The bail granted to the petitioners is cancelled. They are directed to surrender before the trial court within three days from today, failing which the Superintendent of Police, Jhansi is directed to take the petitioners into custody and send them to jail for serving out the remaining sentence.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
FULL BENCH
( Before : R.M. Lodha, H.L. Gokhale and Ranjan Gogoi, JJ. )
DAL CHAND AND OTHERS – PETITIONERS
Vs.
STATE OF U.P. – RESPONDENT
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s). 2358 of 2011.
Decided on : 04-05-2012
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 439(2)
Counsel for Appearing Parties
Mr. Manohar Singh Bakshi, Advocate (A.C.), for the Petitioners; Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Shiv Prakash Pandey, Advocate, for the Respondent
ORDER
1. By order dated December 9, 2011 passed by this Court, the Sessions Judge, Jhansi was directed to hold an inquiry about the identity of the person who was murdered on August 2, 2000 concerning FIR No. 135 of 2000 and as to whether Bhagwan Das s/o Narain Das who was issued Identity Card No. UP/61/330/765174 by the Election Commission of India and is stated to be alive is the person for whose alleged death, the petitioners namely; (1) Dal Chand s/o Halkai (2), Mohan s/o Kalkai and (3), Rameshwar s/o Mohan were tried pursuant to the complaint lodged by Dhani Ram s/o Bhagwan Das in Sessions Trial No. 444 of 2000 arising out of F.I.R. No. 135 of 2000 and Crime No. 204 of 2000.
2. The above exercise became necessary as the above petitioners, who have been convicted by the Sessions Judge, Jhansi under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for the murder of Bhagwan Das and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and whose conviction has been confirmed in appeal by the High Court and against their conviction, the above Special Leave Petition is pending, took up the plea before this Court that Bhagwan Das, who was allegedly murdered, was still alive.
3. Having regard to the prima facie material placed before this Court, by an earlier order dated November 4, 2011, this Court directed the release of the petitioners on bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
4. In compliance of this Court’s order dated December 9, 2011, the Sessions Judge, Jhansi held an inquiry and he has sent his report. In his report, the Sessions Judge has stated that one Narain Das had two wives. Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Das was born from the first wife of Narain Das. Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Das used to reside in Mohalla Belai, Town and Police Station Mauranipur, District Jhansi and for the murder of that person, accused – petitioners have been convicted.
5. Maanu is another son of Narain Das who was born from his second wife. He is still alive and in order to usurp the property of Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Das, Maanu has now impersonated himself as Bhagwan Das and made publicity that he was Bhagwan Das s/o Narain Das.
6. The Sessions Judge had referred to the oral testimony of Ramanuj Dwivedi (CW 2) Executive Officer, Nagarpalika, Mauranipur, District Jhansi and Smt. Ram Murti (CW 3) the widow of Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Das and also the documentary evidence including the photographs etc. from which he concluded that Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Das s/o Narain Das r/o Town and Police Station Mauranipur, District Jhansi was not alive and the person who is now claiming to be Bhagwan Das s/o Narain Das is actually Maanu.
7. Having regard to the above, we deprecate the position taken up by the petitioners before this Court for the purpose of getting bail that Bhagwan Das for whose murder they have been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment was still alive. The misrepresentation made by the petitioners is highly reprehensible.
8. We, accordingly, recall our order dated November 4, 2011. The bail granted to the petitioners is cancelled. They are directed to surrender before the trial court within three days from today, failing which the Superintendent of Police, Jhansi is directed to take the petitioners into custody and send them to jail for serving out the remaining sentence.
9. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the High Court.
10. Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
11. In view of dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, Crl.M.P. No. 6168 of 2011 does not survive and stands dismissed.