded ') hi" neigh'our", 4i" hou"e no

there#ore,

neigh'our would li&e to 'e a witne"" to the re*over) whi*h wa" e##e*ted #ro$ the hou"e o# the a**u"ed. @hen

the re*over) prove" to 'e a genuine one, non *o$plian*e o# the provi"ion" o# Se*tion 100D/E 2r.P.2. doe" not $a&e it dou't#ul. Ad$ittedl), the *o$plian*e o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

245

Se*tion

100D/E

2r.P.2.

i"

$andator)

and

the

inve"tigating o##i*er wa" re>uired to independent witne""e" #ro$ the

oin at lea"t two 'ut in the

lo*alit)

given #a*t" o# the *a"e, the authoritie" re#erred ') the learned de#en*e *oun"el in

3sho0 5u&ar9s 1ase

D"upraE, Raj )al Sin#h9s *a"e D"upraE and Rattan9s 1ase D"upraE are o# no help to the a**u"ed. 1:2. 7 al"o #ind no $erit in the *ontention o# the

learned de#en*e *oun"el that no hair were re*overed #ro$ the right hand o# the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh on the da) o# o**urren*e. P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh wa" not

"uppo"ed to narrate in hi" "tate$ent a'out the arti*le" re*overed #ro$ the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh. 4e i" the

*o$plainant and "i$pl) $ade hi" "tate$ent with regard to the o**urren*e. P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh ha"

*ategori*all) "tated that there were "o$e hair in the right hand o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -he hair were

ta&en into po""e""ion, &ept in a pla"ti* 'ag and the 'ag wa" "ealed with the "eal i$pre""ion FSSF. -he

pla"ti* 'ag wa" ta&en into po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-A/ 1 whi*h wa" witne""ed ') AS7 Sat Pal Singh, P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh and P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon. A" hair were

alread) ta&en into po""e""ion ') the poli*e, there#ore, the "a$e *ould not 'e depi*ted in the photograph o# the dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh. -he hair were to 'e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

246

depo"ited in ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) along with the "a$ple hair". -here#ore, 7 #ind no u"ti#i*ation in

"ending the hair to ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) without having the "a$ple hair. hair wa" "ent to 2. the 6n 18.10.2001 "aid par*el o# ?oren"i* Singh S*ien*e 'ut the 3a'orator) "a$e wa"

through

P@-;;

5a winder

returned with o' e*tion".

P@-;; 2. 5a winder Singh ha"

e.plained that the ?7R atta*hed with the "a$ple" wa" not legi'le and the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator)

Authoritie" returned the par*el with an o' e*tion that the *op) o# the on ?7R wa" not da) legi'le. i.e. Moreover, the

i$$ediatel)

the

ne.t

19.10.2001,

par*el" *ontaining hair wa" depo"ited in the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator). report in A" per the the ?oren"i* hair S*ien*e wa"

3a'orator) re*eived

A..P-292,

par*el

?oren"i*

S*ien*e

3a'orator),

Pun a',

2handigarh on 19.10.2001, through 2. 5a winder Singh DP@-;;E. 6therwi"e, al"o there were no *han*e" o#

te$pering with the par*el o# hair 'e*au"e the"e were dul) "ealed and &ept in the Mal&hana where the

te$pering wa" not po""i'le.

-he another *ontention o#

learned de#en*e *oun"el i" that a" per the te"ti$on) o# P@-1: Sarvinder Singh when he had "een the a**u"ed he wa" wearing a Pat&a and -ur'an, thu", having hair in the right hand o# the de*ea"ed o# the head o# Man it

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

247

Singh wa" not po""i'le.

7 #ind no rea"on to *on*ur -here were a" $an)

with the learned de#en*e *oun"el.

a" 21 in urie" on the 'od) o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh whi*h it"el# "u##i*ient to draw a *on*lu"ion that a "*u##le too& pla*e 'etween the a""ailant and the

de*ea"ed and hi" tur'an $ight have #ell down on the ground during the "aid "*u##le. More i$portantl) the

"a$ple" o# hair ta&en #ro$ the head o# a**u"ed Man it Singh have $at*hed with the hair re*overed #ro$ the right hand o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -here#ore, no $ore

eviden*e i" re>uired to prove that it i" a**u"ed Man it Singh who in#li*ted the in urie" to de*ea"ed %i a)

Singh and during the "*u##le the hair o# Man it Singh "tu*& in the right hand o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed whi*h were re*overed #ro$ hi" dead 'od) i$$ediatel) a#ter the o**urren*e. -he hair #ro$ the right hand o# de*ea"ed

wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion ') the 7nve"tigating 6##i*er in the pre"en*e o# AS7 Satpal Singh, P@-2 Shiv Ra Singh and P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon who have al"o -hi" #a*t *annot

witne""ed the re*over) $e$o A..P-A/1.

loo"e "ite that the a**u"ed wa" e.a$ined ') P@-;1 <r. Moni&a per"on and o# "o$e in urie" Man it ?oren"i* have 'een reported @hen on the te"t wa"

a**u"ed ') the

Singh. S*ien*e

the

*ondu*ted

3a'orator)

