# Tarun Goel v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2024) 7 ILRA 778
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-07-04
- **Case number:** Capital Case No. 10 of 2023
- **Bench:** Arvind Singh Sangwan, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/tarun-goel-v-state-of-u-p-52286
- **Pages:** 29

## Headnote

Criminal Law-(The Indian Penal Code1860-Sections 302, 307, 394, 411 & 506)-
Reference has been made by the Court of
Additional
Sessions
Judge/
Special
Judge
(Dacoity Affected Area), Court No.6, Firozabad
for confirmation of death sentence awarded to
appellant vide judgment of conviction holding
the appellant guilty of offence under Sections
302, 307, 394, 411 & 506 of Indian Penal CodeCapital punishment awarded by the trial court is
not a "rarest of rare" case for the following
reasons: (A) Appellant is aged about 45 years
and has two children and wife to support (B)
Trial court has not recorded any finding how it is
a rarest of the rare case. (C) Trial court has also
not recorded the finding that there is no
possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of
appellant in the society (D) Trial court has also
not recorded any finding that accused is a
menace to the society or he is having any
criminal antecedents. (E) If the Court is inclined
to award death penalty, there must be
exceptional circumstance warranting imposition
of excessive death penalty which cannot be
reversed. (Para 68 & 69)

order of sentence modified and death
penalty
awarded
to
the
appellant
commuted to the life imprisonment. (E-15)

List of the Cases cited:

1.Subramanya Vs St. of Karnataka, 2022 0 AIR
(SC) 5110

2.Mohd. Hussain Alias Zulfikar Ali Vs St.
(Government of NCT of Delhi), (2012) 2 SCC
584

3.St. of Mah. Vs Nisar Ramzan Sayyed, 2017(2)
R.C.R.(Criminal) 564

## Text

_Characters 0–39,886 of 100,245. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39886 for what follows._

778 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
38.

With
the
aforesaid
modification, the appeal qua conviction is
dismissed.
However,
the
appeal
qua
sentence is partly allowed and the sentence
is modified.

39. The accused appellant is in jail.
He will undergo the remaining sentence in
accordance with law.

40. Record and proceedings be sent
back to the Trial Court forthwith.
----------
(2024) 7 ILRA 778
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 04.07.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.
THE HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN
MISHRA, J.

Capital Case No. 10 of 2023

Tarun Goel ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Ashutosh Singh, Sri Rahul Srivastava
(A.C.), Sri Shashank Pandey, Sri Rajiv
Lochan Shukla

Counsel for the Respondent:
A.G.A.

Criminal Law-(The Indian Penal Code1860-Sections 302, 307, 394, 411 & 506)-
Reference has been made by the Court of
Additional
Sessions
Judge/
Special
Judge
(Dacoity Affected Area), Court No.6, Firozabad
for confirmation of death sentence awarded to
appellant vide judgment of conviction holding
the appellant guilty of offence under Sections
302, 307, 394, 411 & 506 of Indian Penal CodeCapital punishment awarded by the trial court is
not a "rarest of rare" case for the following
reasons: (A) Appellant is aged about 45 years
and has two children and wife to support (B)
Trial court has not recorded any finding how it is
a rarest of the rare case. (C) Trial court has also
not recorded the finding that there is no
possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of
appellant in the society (D) Trial court has also
not recorded any finding that accused is a
menace to the society or he is having any
criminal antecedents. (E) If the Court is inclined
to award death penalty, there must be
exceptional circumstance warranting imposition
of excessive death penalty which cannot be
reversed. (Para 68 & 69)

order of sentence modified and death
penalty
awarded
to
the
appellant
commuted to the life imprisonment. (E-15)

List of the Cases cited:

1.Subramanya Vs St. of Karnataka, 2022 0 AIR
(SC) 5110

2.Mohd. Hussain Alias Zulfikar Ali Vs St.
(Government of NCT of Delhi), (2012) 2 SCC
584

3.St. of Mah. Vs Nisar Ramzan Sayyed, 2017(2)
R.C.R.(Criminal) 564

4. St. of U.P. Vs Ram Kumar & ors., 2017(5)
R.C.R.(Criminal)785,

5.Chhannu Lal Verma Vs St. of Chhatt., 2019(5)
R.C.R.(Criminal) 192

6.Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar Vs St. of Mah.,
2019(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 302

7.Manoharan Vs St. by Inspector of Police,
Variety Hall Police Station , Coimbatore,
2019AIR (Supreme Court ) 3746

8.Veerendra Vs St. of M.P., 2022(3)R.C.R.
(Criminal) 254,

9.The St. of Har. Vs Anand Kindo & anr. etc.,
2022(4)R.C.R. ( Criminal)735

10.Framing
Guidelines
Regarding
Potential
Mitigating Circumstances to be Considered
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
779
While Imposing Death Sentences, 2023(1)
R.C.R.( Criminal) 571

11.Sundar @ Sundarrajan Vs St. by Inspector of
Police, 2023 Cri.L.R.(SC) 473

12.Ravindar Singh Vs The St. Govt. of NCT of
Delhi, 2023 AIR (Supreme Court)2220

13.Digambar Vs The St. of Mah., 2023 Cri. L.R.
(SC) 564

14.Bhaggi @ Bhagirah @ Naran Vs The St. of
M.P., 2024(1) Crimes 121

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arvind Singh
Sangwan, J.)

