(May 29, 2001) 2001 (TLS)125179

2001-DLT-92-641 :: 2001-AD (Del)-5-551

MOHAMMAD SABIR AND ANIL KHANNA Vs. State (National Capital Territory of Delhi)

Mahmood Ali Khan

( 1 ) THESE three appeals, one filed by Mohd. Sabir and anil Khanna jointly and the other two appeals filed individually by Lakhpat Singh and Faryad Alt are directed against an order of Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi dated 19. 9. 1996 by which he has convicted these appellants for committing offence under Section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code and has sentenced each of then to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000. 00 each and in default to undergo further rigourous imprisonment for a period of 12 months. The appellants Faryad Ali and Mohammad Sabir were, however, acquitted of the charge under Section 27 of Arms Act.

( 2 ) THE facts, as disclosed in the FIR and the evidence led by the prosecution, are that on 22. 8. 1994 at about 8. 45 AM a wireless message was received from the PCR that the body of a. man was lying near Gokalpur graveyard near fly over. A D. D. No. 7 Ex. public witness-5/a was recorded. No police officer was present in the police station so the copy of the d. D. was immediately sent to SI Ramesh Chand through a constable Shyamvir Singh. On the way SI Ramesh Chand met SI ajaib Singh and he entrusted him the copy of the D. D. , SI ajaib Singh reached a vacant piece of DDA) land near the graveyard in Kabir Nagar where he found a dead body of a man sprawled on the ground which had incised injuries on his neck, face and left shoulder. Nobody was present there to identify the deceased. or give evidence about the manner in which the crime was committed. SI Ajaib Singh recorded his note Ex. public witness-12/a on the copy of the D. D. No. 7 and sent it to the police station for registration of a case under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. FIR Ex-public witness12/b was thereupon registered at the police station at 10. 30 AM. SI Ajaib Singh picked up the sample of the blood, sample of blood soaked earth and the earth control and preserved it under sealed parcels. He also called the dog squad and the police photographer. The dog squad could not lead to-any clue. After conducting inquest, the body was then sent to G. T. B. hospital mortuary.

( 3 ) IN the afternoon one Abdul wahidpublic Witness-1 met SI AJaib singh and he identified the body as of his younger brother abdul Kalim. In the evening at about 7. 00 or 8-00 PM the i. O. . allegedly recorded the statements of Abdul wahid Public Witness-1 and Ms. Muniranpublic Witness-2, who is the mother of the. deceased, under section 161 Criminal Procedure Code. Both these statements were identical. It was stated that on 21. 8. 1994 both these persons and the deceased Abdul Kalim were at home when at 7. 00 PM all the four appellants came and took away Abdul Kalim saying that they had some account to settle with him and he would be back soon. Abdul Kalim did not return till mid-night so both these witnesses Abdul wahid and Muniranpublic Witness-1 andpublic Witness-2 went to the houses of these appellants where the mothers of these appellants told that they had not come back home. In the morning. Abdul wahid went out searching for his brother Abdul kalim and ultimately reached the police station. There he was told about the recovery of a dead body which had been kept in G. T. B. Hospital. He proceeded to the hospital and identified the body of Abdul Kalim. He came back and informed his mother and other relatives. After the post-mortem examination conducted on the body on 23. 8/1994 the body was handed over to the father and elder brother of the deceased.

( 4 ) THE prosecution story further goes on to state that on 10. 11. 1994 appellant Faryad Ali and Mohd. Sabir Ali were arrested by the police. Their disclosure statements were recorded. They admitted the commission of the offence of murder of Abdul Kalim in complicity with the other two appellants and offered to get the weapon of offe