"u##i*ient to prove that the hair re*overed #ro$ the

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

248

right hand o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and the "a$ple hair o# a**u"ed Man it Singh $at*hed with ea*h other, no other te"t wa" re>uired. -here i" no di"pute on the

law laid down ') the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in

Ja#ta9s 1ase

D"upraE

that

the

$inute

detail"

are

re>uired to 'e $entioned in the in>ue"t pro*eeding", 'ut in the *a"e in hand i# the inve"tigating o##i*er ha" not $entioned the #a*t o# having hair in the hand o# de*ea"ed in the in>ue"t pro*eeding", the entire

inve"tigation *annot 'e ter$ed a" tainted one. 1:;. -he $o'ile phone No&ia ;220 i" proved to have

'een re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. P@-21 Narinder Ku$ar ha" proved that the "aid

$o'ile phone No&ia ;220 wa" "old ') hi$ to Man it Singh vide 'ill A..EP-101. ;1;980008919102, -he 7MA7 nu$'er o# thi" $o'ile i" the *all detail" A..P-2;0

wherea"

depi*t" the 7MA7 No. ;1;980008919101;.

-he #ir"t "i.

digit" repre"ent" the t)pe approval *ode", the ne.t two digit" repre"ent" the #inal a""e$'l) *ode and then the ne.t "i. digit" repre"ent" the "erial nu$'er. -he

re$aining are the "pare digit" and thi" digit will 'e F0F D=eroE when tran"$itted ') the $o'ile "tation. -he

7MA7 nu$'er in the given *a"e are o# 1: digit" thu", the la"t two digit" "hall 'e treated a" I00J and in that *a"e 7MA7 nu$'er o# the $o'ile phone No&ia ;220

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

249

owned and po""e""ed ') a**u"ed Man it Singh $at*hed with the *all detail" A..P-2;0 and thu", it "tand"

proved that the *all $entioned at "erial nu$'er 1/28 in the *all detail" A..P-2;0 wa" re*eived #ro$

98880;/099 to A..P-10;. 1:/.

988809/099 on $o'ile phone No&ia ;220

7t i" the *a"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur that

the *ell phone nu$'er 988809/099 wa" with her #a$il) then it wa" #or the a**u"ed to e.plain who wa" u"ing thi" phone nu$'er in her #a$il) and #ro$ who$ it wa" re*overed ') the poli*e. 'earing $o'ile nu$'er A" di"*u""ed a'ove, the S7M ha" 'een u"ed on

988809/099

1;.10.2001 #ro$ the No&ia ;220 owned and po""e""ed ') a**u"ed Man it Singh then no $ore eviden*e i" re>uired to prove thi" #a*t. 1:1. alleged Ad$ittedl), the 'lood group on the "port "hoe" to 'e re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed

Ravdeep Kaur ha" not 'een got $at*hed.

Si$pl) the #a*t

that there were hu$an 'lood on the "port "hoe" i" not "u##i*ient Singh, 'ut to it *onne*t i" the "a$e that with a" a**u"ed the Man it

*orre*t

per

?oren"i*

S*ien*e 3a'orator) report A..P-29; --"hirt, pant, 'elt, underwear, pair o# "o*&" and Pat&a o# %i a) Singh

de*ea"ed, Kurta-Pa) a$a o# a**u"ed Man it Singh were #ound to 'e "tained with hu$an 'lood o# group F6F and

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

250

the "oil "$eared with 'lood li#ted #ro$ the "pot i" al"o #ound to 'e "tained with hu$an 'lood group F6F. -he 'lood l)ing at the "pot wa" o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh whi*h i" #ound on the Kurta-Pa) a$a re#erred a'ove o# the a**u"ed Man it Singh, thu", it prove" the pre"en*e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh at the "pot and there i" no dou't that it i" a**u"ed Man it Singh who in#li*ted the in urie" to %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. 1::. 7t "tand" proved #ro$ the te"ti$on) o# P@-1/

Sohan Singh, 2hie# Manager, 2anara Ban& that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur withdrew R". ; 3a*" ea*h vide vou*her" dated 10.09.2001 A..P-6 and dated 0:.10.2001 A..P-P

#ro$ her Saving Ban& A**ount No. 1088 in 3eela Bhawan Mar&et Bran*h o# 2anara Ban&. -he learned de#en*e

*oun"el ha" tried to e.plain that thi" a$ount wa" u"ed ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur #or rai"ing *on"tru*tion. A$it Kohli entered Kaur into on a written agree$ent -he <@-1 with

a**u"ed

Ravdeep

22.09.2001.

original <@-1

agree$ent ha" 'een pla*ed on #ile a" A..<-AB.

"tated that he re*eived R". / 3a*" on 22.10.2009 vide re*eipt A..<-A2 on the date o# the agree$ent. 4e again

re*eived R". / 3a*" a" part o# the running 'ill vide re*eipt A..<-A< dated 10.09.2001. re*eived another "u$ o# R". ; 6n 0:.10.2001 he had 3a*" on a**ount o#

running 'ill vide re*eipt A..<-AA.

-hu", i# it i"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

251

pre"u$ed to 'e *orre*t that thi" a$ount wa" utili=ed ') Ravdeep Kaur #or *on"tru*tion even then it "tand"

proved that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" a "ound #inan*ial po"ition. a$ount o# 7t i" al"o pertinent to $ention here that an R". o# her 2 3a*" wa" al"o re*overed at the #ro$ ti$e the o# it

po""e""ion "ear*h o#

a**u"ed hou"e

Ravdeep on

Kaur

2:.10.2001.