1. Reference No. 9 of 2023 has been
made by the Court of Additional Sessions
Judge/ Special Judge (Dacoity Affected
Area),
Court
No.6,
Firozabad
for
confirmation of death sentence awarded to
appellant Tarun Goel vide judgment of
conviction dated 24.4.2023, holding the
appellant guilty of offence (in Sessions
Trial No.877 of 2022 arising out of Case
Crime No.220 of 2022), under Sections
302, 307, 394, 411 & 506 of Indian Penal
Code ( hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and
the order of sentence dated 25.4.2023 vide
which, the appellant was awarded death
sentence, to be hanged till death under
Section 302 of IPC with a fine of
Rs.20,000/-and in case of default of
payment of fine, to undergo further
additional imprisonment for one year;
under Section 307 of IPC, the appellant
was awarded life imprisonment along with
a fine of Rs.20,000/-and in case of default
of payment of fine, to undergo further
additional imprisonment for one year;
under Section 394 of IPC, the appellant
was awarded life imprisonment along with
a fine of Rs.20,000/-and in case of default
of payment of fine, to undergo further
additional imprisonment for one year;
under Section 411 of IPC, the appellant
was awarded three years imprisonment
along with a fine of Rs.5,000/-and in case
of default of payment of fine, to undergo
further additional imprisonment for three
months; under Section 506 of IPC, the
appellant
was
awarded
seven
years
imprisonment
along
with
a
fine
of
Rs.5,000/- and in case of default of
payment of fine, to undergo further
additional imprisonment for three months.
All the sentences were to run concurently.
The appellant has laso filed jail appeal.

2. The Reference and Appeal were
admitted. The Trial Court's record is
received and paper books are ready.

3. Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, Sri
Ashutosh Singh, Sri Shashank Pandey,
learned counsel for appellant, Sri Rahul
Srivastava, learned Amicus Curie for the
appellant, Sri A.N. Mulla and Sri Kailash
Prakash Pathka, learned AGA for the State
and perused the material placed on record.

4. With the assistance of learned
counsel for the parties, the entire evidence
is re-scrutinized and re-appreciated.

5. Facts of the case are that
informant- Arpit Jindal (PW-1) s/o Lokesh
Kumar Agarwal, resident of Mohalla Arya
Nagar, Lane No.9, Police Station Firozabad
North, District Firozabad gave a written
complaint
to
S.H.O.
Police
Station
Firozabad North, District - Firozabad
stating that "Today on 1.4.2022 at about
2:15 p.m. I, Arpit Jindal son of Lokesh
Kumar Agarwal, my mother- Sobha Jindal
wife of Lokesh Kumar Agarwal, my cousin
brother Chandan Agarwal son of Rakesh
Kumar Agarwal, my cousin sister Astha
Agarwal d/o Rakesh Kumar Agarwal, my
cousin sister Akansha Mittal wife of
780 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Manish Mittal, my maternal aunt Sarita
Agarwal wife of Rakesh Kumar Agarwal,
my nephew Arnav Goel son of Tarun Goel
and my another nephew Anshuman Mittal
son of Manish Mittal had gone to D. Bharat
Cinema, Firozabad for watching a movie.
At about 4:30 p.m. our neighbour Bhatiya
called on my mother's mobile phone that
some incident has taken place in your
house and we should immediately rush
back to our home. We all left the movie in
between and while entering our house, saw
that our maid servant Renu Sharma wife of
Narendra Sharma, resident of Tapa Path (
Kaushalya Nagar) was lying in unconcious
and injured condition. On entering inside
the house, I saw that in the room, my
grandmother is lying dead and blood was
spread over the bed. The jewellery and
money lying in the house were missing.
When we thoroughly looked, we saw that
about 70 to 75 thousand rupees, four gold
bangles, one gold earring, two gold rings
and one silver coin were missing. My
grandmother used to keep the bundles of
currency note carefully. Some unknown
miscreants has committed the loot of
money and jewellery and has committed
murder of my grandmother by causing
injuries to the maid servant. By calling an
ambulance, the injured maid servant was
sent to the hospital. My grandmother is
lying dead on the bed, therefore, it is
requested that my report be recorded and
legal action be taken".

6. Thereafter, the police registered
chik FIR-Exhibit-Ka-4 on the written
compliant-Exhibit-K-1,
dated
2.4.2022.
The police started the investigation and on
the same day i.e. on 2.4.2022, recorded a
recovery memo / arrest memo and recovery
of a screwdriver and blood stained cloths of
accused along with cash of Rs.77620/- and
jewellery consisting of four gold bangles,
two gold rings, one earring of yellow metal,
one 20 rupee dollar note and one white
metal note from accused.

