SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Del) 892

High Court Of Delhi
ABDUL MURASALIN - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
Decided On : 09/16/2005

Headnote:Penal Code, 1860 Section 302, 354 and 392 - Conviction for robbery and murder Witnesses affirming the prosecution case but turned hostile on the identification of accused - One witness identifying the accused, but after his cross-examination was deferred, he admitted that accused person was shown to him by police - Recovery of articles from the accused also proved to have been stolen from the victim - The accused failed to prove his ownership over the stolen property - Accused persons entered the house of victim armed with weapons - The conviction u/s 392 affirmed - The conviction of co-accused for murder held to be an act attributable to him only - Conviction of other accused u/s 302 set aside.

       [Paras 22, 23, 28, 34 & 39]

REKHA SHARMA, J.

( 1 ) ON 27th October, 1998, house No. A-32/15, Main road No. 66, Maujpur, was a mute witness to murder and robbery. It was otherwise a house which appeared to be buzzing with activity. On its first floor lived Shama Parveen along with her three sons and her mother, while on the ground floor she was running a business of air-coolers and real-estate. A portion of the ground floor was also in occupation of her maternal uncle (Mammu) namely, Mohd. Jamil, who was running his own shop from there. Shama Parveen knew one Salvinder alias Kake who was dealing in finance. He was assisting her in her business and was a frequent visitor to the house.

( 2 ) ON the fateful day of 27th October, 1998, she along with Salvinder returned to her house after making purchases from the market little knowing that the coming hours were not to augur well for either of the two. What followed was a gory incident in which she and Salvinder were robbed of their valuables by three persons who had entered her house armed with weapons. Thereafter, one of them made an attempt to outrage her modesty to which salvinder objected, upon which he was shot dead by that person. Shama Parveen thus not only lost her valuables but also underwent the nightmarish experience of witnessing the murder of Salvinder. Here are the details :-

( 3 ) THE three intruders were between the age group of 20-22 years. Two were armed with revolvers and one with a knife. One of them was slim, wheatish in complexion and had a cut mark on his right cheek. The other was tall, fair and without moustaches. The third was round-faced with medium height. Upon entering the house, they inquired about the whereabouts of Mammu to which Shama Parveen replied that he had gone to fetch vegetables. They then snatched a gold ring, a locket and cash amounting to Rs. 100/150 from Salvinder. Thereafter, they asked Shama Parveen to handover the keys of the almirah but she denied being in possession of the same. In the meanwhile, one juice seller came to her house and asked her for money. She told him that she did not have any money and also showed him her empty purse. While she did that, the three boys saw the keys of the almirah in her purse. They pointed a revolver at her and while extending a threat that they would kill her and her three children, took out the keys from her purse. Having done so, they opened the almirah and removed Rs. 15,000/- lying therein. They also found in the almirah the key of the locker with which they opened the same and removed rs. 2,50,000/-, a mobile phone and some ornaments. They also removed ear-rings, three rings and a necklace from the person of Shama Parveen. In the meanwhile, mammu mohd. Jamil, entered the house, and so also, a friend of shama Parveen, namely, Nasreen and her husband Jeeta. Shama Parveen s mother who was already present in the house also came to the same room.

( 4 ) HAVING robbed Shama Parveen, the three robbers started outraging her modesty which evoked protest from salvinder who questioned them as to why they were molesting her when they had even taken away all her valuables. On that, one of the boys asked him to keep shut and at the same time fired a shot at his forehead consequent to which he fell on the bed. Thereafter, the three boys tied all other present in the house with chunnis and sarees and decamped with the robbed articles including the cash. Before leaving the house they closed the door from outside. About 10-15 minutes later, one of the sons of Shama Parveen, namely, Danish, entered the house and untied them all. The injured Salvinder was taken to the hospital where he was declared `brought dead .

( 5 ) THE facts, as noticed above, have emerged from the statement of Shama Parveen which she made to the police soon after the incident. The police reduced her statement into writing and after obtaining her signatures thereon, registered a case under Sections 392/354/302/34 ipc at Police Station Seelampur, Delhi.

( 6 ) ACCORDING












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top