-here#ore,

"tand" proved that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" *apa*it) to pa) a "u$ o# R". 1 3a*" to a**u"ed Man it Singh with

who$ her relation "tand" proved. 1:9. -he learned de#en*e *oun"el ha" $u*h "tre""ed

on the point that P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh and P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh have o# *ondu*ted an ') a a**u"ed a a in tainted a *a"e

inve"tigation. regi"tered *ertainl) and doe"

A*>uittal

inve"tigated not lead to

poli*e

o##i*er that the

*on*lu"ion

inve"tigation wa" tainted. a**u"ed are a*>uitted ')

7n $o"t o# the *a"e", the giving 'ene#it o# dou't".

Moreover, even i# it i" dee$ed to 'e *orre*t that 'oth the inve"tigating o##i*er" o# thi" *a"e earlier

$anipulated the eviden*e in "o$e *ri$inal *a"e doe" not lead to an in#eren*e that the #al"e witne""e" and the #orged do*u$ent" have 'een introdu*ed/addu*ed in thi" *a"e. A" o'"erved a'ove, the eviden*e i" "u##i*ient to -hu", #ro$ an) angle

lead *onvi*tion o# the a**u"ed.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

252

inve"tigation *ondu*ted ') P@-/9 and P@-1: *annot 'e ter$ed a" tainted. 1:8. -he Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e titled

5rishna 2hosh Vs. State of !est "en#al, 2$$9(2) RCR (Crl.) '$9
while dealing with the *a"e 'a"ed on

*ir*u$"tantial eviden*e ha" laid down guide line" and o'"erved that +-

the #ollowing

IThe conditions precedent in the words of this Court, before conviction could be based on circumstantial evidence, must be fully established. They are ! ". the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned #must# or #should# and not #may be# established$ %. the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be e plainable on any other hypothesis e cept that the accused is guilty$ &. the circumstances should nature and tendency$ be of a conclusive hypothesis

'. they should e clude every possible e cept the one to be proved$ and

1. there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused(. 1:9. the -he pro"e*ution in thi" *a"e ha" #ul#illed all *ondition" re>uired to 'e proved in a *a"e o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

253

*ir*u$"tantial eviden*e. 190. -he Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in *a"e titled

a" Sar ir Sin#h Vs. State of )unja , 199%(1) Cri&es '1' (SC) ha" o'"erved that +I) istence reasoning evidence(. 191. 7n the *a"e in hand a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had a P@-;: in cases of a motive on is often an

enlightening factor in a process of presumptive depending circumstantial

"trong $otive to eli$inate %i a) Singh de*ea"ed.

<eepinder Kaur wi#e o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed ha" "tated that <al it Singh Bahia, Retired -eh"ildar D#ather o# a**u"ed Ravdeep KaurE and her #ather-in-law D#ather o# %i a) Singh de*ea"edE having ver) good relation" with ea*h other. %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and a**u"ed Ravdeep

Kaur were o# the "a$e age and the) grew up together. A#ter her $arriage with %i a) Singh de*ea"ed, he told that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wanted to $arr) hi$ wherea", he had no intere"t in her. A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had

'een *o$pelling her hu"'and %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to $arr) her even 'e#ore and a#ter hi" $arriage. #a$ilie" had tried to $a&e a**u"ed Both the Kaur

Ravdeep

under"tand a" to whatever wa" thought ') her in thi" regard, i" not *orre*t. 7n the )ear 1989 Ravdeep Kaur ?ro$

wa" $arried to <r. Raghvinder Mann o# 2handigarh.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

254

thi" $arriage Ravdeep Kaur wa" not happ) and "he had 'een pre""ing her hu"'and D%i a) Singh de*ea"edE to $arr) her. hu"'and at Ravdeep Kaur then "tarted living with her 4ou"e No. 19-A, Nihal Bagh, Patiala.

Ravdeep Kaur then had a "on. her hu"'and did not la"t.

4owever, in#atuation #or Ravdeep Kaur even "tarted

*o$ing to her hou"e on the prete.t o# 'u)ing *lothe" #ro$ her 'outi>ue. She never li&ed her *o$ing to her She even had a tal& with her point. *o$e to She her even hou"e *he*&ed tal&ed with her to

hou"e in thi" $anner. $other-in-law Ravdeep prete.t. Kaur on not thi" to her

the"e #ro$

Aven

$other-in-law

*o$ing to her hou"e. regard "tarted with her

She al"o had a tal& in thi" -herea#ter, to her 'ut Ravdeep the) Kaur never

hu"'and. phone *all"

$a&ing

re"ponded. #ro$ hi"

6n*e her hu"'and even told her a#ter *o$ing o##i*e that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had 'een

"ending o'"*ene SMS to hi$ and al"o $ade phone *all" to hi$ and al"o told her that he had even repre$inded Ravdeep Kaur on that a**ount. -herea#ter, "he *a$e to

&now that Ravdeep Kaur had turned out her hu"'and #ro$ the hou"e "o that he $a) not *au"e an) trou'le in relation" o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and Ravdeep Kaur. She had ten"ion on that a**ount, a" "u*h, "he al"o tal&ed with her hu"'and. 4e a""ured that he would not

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

255

gave a long rope to Ravdeep Kaur and "he need not worr). Again a#ter *o$ing #ro$ hi" o##i*e her hu"'and

told her that he re*eived a telephone *all #ro$ a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to the e##e*t that "he had given a threat to hi$ ') "a)ing that "he had alread) le#t her hu"'and #or hi$ and now i# de*ea"ed doe" not leave her DP@-;:E and $arr) her DRavdeep KaurE, "he will got hi$ &illed. At that ti$e, her hu"'and a""ured her not to worr) and al"o "aid to her that "he DRavdeep KaurE *an do

nothing.