7. This recovery memo ( Exhibit Ka7) which was prepared by Sanjay Kumar
Dubey,
Investigating
Officer,
bears
signature of informant -Arpit Jindal as a
witness. As per this recovery memo, the
police party came to the house of appellant-
Tarun Goel who was found present and he
was informed that Case Crime No.220 of
2022 under Section 394/302 of IPC is
registered and the Investigating Officer has
suspicion against him. Therefore, Tarun
Goel was asked to co-operate and Tarun
Goel while keeping his head cool from
under the bedding lying over a bed
produced the cash and jewellery looted in
the incident and confessed that it is the
same money and jewellery which he had
snatched by committing murder of his
grandmother-in-law. While counting the
money, 57 notes of 10 rupees total Rs.570/-
, 200 note of 20 rupees total Rs.4000/-, 107
note of 50 rupees total amount Rs.5350/-,
321 note of 100 rupees total Rs.32100/-, 8
note of 200 rupees total amount Rs.1600/-,
64 note of 500 rupees total amount
Rs.32,000/- and 1 note of 200 rupees total
Rs.200/- were recovered at the spot. The
witnesses namely, Arpit and Himanshu on
seeing the jewellery stated that the same is
of their maternal grandmother and they also
identified a packet of new notes which has
red colour mark. They stated that their
maternal grandmother used to perform
Pooja on festival of Diwali. All these
currency notes which belonged to their
maternal grandmother and jewellery were
taken in possession by keeping in a
separate plastic boxs. Tarun Goel stated
that he confess his offence and had handed
over money, jewellery, T-shirt and lower
pant which were blood stained and were
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
781
washed and dried. He handed over the Tshirt, lower and one screwdriver by which
he committed murder of his maternal
grandmother.
The
screw
driver
was
concealed in dickey of Activa scooter and
recovered from Activa scooter no.UP-15
CV-5735. The screwdriver was having
blood
stains.
Lower,
T-shirt
and
screwdriver were also taken in possession
by the police and kept in separate packets
and were sealed, bearing a sample seal.
Thereafter, on the basis of the evidence
collected at the spot, the accused was
arrested at 10:00 p.m. The recovery memo
was prepared by Sanjay Kumar Dubey,
Investigating
Officer.
Thereafter,
the
Investigating Officer prepared the inquest
report and recovered the dead body which
was sent to postmortem examination. After
completing other formalities, the challan
was presented against the appellant.

8. On completing the investigation,
the charge-sheet against accused-Tarun
Goel under Section 302, 307, 394, 411 and
506 of IPC. was submitted before the
Court. Thereafter, copy of the charge-sheet
was supplied to the accused and charges
were framed under the aforesaid sections
which were read over to the accused.
However, he did not plead guilty and
claimed trial.

9. The Trial Court, in prosecution
evidence examined, informant- Arpit Jindal
(PW-1) who stated on the line of
information given in the FIR which was
recorded on the basis of the written
complaint given by him, Exhibit-Ka-1. He
stated that on the same day i.e. on 2.4.2024,
the jewellery and money was recovered
from the house of accused Tarun Goel
which was concealed under the bedding
lying over a bed. At that time, Himanshu
was also with him along with the police. He
identified that Tarun Goel as the same
person from whom the recovery was
effected. He proved the recovery memo
made by the police regarding screwdriver
and blood stained earth and a white metal
twenty rupees dollar note having serial
no.6-A/1 and it bears the signature.

10. In cross examination, this witness
stated he had not witnessed how incident
took place. Regarding the incident, there
was no CCTV footage and while recording
the complaint (Ex.-Ka-1), he has not stated
about the involvement of Tarun Goel. He
further stated that after police has reached
at the house of Tarun Goel, he also reached
there along with his cousin brother,
Himanshu. He further stated that when they
reached at the house of Tarun Goel, police
had already recovered the items. They
stayed at the house of Tarun Goel for about
5-10 minutes and he and Himanshu came
back from the house of Tarun Goel and the
police also came back. The police did not
stay at the house of the accused after
recovering the articles. This witness stated
that
inquest
report/Panchnama
was
prepared at about 6:00 p.m., which is at
Serial No.9A/15 to 17. He, Rakesh,
Pradeep Kumar Jindal, Himanshu Agarwal
and Manish Mittal were the punches. He
had signed the inquest report which he
identified. He stated that Kamla Devi was
his grandmother. He further stated that the
articles which were recovered by the police
were released in his favour by the Court.
He had brought the same before the Court
and some of the currency notes have been
spent and the some are left which he had
brought.

11. With the permission of the Court,
the case property was opened from which
four gold bangles, two lady gold rings and
one gold earring were found. All these
782 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
articles were exhibited as Ex.1 to Ex-7.
One silver earring and twenty rupees dollar
notes was exhibited as Exhibit-8. One
sealed plastic container received from the
police station was also opened from which
photocopies of the recovered notes was
there, in which 111 notes of 500 having
value of Rs.55,500/- and on 17 pages, 68
notes of 500 having value of Rs.34000 was
there. There were total 46 pages which
were exhibited as Ex.-9 to Ex.-55. There
were two papers of 2000 notes and 200
notes of 5 rupees, 100 notes of 5 rupees, the
total of Rs. 5500/- which were exhibited as
Ex.-58 to Ex.-60. The plastic cane and tape
were exhibited as Ex.-59 & Ex.-60 and the
clothe was exhibited as Ex.-61. He further
stated that the police has taken the
recovered articles to the police station and
he and Himanshu accompanied the police.
He stayed in the police station for three
hours. The compliant was scribed by his
brother-in-law
and
the
recovery
proceedings were done in the police station
in their presence. During this entire
proceedings, the accused was sitting at in
the police station and PW-1 and Himanshu
signed on the recovery proceedings. He
stated that he has no knowledge when the
police
sealed
the
recovered
articles,
however, the same were not sealed in his
presence and only he had signed the
documents. He further stated that the
currency notes which were recovered, were
released by the Court in his favour and the
photocopies of currency notes was got done
by the police at his expenses. Currency
notes which were returned to him, their
photocopies were produced in the Court.

