Back
High Court Of Delhi
STATE - Appellant
Versus
KHEM CHAND - Respondent
Civil 179 of 1979
Decided On : 07/07/1993
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - DELAY IN SENDING SPECIAL REPORT TO MAGISTRATE - EFFECT - DELAY IN LODGING FIR - EXPLANATION - NECESSITY - EYE WITNESSES - CREDIBILITY - ASSESSMENT - CIRCUMSTANCES CASTING DOUBT ON PROSECUTION CASE - BENEFIT OF DOUBT TO ACCUSED.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the accused, Khem Chand, inflicted an injury on the back of Laxmi Narain with a Rampi (an instrument of leveling leather) upon the exhortation of his father, Sohan Lal, who was being teased by Laxmi Narain. Laxmi Narain succumbed to the injury. The accused were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found that there were serious doubts about the truthfulness of the eye witnesses, and there were vital discrepancies in the investigation and in the evidence of police witnesses. The court held that the accused could not be convicted only on the basis of the testimony of police witnesses.
Issues: 1. Whether the delay in sending the special report to the Magistrate and the delay in lodging the FIR were satisfactorily explained. 2. Whether the testimonies of the eye witnesses were credible. 3. Whether the circumstances cast a reasonable doubt on the case of the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the delay in sending the special report to the Magistrate and the delay in lodging the FIR were not satisfactorily explained. The court observed that the object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the Police in respect of commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits and part played by them as well as the name of the eye witnesses present at the scene of the occurrence. The delay in lodging the First Information Report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of afterthought. 2. The court held that the testimonies of the eye witnesses were not credible. The court noted that the eye witnesses were chance witnesses, none of them tried to separate the victim and the accused when they were allegedly grappling, none of them tried to chase the accused, and their testimonies contained several discrepancies. 3. The court held that the circumstances cast a reasonable doubt on the case of the prosecution. The court noted that there were vital discrepancies in the investigation and in the evidence of police witnesses, such as the non-mention of the names of the eye witnesses in the inquest report and brief facts, the delay in sending the special report to the Magistrate, and the discrepancy in the testimony of the Investigating Officer regarding the sending of the parcel containing the Rampi for the opinion of the Police Surgeon.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the State challenging the acquittal of the accused.
( 1 ) IN this appeal filed by the State the judgment of acquittal of respondent, Khem Chand is under challenge. The other respondent, namely, Sohan Lal, father of Khem Chand died during the pendency of this appeal and his name has already been struck off.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY, the prosecution case is that the residents of Mukimpura used to tease accused Sohan Lal, also a resident of Mukimpura, by calling him kalia as Sohan Lal was of dark complexion. On 14th May 1978 at about 5 pm Laxmi Narain teased Sohan Lal by addressing him as Kailia and on this Sohan Lal started abusing Laxmi Narain @ Babbu. At that Laxmi Narain being stronger felled Sohan Lal and over-powered him. Incidently Khem Chand came there from Gali Bhim. Khem Chand being Cobbler was carrying with him a Rampi (an instrument of leveling leather ). Sohan Lal exhorted Khem Chand "dekhta Kaya Hai, Sale Ko Jaan Se Maar De" (What are you looking at, kill the rascal ). On this exhortation Khem Chand inflicted an injury on the back of Laxmi Narain with that Rampi. Laxmi Narain fell along the wall of the gali. Thereafter, Khem Chand and Sohan Lal ran away towards Mukimpura. Vishnu Datt Kaushik, who was present at his house came out on hearing the alarm. He found Laxmi Narain lying against wall and bleeding. He gave telephonic information to Police Control Room. The telephonic call was received by Head Constable Rajbir Singh of Police Control Room. SI Vimlesh Kurnari filled in the requisite form and on the basis of that form Head Constable Rajbir Singh entered report No. 38 in the daily diary. Head Constable Darshan Kumar received the telephonic information from Sub Inspector Vimlesh Kumari of Police Control Room about the occurrence. So, the Head Constable Darshan Kumar had recorded that report in Daily Diary at No. 40 and handed over a copy thereof to Sub Inspector Ram Kishan for enquiry.
( 3 ) SUB Inspector Kali Ram who was in Police Control Room received wireless information from Police Control Room that stabbing incident had taken place in Gali Mukimpura. So, he reached the place of occurrence. Laxmi Narain was lying on a cot in an injured condition at that time.
( 4 ) ON receipt of daily diary B report No. 40, Sub Inspector Ram Kishan also reached Gali Mukimpura. Sub Inspector Kali Ram, Suresh Chand, Dharampal and Sita Ram were present there. Sub Inspector Ram Kishan completed various formalities including lifting of blood from the place where injury was indicted and also from the place where Laxmi Narain in fell after receipt of the injury and also took control samples from nearby, preparation of rough site plan on the pointing out of Suresh Chand in the presence of Sita Ram and Dharam Pal and preparation of inquest report, recording of brief facts and the statement of Kishori Lal under Section 174 Cr. P. C. Kishori Lal, father of Laxmi Narain deceased identified the dead body.
( 5 ) DR. L. T. Ramani, Medical Officer of Police Hospital conducted the post martem examination on the body of Laxmi Narain.
( 6 ) SI Ram Krishan arrested Khem Chand vide personal search memo Ex. Public Witness19/cand Sohan Lal vide personal search memo Ex. Public Witness19/d.
( 7 ) ON 16th May 1978 SI Ram Kishan subjected Khem Chand to interrogation on which he disclosed that he could get recovered Rampi. Khem Chand led the Police Party including Kishori Lal, father of the deceased and got recovered Rampi Ex. Pl. A rough sketch Ex. Public Witness 11/d of Rampi Ex. Pl was prepared and the same was taken into possession vide Memo EX. Public Witness 11/e.
( 8 ) SUBSEQUENTLY the case property was sent to CFSL and reports Ex. Public Witness19/e and Public Witness19/f and Public Witness19/g were received.
( 9 ) THE accused were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code.
( 10 ) THE prosecution examined three eye witnesses, namely, Suresh Public Witness-2, Dhararh Pal Public Witness-3 and Sita Ram, Public Witness-4. Suresh, Public Witness-2 also identified Rampi w
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