4owever, "he a"&ed hi$ to 'e *are#ul a" "u*h Again one da) when

lad) *an do an)thing at an) ti$e.

her hu"'and wa" awa) to hi" o##i*e, Ravdeep Karu *a$e to her hou"e ') *ar and a"&ed her and her $other-in-law a'out the wherea'out" o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh. She

>ue"tioned the pre"en*e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur at that ti$e at her hou"e whereupon "he "aid to her that i# "he *ould not own %i a) Singh de*ea"ed, "he would not even allow her to have hi$. She ha" #urther "tated that

when her hu"'and wa" po"ted a" Additional <i"tri*t G Se""ion" 5udge, 3udhiana, Ravdeep a**u"ed ha" tried to enter into hi" retiring roo$ during lun*h hour" 'ut the "e*urit) per"on" did not allow her to enter the

retiring roo$.

4er hu"'and told thi" in*ident to her.

4owever, even a#ter lun*h "he entered into the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed where "he *reated a "*ene and told her

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

256

hu"'and that "he will not leave her alive even i# he $a) e$plo)ee an) nu$'er o# "e*urit). 192. -o #urther prove the $otive Satinder Singh

Se&hon ! 2hanni ha" appeared in the witne"" 'o. a" P@-9 and ha" depo"ed that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed told hi$

a'out eight $onth" prior to the o**urren*e that Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed had a"&ed hi$ to divor*e hi" wi#e and to $arr) her to whi*h he de*lined. 2orro'orating the

ver"ion o# P@-;: <eepinder Kaur and P@-9 Satinder Singh Se&hon, P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi ha" depo"ed that %i a) Singh de*ea"ed had 'een &nown to hi$ "in*e hi" *hildhood. Ravdeep Kaur i" al"o &nown to hi$. 4er 4e i"

#ather i" retired -eh"ildar <al it Singh Bahia. al"o &nown to hi$.

?ather o# %i a) Singh wa" #riendl) A**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur want" to Ravdeep Kaur wa" not

with <al it Singh Bahia. $arr) %i a) Singh

de*ea"ed.

having *ordial relation" with her hu"'and. want to pull on with hi$. hu"'and out o# the hou"e.

She did not

Ravdeep Kaur had turned her %i a) Singh told the$ that

"he u"ed to "end hi$ dirt) $e""age" and "he u"ed to tal& her on telephone in a illogi*al $anner. Singh did not li&e it at all. %i a)

4e D%i a) SinghE told

hi$ that he had re'u&ed Ravdeep Kaur #or thi" 'ut "he did not relent. %i a) Singh al"o "tated to hi$ that

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur told hi$ that i# he *ould not 'e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

257

her, "he would not let hi$ to 'e with an) 'od) el"e. %i a) Singh al"o told hi$ that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" al"o *reated a $e"" in the 2ourt at 3udhiana. 4e al"o

told hi$ that a**u"ed had al"o gone to hi" hou"e and e.tended threat to hi" $other and wi#e. 19;. Be"ide" thi" the pro"e*ution had al"o e.a$ined

Kuldeep Singh ,rewal, Advo*ate a" P@-2; who happened to 'e pre"ent in the 2ourt o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed at 3udhiana on 29.09.200; at ;+;0 p.$. 4e ha" depo"ed

that Ravdeep Kaur a**u"ed entered in the 2ourt roo$ o# de*ea"ed and "tarted $i"-'ehaving %i a) Singh "a)ing that he had not $arried her and had there') "poiled her li#e. le#t 4e had $arried to one lad) <eepi and "he had her hu"'and. She #urther "tated that he had

"poiled her li#e and he hi$"el# wa" doing 5udge"hip *o$#orta'l). She al"o "tated that "he would "poil hi" She

li#e in the "a$e $anner a" her li#e wa" "poiled. al"o threatened %i a) to li>uidate *all %i a) Singh

de*ea"ed. and

-herea#ter,

Singh

"e*urit)

o##i*ial"

dire*ted the$ to ta&e a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur out o# the 2ourt roo$. -he ver"ion o# thi" witne"" ha" 'een

#urther *orro'orated ') P@-/2 A$it -a)al, ?ront 6##i*e Manager, Ma e"ti* Par& Pla=a 4otel, 3udhiana. 4e ha"

"tated that on 29.09.200; Ravdeep Kaur had "ta)ed in their hotel a" per *o$puter re*ord and "he wa" allotted

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

258

roo$ No. ;0/.