12. This witness, on showing the
recovery memo, stated that as per the
recovery memo 64 notes of Rs.500 hundred
are shown and he admitted that from the
Police Station 111 and 68 i.e. 179 notes of
Rs.500
were
recovered.
He
pleaded
ignorance as to how the police has
produced excessive currency notes over
and above the recovery memo.

13. He stated that in the recovery
memo, 9 notes of Rs.200/- are mentioned
whereas he received 5 notes of Rs.200/-. In
recovery, there are 321 notes of Rs.100/-
whereas, he received 5 notes of Rs.100/-.
He received 2 notes of Rs.2000/- but the
same was not shown in the recovery memo.
On the sealed copy, Case No. 4061 was
mentioned and no one has signed it. The
C.J.M. has made endorsement on 6.4.2022.

14. This witness further stated that he
had received the currency notes as per the
order of the Court and he has submitted the
coloured photocopy of the same in the
Court along with affidavit marked as 20B/1
to 21B/100 which are Ex.Ka-9 to Ex.Ka108.

15. Similarly, the coloured copies of
twenty rupees notes were marked as 22B/1
to 22B/193 which are Ex.108 to 301. The
photocopies of fifty rupees notes were
marked as 23B/1 to 23B/100 which are
Ex.302 to 402. Coloured copy of ten rupees
notes were marked as 24B/1 to 24B/50
which are Ex.403 to 452.

16. He further stated that as per the
order of the Court, he got the photostate
copies and till date, the Investigating
Officer did not get the copies of the notes.
He prepared copies on 2.9.2022 and
submitted in the Court on 5.9.2022. He
further stated that accused- Tarun Goel was
doing work of sale of sanitary articles and,
in connection of his business, he used to go
to Delhi. Accused-Tarun Goel used to keep
a bag regarding his business separately, in
which, he had a diary along with sample
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
783
articles and money. This witness stated that
he had also gone to Delhi with Tarun Goel
on some occasions but in the Police Station
he had not seen any such bag. He stated
that Tarun Goel is in the business of
sanitary since childhood and running his
business in the name of Pari Traders.

17. PW-1 further stated that for the
last one year, he was also doing sanitary
business and before that he was doing
business of ready made clothes. He stated
that he acquired experience of sanitary
work from Tarun Goel and used to visit
various places in Delhi with Tarun Goel.
He stated that he and Tarun Goel trusted
each other and they even dealt in the giving
and taking of money. He further stated that
writing regarding recovery of the articles
was made in the Police Station. This
witness admitted "this is correct that he was
owning money towards accused-Tarun
Goel". He denied a suggestion that due to
business rivalry, he has falsely implicated
Tarun Goel.

18. Renu Sharma (PW-2), the injured
witness, stated that one year prior to the
incident, she was working in the house of
Kamla Devi and used to cook food.
However, her services were terminated
later on.

19. On 1.4.2022, Kamla Devi called
her on mobile phone and she reached at
2.00 PM. Thereafter, family members of
Kamla Devi had gone to watch a movie in
Bharat Talkies by directing her to take care
of Amma Ji (grandmother). After they left
and at about 2.15 p.m. Tarun Goel came.
She knew Tarun Goel previously as he is
the son-in-law of Amma Ji. She opened the
door. Tarun Goel directly went to the room
of Amma Ji and asked her to prepare tea.
When she prepared tea, he told her to keep
it and he will take it himself. He further
informed Amma Ji was sleeping and after
making tea, she went to the other room to
take rest. At 4.00 PM, Tarun Goel called
her and she saw that Amma Ji was lying dead
and Tarun Goel was carrying a screwdriver
and when she asked him what he had done,
he told her to keep her mouth shut otherwise
she would also be killed. Thereafter, Tarun
Goel stated that she should also be killed and
with a piece of mirror, he caused injuries on
her head, arms and neck. He had caused
injuries to her and had killed Amma Ji and
her bedding was blood stained. This witness
further stated that when she pleaded, what is
her fault and why Tarun Goel was giving her
beating, he stated that since she was a
witness, he would not leave her. Thereafter,
she fell down and Tarun Goel went away.
She gained consciousness after some time.
Then
she
called
Jitendra
Bhatiya,
a
neighbour, who was standing on the roof and
told him about the incident. Uncle Bhatiya Ji
said, "open the door", then she told him that
her both hands were injured and with the help
of her mouth, she had opened the door. Some
other person also came inside and they took
her to the hospital. In the Court she identified
Tarun Goel and stated that he is the same
person who has killed Amma Ji and caused
injuries to her.

20. In cross examination, this witness
stated that after one year, she was removed
from service and thereafter, for the first
time, Kamla Devi, by making a phone call
called her. The daughter-in-law of Kamla
Devi namely Sobha had met with an
accident and received injury on her hand.
After she recovered, services of PW-2 were
terminated.

21. She further stated that
deceased-Kamla Devi made a phone call
from her phone as she used to keep a
784 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
mobile phone with her. She further stated
that on the date of incident, PW-2 was also
keeping a mobile phone and when she
reached the house of Kamla Devi, she was
carrying a mobile phone. She used to talk
to aunty while coming for work. She stated
that she only had number of Aunty in her
mobile phone, however, the same was not
stored. She further stated that she had not
suffered any injury on her own.