She had "ta)ed in their 4otel #ro$ /+;1

p.$. to 9+0: p.$. and in thi" re"pe*t 'ill No. :989 #or a "u$ o# R". ;/10 a" tari## o# the roo$ and $ore 4e

pa)$ent in re"pe*t o# other order" wa" *harged. handed over *op) o# 'ill A..P-1;; to the poli*e.

-hu",

te"ti$on) o# P@-/2 A$it -a)al i" "u##i*ient in it"el# to prove the pre"en*e o# Ravdeep Kaur in 3udhiana on 29.0;.200; when "he *reated a "*ene in the 2ourt o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. 19/. 7t al"o "tand" proved that Ravdeep Kaur got a

*o$plaint $ade #ro$ her "ervant Narain Singh again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and hi" wi#e <eepinder Kaur. -o

prove the <<R A..P-2;1 dated ;0.01.200/ AS7 Ra$ Ki"han ha" "tepped into the witne"" 'o. a" P@-1; who in>uired and inve"tigated the "aid *o$paint. P@-1; ha"

"pe*i#i*all) "tated that on in>uir) the "aid *o$plaint wa" #ound #al"e and another <<R A..P-2;2 wa" re*orded. ?ro$ the te"ti$on) o# P@-1; AS7 Ra$ Ki"han #urther goe" to prove that Narain Singh wa" wor&ing with a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and he lodged thi" *o$plaint at the

in"tan*e o# Ravdeep Kaur.

-he #a*t *annot loo"e "ite

that Ravdeep Kaur al"o pur*ha"ed a pi"tol on 0;.0;.200/ vide *a"h $e$o A..P-108 and to prove thi" #a*t P@-29 7"ht Pal Singh ha" appeared in the witne"" 'o. who ha" *ategori*all) "tated that on 0;.0;.200/ a pi"tol @e'le)

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

259

and S*ott .;2 'ore wa" "old to Ravdeep Kaur. 7n her e.tra udi*ial *on#e""ion $ade to P@-11 Rupinder Singh,

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ha" ad$itted thi" #a*t that "he pur*ha"ed the pi"tol to &ill %i a) Singh de*ea"ed 'ut did not have the *ourage to i$ple$ent the "a$e. 191. 7t al"o "tand" proved that a**u"ed Ravdeep

Kaur $ade an anon)$ou" *o$plaint again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# the 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G4ar)ana at 2handigarh. -he *op) o# the

*o$plaint A..P-1:0 wa" re*overed on 2;.10.2001 #ro$ the drawer o# the ta'le o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur during

"ear*h o# Ravi 4o"pital owned and run ') her, ') P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh. -he "aid *op) o# the *o$paint

wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-11:. P@-/8 Shiva Nand, o##i*ial o# the 4onF'le 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana, 2handigarh 'rought the original

re*ord and proved the original *o$plaint A..P-19; along with the envelope A..P-19/ whi*h i" dated 08.09.200/. P@-/9 <ara Singh, A""i"tant, CPS S*hool, Patiala where the "on o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur wa" "tud)ing had

produ*ed two appli*ation" A..P-198 and A..P-199 'earing ad$itted hand writing and "ignature" o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. the -he hand writing o# the *o$plaint A..P-19; and writing in the a#ore"aid two appli*ation"

hand

A..P-198 and A..P-199 were "ent to ?oren"i* S*ien*e

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

260

3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh #or *o$pari"on and the ?oren"i* A..P-298 S*ien*e $a&e" 3a'orator) it *lear report the dated 22.02.200: on the

that

writing

*o$plaint a" well a" on the envelope ha" 'een written ') one and the "a$e per"on who ha" written the

appli*ation A..P-198 and A..P-199.

-hu", it "tand"

proved that it i" a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur who $ade thi" anon)$ou" *o$plaint again"t %i a) Singh de*ea"ed to the 4onF'le 2hie# 5u"ti*e o# 4igh 2ourt o# Pun a' G 4ar)ana at 2handigarh. -hu", #ro$ the a'ove di"*u""ion, it

"tand" proved that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur intended to $arr) %i a) Singh 'ut he re#u"ed to divor*e hi" wi#e and to $aintain an) relation"hip with her whi*h

pro$pted a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur to hat*h a *on"pira*) to a""a""inate %i a) Singh. 19:. 7t al"o "tand" proved that to e.e*ute her

$otive, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur hired a**u"ed Man it Singh to eli$inate %i a) Singh de*ea"ed. -here i" "u##i*ient

eviden*e on re*ord that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur had a ver) *lo"e relation"hip with a**u"ed Man it Singh. -o prove

their relation"hip, the pro"e*ution ha" e.a$ined P@-;/ 5oginder Singh, ,uard, Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala who ha" depo"ed that in the $onth o# Ma), 2001, at a'out 8+;0 p.$. he wa" "itting in the "e*urit) roo$ "ituated at the $ain gate o# Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala. At

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

261

that ti$e, he re*eived a telephoni* *all in#or$ing that one lad) and one gent" were "itting in a *ar near State Ban& o# Patiala "ituated in (niver"it) and al"o advi"ed the$ to go there and *he*& the$. 4e along with Su&h'ir

Singh went to that "pot where one 4onda 2it) 2ar wa" l)ing par&ed. and on the 6n the driving "eat one lad) wa" "itting #ront "eat one ,iani Si&h per"on wa"

"itting.