22. Tarun Goel stayed at the place of
occurrence for about three hours. There is a
kitchen on the side of the room of Amma Ji
and from the room, there is a passage
leading to the small roof from where house
of Jitendra Bhatiya is visible. There was
latch on the door which can be opened
from one hand and she had opened the
latch with one hand and called Bhatiya Ji.
She again stated that she opened it with her
mouth. She stated that she told Bhatiya Ji
about incident when Tarun Goel had left
and she was in a position to get up.

23. She further stated that at the time
of incident, she was pregnant and in the
incident, her child got aborted and she got
treatment
from
Government
Hospital,
Firozabad and informed about the same to
the police but she cannot tell why police
has not recorded this in the statement. She
denied that no such incident has taken
place.

24. Dr. Siddharth Yadav (PW-3) who
prepared the medico legal report of Renu
(PW-2) recorded the following injuries :

"चोट नां०-1 घ ि में ट ांके िगे ि ए थे। 1 cm के
ब यी ि थ पर थी और 5cm कि ई के ऊपर।

चोट नां०-2 ट ाँके िगे ि ए 4 cm हसर पर उल्टे क न
से 12 से०मी ऊपर।

चोट नां०-3 खुरसट की ि इन 1 से०मी० सीधी
कोिनी पर थी।

चोट नां० 4 खुरसट 3 से०मी० सीधी तरफ गदुन पर
सीधे क न से 7 से०मी० नीचे थी।

चोट नां०-5 फट ि आ घ ि 1x1से०मी० गदुन पर
सीधी तरफ 9 से०मी० सीधे क न से नीचे थ ।

चोट नां०-6 फट ि आ घ ि 1x1 से०मी० सीधी
तरफ पीछे कधधे पर

चोट नां० 7 सीधे कधधे पर ददु की हशक यत थी
हजसके हिये x-Ray की एडि इज दी गयी।

चोट नां०-8 उल्टी ि थ पििी उाँगिी में ददु की
हशक यत थी। "

25. This witness sated that he cannot
give any opinion regarding injury Nos.1 &
2. Injury Nos. 3 to 8 are caused by hard and
blunt weapon and are simple injuries. X-ray
was advised qua injury No.7. The injuries
were 1⁄4 day old. This witness proved the
Medico Legal Report as Ex.Ka-2.

26. In cross examination, he stated
that he met the injured after stitches were
given to her and none of the injuries was
grievous in nature.

27. Dr. Anurag Gupta (PW-4) who
conducted the postmortem of Kamla Devi
recorded the following injuries :

"चोट नां०-1 हिहिधन इनस इण्ड िूधड गिे एिां जब़िे
के उल्टी तरफ 13 X 8 cm हगतनी में 6 औसत आक र 1 X
1.5 cm मसि तक गिरी चोट प यी गयी।

चोट नां०-2 एक हधक Incised wound गिे के
सीधी तरफ 7 X 4 cm क्षेत् में हगनती में च र चोटों क औसत
आक र 1 X 1 1⁄2 cm म ाँस पेहशयों तक गिरी चोटें प यी गयी।

चोट नां०-3 एक हधक Incised wound छ ती
पर एिां पेट के ऊपरी ि ग में आगे की तरफ 25 X 25 क्षेत् में
हगनती में आठ औसत आक र 1 X 11⁄2 cm म ाँस पेहशयों तक
गिरी प यी गयी।
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
785

चोट नां०-4 Abraded Contusion कांधे के
उल्टी तरफ आगे की ओर 10 X 4 cm क्षेत् में प यी गयी।

चोट नां०-5 रेहखक क आक र Abrasion
िम्ब ई में 16 cm पीठ के ऊपरी ि ग में Scapula bone
उल्टी तरफ थी। नीचे की ओर ज ती ि यी पीठ के ऊपरी ि ग में
सीधी तरफ चोट प यी गयी।

चोट नां०-6 8 X 6 cm आक र क
Contusion पीठ के सीधे ि ग में प यी गयी।

आधतररक परीक्षणः-

1- हसरः-कोई चोट निीं।

हझहल्िय ाँ एिां रक्त ि हिहनय ाँ पेि थी महस्तष्क क
िजन 1250/ ग्र म एिां Pale प यी गयी।

गिे की हस्थहत गिे के आधतररक उरकों की हस्थहत
इस प्रक र उसमें Incised wound प य गय ।

अधय उपहस्थहतयों की हस्थहत मे जम ि आ खून
Larynx एिां श् ाँस की निी के च रों ओर प य गय । Hyoid
bone में कोई पररितुन निी प य गय ।

छ ती की हस्थहतः- 3-8 पसहियों में फ्रेक्चर प य
गय जो सीधी ओर की थी। Plura सीधे ओर की
Lacerated प यी गयी। छ ती की केहिटी में जम ि आ एिां फ्री
रक्त िगिग आध िीटर प य थ ।

फैफ़िो सीधी ओर 350 ग्र म Lacerated थे।
और उल्टी ओर 325/ग्र म Pale थे। हृदय दोनों चैम्बर ख िी
प ये गये हजसक िजन 175 ग्र म प य गय ।

उदरः- उदर हशस्ती की दश में incised
wound प य गय । आम शय में पेस्टी फूड प य गय । छोटी आाँत
में आध पच ि आ ख न ब़िी आाँत में गैस एिां Fecal
Mattal? प य गय ।