6n their a"&ing the lad) had di"*lo"ed a'out

their identit) that "he wa" <o*tor o# Ravi 4o"pital, (r'an A"tate, Patiala and the gentle$an "itting ') her "ide wa" the ,ranthi Man it Singh. 'oth le#t that pla*e. 6n hi" a"&ing the)

P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi ha"

#urther prove" the a""o*iation o# the a**u"ed with ea*h other. 4e had "een a**u"ed Man it Singh vi"iting Ravi 4e had al"o "een Ravdeep Kaur toward" *ar No. %i a) Singh de*ea"ed near CPS

4o"pital ver) o#ten. pointing while Man it in Singh her

"itting

PB11-N-0110

2how&, Patiala.

7t i" al"o pertinent to $ention here

that on 18.10.2001 a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" arre"ted and on hi" per"onal "ear*h one po*&et diar) A..P-189 wa" re*overed having $o'ile nu$'er", phone nu$'er" o# re"iden*e and ho"pital o# Ravdeep Kaur. -he "pe*i$en

hand writing o# a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" ta&en 'e#ore P@-1/ <r. Ra nee"h, the then learned 5udi*ial

Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala on 28.10.2001 and wa" got

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

262

*o$pared with the hand writing o# the "aid diar). *o$pari"on, the hand writing o# the po*&et

6n

diar) -he

A..P-189 tallied with the "pe*i$en hand writing. do*u$ent" e.pertF" report i" A..P-291.

Be"ide thi"

during the "ear*h o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 19.10.2001, one photograph A..P-1;9 wa" al"o

re*overed whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1/;. 199. -he pro"e*ution ha" al"o e.a$ined P@-12 A$it

Ku$ar, Nodal 6##i*er o# the %oda#one who ha" "tated that one %oda#one S7M *ard 'earing nu$'er 98880;/099 had 'een i""ued in the na$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. She al"o got i""ued an add-on *onne*tion on the "aid $o'ile phone 'earing No. 988809/099. 4e ha" #urther

proved the *all detail" A..P-229 o# $o'ile phone nu$'er 98880;/099 A..P-2:1 w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 2/.10.2001.

-he $o'ile phone nu$'er 98880;/099 wa" re*overed #ro$ the po""e""ion o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur at the ti$e o# her arre"t on 18.10.2001 whi*h wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1//, wherea" S7M A..P-21: o# $o'ile nu$'er 988809/099 wa" re*overed vide $e$o

A..P-219 on 2:.10.2001 #ro$ a**u"ed Man it Singh in pur"uan*e o# hi" di"*lo"ure "tate$ent A..P-211. -he

*all detail" o# the "aid $o'ile phone" are A..P-2;0 w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 2/.10.2001. -he *all detail"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

263

reveal"

that

there

ha"

'een

:0;

*all"

in

'etween

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur and Man it Singh w.e.#. 01.09.2001 to 1:.10.2001. other #ro$ Both the a**u"ed were tal&ing to ea*h 01.09.2001 #ro$ to 1;.10.2001 Dda) o# dail) and to

therea#ter,

1;.10.2001

o**urren*eE

1:.10.2001 there wa" no tal& in 'etween the$ on the"e telephone". -he re*eipt" A..P-1;: and A..P-1;9 o# the

"aid $o'ile phone" were re*overed #ro$ the *up 'oard o# the 'ed roo$ o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 21.10.2001 ') 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh vide $e$o A..P-1/; whi*h reveal" that the pa)$ent o# 'ill" o# 'oth the"e $o'ile phone" have 'een $ade ') a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. P@-19 Sunil

Rana had al"o proved that the $o'ile nu$'er 981190:001 wa" in the na$e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur. detail" o# thi" nu$'er ha" 'een to pla*ed on -he *all #ile a" She phone

A..P@-19/A re*eived

w.e.#. o#

11.09.2001

1/.10.2001. on thi"

SMS

a**u"ed

Man it

Singh

nu$'er on 21.09.2001 and ;0.09.2001. phone nu$'er wa" re*overed #ro$ the

-he "aid $o'ile po""e""ion o#

a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur on 18.10.2001 at the ti$e o# her arre"t and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1//. 198. A..P-229 7t al"o "tand" proved that the invitation *ard o# F,reh Prave"hF o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed

Man it Singh wa" re*overed #ro$ the drawer o# the ta'le

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

264

o#

a**u"ed

Ravdeep

Kaur

during

the

"ear*h

o#

Ravi

4o"pital on 2;.10.2001.