िीिर 1300 ग्र म Pale प य गय स्पिीन 150
ग्र म पेि प यी गयी गुद ु द हिनी ओर 90 ग्र म Pale ब यी ओर
80 ग्र म Pale मृत्यु क सांि हित समय 3⁄4 हदन, मृत्यु क क रण
रक्त श्र ि एिां Shock से आयी चोटों के क रण मृत्यु िोन सांिि
िै। "

28. He further stated that that on the
neck, one incised wound was found and
blood was deposited around the breathing
chord and Larynx and there was no injury
on hyoid bone. 3 to 8 ribs were fractured on
the front side. The death occurred 3⁄4 days
before. The wearing clothes of the victim,
Maxi, Blouse, Petikot, two foot-rings, one
white mettled earring, one yellow coloured
nose pin and one black string were handed
over to the police official who had brought
the dead body.

29.

This
witness
proved
the
postmortem report as Ex.Ka-3.

30. In cross examination, he stated
that injury No.1 can be caused by any sharp
edged weapon. Similarly, injuries No.2 and
3 were also caused with sharp edged
weapon. He stated that if many sharp edged
weapons are lying on the earth and victim
fall on such injuries can also be sustained
and injury No.4 to 6 may be caused
because of dragging or falling. There were
fractures on right side of the ribs and no
other fracture was found on other part of
the body.

31. Kishan Singh (PW-5) stated that
he prepared the chik F.I.R. at Serial No.
3A/1 to 3A/3 which bears signature of the
S.H.O. and was exhibited as Ex.Ka-4. He
has made entry in G.D. vide Rapat No. 4 on
2.4.2022. Copy of which is at Serial No.
9A/27 which Ex.Ka-5.

32. In cross examination, he stated
that he dictated F.I.R. to the Computer
Clerk Atul Bhargav and has mentioned so
in the opening of the F.I.R. The complaint
was brought by informant along with two
ladies. The F.I.R. was registered against
unknown persons and at that time, the
accused was not in custody. He denied a
suggestion that on the direction of the
higher official, he registered ante time
F.I.R. and G.D.

33. PW-6, Inspector, Sanjeev Kumar
Dubey stated that he was the Investigating
786 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Officer and prepared CD No. 1 on
2.4.2022. Thereafter, he inspected the spot
and prepared 'naksha nazri' on the asking
of the informant, which is at Sl. No. 5-A/1.
He had prepared and signed the same and
same was exhibited as K-6. He further
stated that he has recorded the statement of
eye witness Renu Sharma, arrested the
accused, recovery memo of the article
which is at Sl No. 6-A and was exhibited as
K-7. He stated that the witness from the
public had signed this Exhibit K-7. He
further stated that field unit which prepared
report is also mentioned and after recording
statement of Tarun Goel, the accused,
section 307, 506 and 411 I.P.C. were added
and Panchayatnama was prepared. This
witness further stated that G.D. No. 2 dated
6.4.202, the Panchayatnama dated 1.4.2022
signed by five witnesses was recorded
which is at Sl No. 9-A/15-17. The same
was exhibited as Ex-K-8. He had prepared
photograph of the dead body, reports of
Inspection
and
letter
to
the
CMO,
Firozabad for post mortem which was
exhibited as K-9 to 12. Vide GD No. 3
dated 4.9.2022. He investigated eye witness
Renu Shamra and other witnesses. Vide
G.D. No. 4 dated 13.4.2022, he made
request to the Court for comparison of the
finger print and DNA sample of the
accused Tarun Goel for matching with the
scientific finger print, blood stained sample
collected from the spot vide G.D. No. 6
dated 17.4.2022. He presented MLR of
Renu Sharm and postmortem report of
Kamla Devi.

34. According to G.D. No. 7 dated
18.4.2022, the order of the Court for DNA
test of Tarun Goel's finger print was
obtained vide G.D. No. 8 dated 19.4.2022.
A copy of order of the Court for DNA
examination of the accused was submitted
to the CMO, Firozabad. This witness
further stated that vide G.D. No. 9 dated
5.5.2022, CMO Dr. Naveen alongwith staff
went to the District Prison and taken blood
sample of the accused Tarun Goel and the
same was handed over to him/I.O. and
Head Moharrir of the police station was
directed that blood sample and the sample
recovered by Forensic Team at the place of
occurrence be sent to Forensic Lab vide
G.D. No. 10 for the purpose of matching of
examination, he recovered the articles
which was signed by the public witness
Himansu and sent to the Forensic Science
Lab, Agra. Thereafter, the statement of
doctor who conducted the postmortem was
recorded in G.D. No.11 and charge-sheet
was presented before the Court on
14.5.2022 vide Exhibit No.13. This witness
further stated that:

इस मुकदमें से सम्बनन्धत माल एक प्लानस्टक की
बोरी में न्यायालय के समक्ष पेश नकया गया नजसे न्यायालय के
अनुमनत से खोला गया। एक अदद रक्त रंनजत दुपट्टा नौकरानी रेनू
शमाष प्लानस्टक में पैक है। नजस पर घटना स्र्थल प्राप्त हुआ नलखा है।
प्लानस्टक की र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष-451, दुपट्टा पर वस्तु प्रदशष452 डाला गया पौलीर्थीन में वेडशीट का टुकडा ननकला, र्थैली पर
वस्तु प्रदशष 453 तर्था बैडशीट के टुकडे पर वस्तु प्रदशष 454
डाला गया। तर्था सादा बैडशीट के टुकडे पर वस्तु प्रदशष- 455
डाला गया। एक प्लानस्टक की र्थैली में रक्त रंनजत चप्पल ननकली
र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष-456 तर्था चप्पलों पर 457 व 458 डाले
गये। एक सिेद प्लानस्टक की र्थैली में दो कडा दो चूडी टूटी हुयी
ननकली जो िारेंनसक टीम ने मेरे सामने कब्जे में नलये र्थे प्लानस्टक
की र्थैली वस्तु प्रदशष 459 व कडों पर 460,461 तर्था चूडी टूटी
पर 462,463 डाले गये। एक प्लानस्टक की पौलीर्थीन रक्त रंनजत
कांच का टुकडा ननकला, र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष 464 व कााँच के
टुकडों पर वस्तु प्रदशष 465 डाले गये एक पौलीर्थीन में सादा कांच
का टुकडा ननकला र्थैली पर 466 तर्था सादा कााँच के टुकडों पर
वस्तु प्रदशष 467 डाले गये। एक पालीर्थीन में मृतका के दो टाप्स
पीली धातु के ननकले पौलीर्थीन पर वस्तु प्रदशष 468 तर्था टाप्सो पर
469,470 डाले गये। एक पोलीर्थीन में रक्त रंनजत पैर का एक
मौजा ननकला, पौलीर्थीन पर वस्तु प्रदशष 471 तर्था मोजा पर वस्तु
प्रदशष 472 डाला गया निंगर नप्रन्ट नजस पर प्रदशष क-473 डाला
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
787
गया एक पटला रक्त रंनजत ननकला नजस पर वस्तु प्रदशष 474 डाला
गया एक पौलीर्थीन में चाय दानी छन्नी ननकली र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष
475 तर्था छलनी पर 476 डाले गये एक पोलीर्थीन में 4 स्टील
का चाय का ग्लास ननकला पालीर्थीन पर वस्तु प्रदशष 477 तर्था
ग्लास पर 478 डाले गये। तर्था चाय दानी पर 479 तर्था पौलीर्थीन
पर 480 डाला गया। एक प्लानस्टक की र्थैली में मृतका के बाल
ननकले र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष 481 तर्था बालों पर 482 डाला गया
एक र्थैली में खून आलूदा नमट्टी ननकली प्लानस्टक की र्थैली में
मृतका के दाये व बाये स्वैप व सादा स्वैप ननकले पोलीर्थीन 485
तर्था स्वेप पर 486 दूसरी पौलीर्थीन पर 487 व 488 डाले गये
एक र्थैली में नौकरानी क स्वेप ननकले पौलीर्थीन पर
489,490,491 डाले गये दूसरी पौलीर्थीन नौकरानी के स्वेप
सादा ननकले र्थैली पर वस्तु प्रदशष 492 स्वेप पर 493, 494
डाले गये। उपरोक्त प्रदशष मेरे समक्ष व मेरी उपनस्र्थनत में िोरेंनसक टीम
द्वारा नलये गये र्थे नजसको मैंने सत्यानपत नकया है। एक प्लानस्टक के
नडब्बा में आला कत्ल पेचकश ननकला नडब्बे पर मेरे व गवाहान व
अनभयुक्त के हस्ताक्षर है। नडब्बे पर वस्तु प्रदशष 495 व पेचकश पर
वस्तु प्रदशष 496 डाला पेचकश पर खून लगा है। नजससे घटना
काररत हुयी र्थी। एक सील मारकीन के कपडे में नजस पर अ०सं०
220/22 से सम्बनन्धत है। नजस पर मेरे व गवाहान तर्था अनभयुक्त
के हस्ताक्षर है। मारकीन कपडे पर वस्तु प्रदशष 497 व नीली कलर
का लोअर वस्तु प्रदशष 498 टी शटष 499 डाला जो रक्त रंनजत है।
जो घटना के समय अनभयुक्त पहने र्था।

35. In cross examination, this witness
stated at that time many people of the
vicinity had gathered and injured Renu
Sharma
was
taken
to
hospital
by
government ambulance, however he did not
remember who accompanied her. This
witness stated that during investigation
nothing came on record regarding giving or
handing over of money between informant
and the accused. The case property relating
to the case was sent to Forensic Lab for
examination and its report was not received
when the charge sheet was filed and even
till date report is not on record. He further
stated that the maid servant Renu Sharma
had left the job and only on the date of
incident she was called back at work. He
did not try to recover mobile phone of
Renu Sharma and same is not mentioned in
the inquiry report. He did not try to find out
if prior to the incident or after the incident
Renu Sharma talked to how many persons
on mobile phone. He denied suggestion that
he has created evidence and submitted the
charge sheet.

36. PW-7, Constable Mohan Singh
stated that he alongwith constable Anjali
has taken the deceased Kamla Devi for
postmortem. Doctor had given cloths worn
by the deceased which were sealed. Seal
and clothes were marked as Ex. 500-506. In
cross examination he stated that the I.O. did
not record his statement.

37. Thereafter the statement of the
accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. was
recorded
in
which
all
incriminating
evidence was put to him. He denied that he
was present at the spot and stated that at
that time, he was doing marketing and
visited 3-4 shops. He denied that he has
caused any injury to Renu Shama and he
has
looted
the
articles
and
money.
Regarding question no. 9 that as per FSL
report Ex.35-A his DNA matched with the
hair and blood found at the spot, this
witness that by extending threat his hair
were taken in the police station and even
blood was taken. He had no knowledge if
blood stained screw driver were recovered
from him.

38. Regarding question no. 12, he
stated that he has suffered loss of money in
gambling and his father-in-law used to help
him and he has not committed any offence.

39. No defence evidence was led.
Thereafter trial court held the appellant
guilty for offence punishable under Section
302, 307, 394, 411 and 506 IPC and
788 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
sentenced him to death penalty, to be
hanged till death.

40. The trial court has thus made a
reference for confirmation for the death
sentence. The appellant has also filed a jail
appeal.

41. Heard learned counsel for the
appellant, learned counsel for the State and
with their help the entire trial record is reappreciated and re-scrutinised.

42(a). Learned counsel for the
appellant has argued that the alleged
recovery of the articles is not in consonance
with Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The
counsel submits that as per the prosecution,
when the police team came to the house of
the
appellant,
they
already
had
an
information that the articles are to be
recovered from the appellant. The counsel
drawn a reference to the recovery memo
Ex.Ka.7 dated 02.04.2022 which is a joint
recovery memo as well as the arrest memo.
It is stated in Ex. Ka-7 that I.O. along with
witnesses reached the house of accused
Tarun Goyal and informed him that FIR for
committing the murder is registered and
police has information that he is in
possession of articles looted from the
deceased. Upon this, the accused told the
I.O. that he has concealed the currency
notes and jewellery under the bed and got it
recovered. The counsel has referred to the
Section 27 of the Evidence Act which read
as under:

"27. How much of information
received from accused may be proved.---

Provided that, when any fact is
deposed to as discovered in consequence of
information
received
from
a
person
accused of any offence, in the custody of a
police-officer, so much of such information,
whether it amounts to a confession or not,
as relates distinctly to the fact thereby
discovered, may be proved."

Learned counsel has referred to the
judgment of the Supreme Court in
Subramanya Vs. State of Karnataka, 2022
0 AIR (SC) 5110 to submit that where the
police has recovered the articles and
clothes of the accused by drawing a
recovery memo under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act, the following conclusion
was made:

"76.
Keeping
in
mind
the
aforesaid evidence, we proceed to consider
whether the prosecution has been able to
prove and establish the discoveries in
accordance with law. Section 27 of the
Evidence Act reads thus:

"27.
How
much
of
information received from accused may be
proved.- Provided that, when any fact is
deposed to as discovered in consequence of
information received from a person accused
of any offence, in the custody of a police
officer, so much of such information,
whether it amounts to a confession or not,
as relates distinctly to the fact thereby
discovered, may be proved."

77. The first and the basic
infirmity in the evidence of all the aforesaid
prosecution witnesses is that none of them
have deposed the exact statement said to
have been made by the appellant herein
which ultimately led to the discovery of a
fact relevant under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act.

78.
If,
it
is
say
of
the
investigating officer that the accused
appellant while in custody on his own free
will and volition made a statement that he
would lead to the place where he had
hidden the weapon of offence, the site of
burial of the dead body, clothes etc., then
7 All. Tarun Goel Vs. State of U.P.
789
the first thing that the investigating officer
should have done was to call for two
independent witnesses at the police station
itself. Once the two independent witnesses
would arrive at the police station thereafter
in their presence the accused should be
asked to make an appropriate statement as
he may desire in regard to pointing out the
place where he is said to have hidden the
weapon of offence etc. When the accused
while in custody makes such statement
before the two independent witnesses
(panchwitnesses) the exact statement or
rather the exact words uttered by the
accused should be incorporated in the first
part of the panchnama that the investigating
officer may draw in accordance with law.
This first part of the panchnama for the
purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act
is always drawn at the police station in the
presence of the independent witnesses so as
to lend credence that a particular statement
was made by the accused expressing his
willingness on his own free will and
volition to point out the place where the
weapon of offence or any other article used
in the commission of the offence had been
hidden. Once the first part of the
panchnama is completed thereafter the
police party along with the accused and the
two
independent
witnesses
(panchwitnesses) would proceed to the particular
place as may be led by the accused. If from
that particular place anything like the
weapon of offence or blood stained clothes
or any other article is discovered then that
part of the entire process would form the
second part of the panchnama. This is how
the law expects the investigating officer to
draw
the
discovery
panchnama
as
contemplated under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act. If we read the entire oral
evidence of the investigating officer then it
is clear that the same is deficient in all the
aforesaid relevant aspects of the matter."

It is submitted that in the light of
the same, the prosecution has failed to
prove that the recovery was effected in
terms of Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

(b) It is next argued that the I.O.
has stated that the accused confessed for
committing the offence before him and
stated that he has washed his blood stained
clothes but the screwdriver was having
blood staines. The counsel submits that as
per
the
Subramanya
Vs.
State
of
Karnataka (supra), recovery of weapon of
offence, in the first part of recovery memo
cannot be read in evidence as no
explanation is given how the police got the
information that accused was in possession
of the articles looted from the house of the
deceased, on the basis of which the police
entered the house of the accused.