-he invitation *ard A..P-229

wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion ') P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh vide re*over) $e$o A..P-11:. 6n the "aid

*ard A..P-229, the telephone nu$'er o# a**u"ed Man it Singh i" printed a" 988809/099. ha" "tated that he printed the P@-10 5ugal Ki"hore invitation *ard #or

F,reh Prave"h *ere$on)F o# the hou"e o# a**u"ed Man it Singh in the $onth o# Augu"t, 2001. invitation Printing A..P-2:1 *ard Pre"". o# F,reh A..P-229 -wo whi*h wa" 4e ha" proved the printed in hi" and

2o$pa*t o#

di"&" the

A..P-2:0 o#

Prave"hF

hou"e

a**u"ed

Man it Singh were al"o produ*ed ') hi" #ather Kuldip Singh during the *our"e o# inve"tigation whi*h were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-2:2. -he

"aid *o$pa*t di"&" reveal" that a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur attended the F,reh Prave"hF *ere$on) o# hou"e o#

a**u"ed Man it Singh and al"o re*eived a FSiropaF in the "aid #un*tion. wa" al"o re*overed Be"ide thi" one *a""ette A..P-1;1 #ro$ the da"h 'oard o# *ar o#

Ravdeep Kaur with a photo o# a**u"ed Man it Singh with a title I2haran Ka$al <a Aa"raJ. -he "aid *a""ette wa"

al"o ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion on 21.10.2001 vide $e$o A..P-1;/. 199. -he te"ti$on) o# P@-;9 <r. A$andeep Kaur

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

265

#urther prove" the *lo"e relation"hip 'etween 'oth the a**u"ed. She ha" depo"ed that "he i" dental "urgeon

and having her *lini* in the na$e o# <r. 2hughF" 2lini* at 3ahel 2olon), Patiala. She #urther depo"ed that

a'out a )ear prior to $urder o# %i a) Singh, a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur *a$e to her *lini* #or the treat$ent o# her "on #or hi" 6rthodonti* treat$ent. her"el# a" <r. Ravdeep Kaur. She introdu*ed

She u"ed to *o$e a'out 2B $onth" prior

on*e in a $onth #or the "aid purpo"e.

to the in*ident, the $urder o# %i a) Singh, <r. Ravdeep Kaur had 'rought one Man it Singh, a**u"ed pre"ent in the 2ourt #or the treat$ent o# hi" teeth. She

introdu*ed Man it Singh that he wa" her Ba'a i and wa" >uite *lo"e to her. *are. ti$e". She 'rought -hu", he "hould 'e given proper Man it Singh to her 2lini* 2-/

She ha" proved the pre"*ription "lip A..P-121.

-hi" pre"*ription "lip wa" re*overed #ro$ the hou"e o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ') P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh on 21.10.2001 during the "ear*h o# her hou"e and wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion vide $e$o A..P-1/;. P@-;9 ha"

al"o depo"ed that "he read the new" o# $urder o# %i a) Singh and therea#ter, in -elevi"ion, "he had "een the photograph o# 'oth the a**u"ed and identi#ied 'oth o# the$ a" her patient". She wa" *alled in the poli*e She

"tation where "he identi#ied a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

266

al"o

identi#ied

a**u"ed

Man it

Singh

in

photograph

"hown to her in the poli*e "tation. -he eviden*e di"*u""ed a'ove, thu", "u##i*ient to prove that 'oth the a**u"ed had ver) *lo"e

relation"hip. 180. -he eviden*e led ') the pro"e*ution ha"

e"ta'li"hed the *hain o# *ir*u$"tan*e" whi*h inevita'l) *onne*t" the a**u"ed with the *ri$e and unerringl) -he *hain

point out" toward" the guilt o# the a**u"ed.

o# *ir*u$"tan*e i" "o *o$plete that there i" no e"*ape #ro$ the *on*lu"ion that within all hu$an pro'a'ilit), the *ri$e ha" 'een *o$$itted ') the a**u"ed and none el"e. -he *ir*u$"tan*e" unerringl) pointing out

toward" the guilt o# the a**u"ed are that +1. ,uard P@-;/ 5oginder Singh wa" po"ted a" Se*urit) in Pun a'i (niver"it), Patiala. 7n the $onth o# Ma), 2001 at a'out 8+;0 p.$. he had "een 'oth the a**u"ed in the (niver"it) pre$i"e" in a dar& pla*e "itting in a 4onda 2it) *ar and identi#ied 'oth the a**u"ed when he appeared in the witne"" 'o.. 2. P@-10 3a&h'ir Singh ! 3a&hi had al"o "een a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur pointing Man it Singh toward" %i a) Singh de*ea"ed while "itting in her *ar No. PB11-N-0110 near CPS 2how&, Patiala. "een Man it Singh vi"iting Ravi 4e had al"o 4o"pital at

Patiala o# a**u"ed Ravdeep Kaur ver) o#ten.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

267

;.

P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal ha" "tated that on 1;.10.2001 he *a$e to Patiala along with Ra Birinder Singh in order to di"tri'ute the *ard" o# 'irth da) o# "on o# Ra on 19.10.2001. it wa" @hen a'out Na'ha, Birinder Singh to 'e held the) were *o$ing p.$. 'a*& to 10+;0/10+/1 A#ter

*ro""ing Modi 2ollege *ro""ing toward" 3ower Mall, Polo ,round, he "aw a $otor *)*le rider *o$ing out o# a 'ro&en wall o# Polo ,round who wa" driving the $otor *)*le at a great "peed. identi#ied a**u"ed Man it Singh -he $otor *)*le 4e the pre"ent in rider "lipped and #ell down on the ground.

2ourt and #urther "tated that he "topped hi" *ar a#ter appl)ing 'ra&e". pi*&ed up ') hi$. 'lue &urta pa) a$a "tarted i$$ediatel) Man it Singh got up at on*e. 4i" &irpan whi*h had al"o #allen down wa" At that ti$e he wa" wearing having hi" 'lood $otor "tain". *)*le 4e and

di"appeared within a "plit o# "e*ond. /. P@-;0 7ndre"h Khanna prepared the "ite plan A..P-11; o# the pla*e o# o**urren*e DPolo ,roundE and ha" "tated in hi" *ro"" e.a$ination that Mar&A in A..P-11; i" the *o$pound wall and volunteered that it wa" 'ro&en at "o$e pla*e". -hu", thi" witne"" #urther *orro'orate the te"ti$on) o# P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal that he had "een a**u"ed Man it Singh *o$ing out o# the 'ro&en wall o# Polo ,round riding a $otor *)*le. 1. -he 'lue *oloured Kurta-Pa) a$a wa"

re*overed #ro$ a "uit *a"e whi*h the a**u"ed wa"

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

268

*arr)ing in hi" -A-A 209 'earing regi"tration No. <312-<-919: at the ti$e o# hi" arre"t. -he"e Kurta Pa) a$a" were #ound to 'e "tained with 'lood and thi" #urther *orro'orate" the ver"ion o# P@-1: Sarvinder Singh ,rewal that on the date o# o**urren*e when he "aw the a**u"ed, he wa" wearing a 'lue *oloured Kurta-Pa) a$a whi*h were "tained with 'lood. :. 7$$ediatel) a#ter the o**urren*e %i a) Singh de*ea"ed wa" "hi#ted to A$ar 4o"pital. 6n 1/.10.2001 at the ti$e o# in"pe*tion o# dead 'od) o# %i a) Singh, "o$e hair were #ound "tu*& in hi" right hand whi*h were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion ') P@-1: 7n"pe*tor Sewa Singh vide $e$o A..P-B/1 a#ter *onverting it in a "ealed par*el with "eal FSSF. the A**u"ed Man it Singh wa" produ*ed 'e#ore 2ourt o# 7"t #or hi" #or <r. Ra nee"h, hi" learned 5udi*ial on -he hi" 2la"", ta&ing no the Patiala "a$ple #or o# DP@-1/E hair. giving

Magi"trate 22.10.2001 a**u"ed "a$ple one were gave hair

o' e*tion purpo"e hi"

e.a$ination, and a#ter in a

there#ore, a**u"ed Man it Singh wa" handed over white ta&en *o$' in #or *o$'ing hair *o$ing hi" hair, the e.tra hair le#t in the *o$' po""e""ion and were "ealed par*el with a "eal 'earing i$pre""ion F<RF. -he

hair re*overed #ro$ the right hand o# %i a) Singh de*ea"ed and the "a$ple hair o# a**u"ed were "ent to ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator), Pun a', 2handigarh #or *o$pari"on. ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) report A..P-292 reveal" that par*el FAF *ontained hair alleged to 'e li#ted #ro$ the right hand o#

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

269

%i a) Singh de*ea"ed and par*el FBF *ontained hair alleged to 'e "*alp hair o# a**u"ed Man it Singh ta&en with the help o# a *o$' in the pre"en*e o# 5udi*ial Magi"trate 7"t 2la"", Patiala. 7t i" #urther $entioned in the "aid report that e.hi'it" DhairE *ontained in the par*el FAF and FBF were e.a$ined "*ienti#i*all) and it ha" 'een opined that the hair *ontained in par*el FAF "how "i$ilar *hara*teri"ti*" with the hair *ontained in par*el FBF. report -hu", #ro$ the ?oren"i* S*ien*e 3a'orator) A..P-292 it "tand" proved that the hair

re*overed #ro$ the right hand o# de*ea"ed %i a) Singh were o# a**u"ed Man it Singh. 9. A**u"ed Man it Singh $ade di"*lo"ure

"tate$ent A..P-191 on 19.10.2001 and in pur"uan*e thereo# he got re*overed one &irpan with F"heathF #ro$ ,anda to Kheri Bran*h o# Bha&hra Road near 2anal #ro$ in ,hanour village Sarala S)phon

#ront o# the &i&&ar tree. vide re*over) $e$o A..P-R. diver ha" #urther 4e i" ver"ion. the

-he Kirpan A..P-; and P@-11 4ar'an" Singh the pro"e*ution in the who dived

F"heathF A..P-1; were ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion *orro'orated per"on

Bha&hra 2anal and ta&en out the &irpan along with F"heathF on pointing out ') a**u"ed Man it Singh. P@-;9 Kri"han Ku$ar too& photograph" o# the entire pro*e"" o# re*over) and ha" proved the photograph" A..P-122 to A..P-121. were al"o video graphed A..P-129. -he re*over) pro*eeding" and video *a""ette i"

-he "aid photograph" and the "aid video

*a""ette wa" ta&en into poli*e po""e""ion ') P@-/9 7n"pe*tor 5a""a Singh vide $e$o A..P-12:.

State

Vs.

Ravdeep Kaur & another

270

8. on the

<r. K.K.Aggarwal who i" one o# the $e$'er" o# Board o# <o*tor" who *ondu*ted the po"t$orte$ dead into that the 'eing A..P-; 'od) the on o# %i a) 'o. Singh a" de*ea"ed P@-12 and had had that "tepped "tated A..P-3, letter Kirpan witne"" o#

poli*e $e$'er"

re>ue"t