Back
High Court Of Delhi
VIJAY KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 151 of 1976
Decided On : 05/14/1979
CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 302, 324, 34 IPC - FACTUAL MATRIX - EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY - DISCOVERY STATEMENT - RECOVERY OF WEAPON - DYING DECLARATION - CAUSE OF DEATH - CONVICTION UPHELD.
Fact of the Case:
Vijay and Romesh were tried for intentionally causing the death of Mathura Pershad and causing simple injuries to Pardeep. The trial court convicted them under sections 302 and 324 read with section 34 IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution witnesses were credible and their testimony was corroborated by the discovery statement, recovery of the weapon, and medical evidence. The court also held that the death of Mathura Pershad was caused by the stab injury inflicted by Ramesh and that the appellants were guilty of murder under section 302 read with section 34 IPC.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution witnesses were credible and their testimony was reliable? 2. Whether the discovery statement and recovery of the weapon were admissible in evidence? 3. Whether the death of Mathura Pershad was caused by the stab injury inflicted by Ramesh? 4. Whether the appellants were guilty of murder under section 302 read with section 34 IPC?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution witnesses were credible and their testimony was reliable. The court noted that the witnesses were present at the scene of the crime and had a clear view of the events. The court also noted that the witnesses were consistent in their statements and were not shaken during cross-examination. 2. The court held that the discovery statement and recovery of the weapon were admissible in evidence. The court noted that the discovery statement was made voluntarily and that the weapon was recovered in pursuance of the statement. The court also noted that the recovery of the weapon was corroborated by the testimony of independent witnesses. 3. The court held that the death of Mathura Pershad was caused by the stab injury inflicted by Ramesh. The court noted that the medical evidence showed that the stab injury was the cause of death. The court also noted that the appellants had admitted to inflicting the stab injury. 4. The court held that the appellants were guilty of murder under section 302 read with section 34 IPC. The court noted that the appellants had intentionally caused the death of Mathura Pershad and that they had acted in furtherance of their common intention.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions of the appellants.
( 1 ) VIJAY son of Karan Singh and Romesh alias Kaley son of Piarey Lal were tried by Shri V B. Bansal, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, under section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, for having intentionally caused the death of one Mathra Pershad in furtherance of their common intention and under Section 324 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, for having caused simple injuries with a dagger, in furtherance of their common intention, to Pardeep. The trial court by its impugned judgment dated 26th March, 1976, found the appellants guilty of the aforesaid offences and consequently sentenced them to imprisonment for life under section 302 read with Section 34 and to rigorous imprisonment for one year under section 324, Indian Penal Code read with section 34 of the Code. The sentences, however, were made to run concurrently.
( 2 ) THE appellants feeling aggrieved by their conviction and sentence have separately filed the present appeals which are being disposed of by this common judgment.
( 3 ) BRIEF facts of the case are us under :
"a quarrel took place between Tillu alias Pradeep and Romesh alias Kaly and Vijay on 30th March, 1975, at 12. 30 p. m. Kaley caught hold of Tillu, Vijay proclaimed as to what for be was waiting and that Tillu should be taught a lesson. Romesh alias Kaley gave knife injuries to Tillu on his abdomen and back. In the mean time Mathra Pershad father of Tillu came there and tried to rescue his son. Vijay proclaimed that Mathra Pershad should also be taught a lesson. Vijay caught hold of Mathura Pershad while Romesh alias Kaley inflicted knife injuries on the person of Mathra Persbad. Mathra Pershad fell down on receiving the stab wounds. The appellants managed to escape from the spot. The injured persons, Tillu and Mathra Pershad were removed to the Irwin Hospital by Nanwa Ram (P. W. 7), who got them admitted in the Hospital. "
( 4 ) JAGDISH Bharti (Public Witness 10) informed the police control room at about 12. 30 or I P. M. that a quarrel had taken place in Basti Julahan. Subinspector Kundal Lal Sharma (Public Witness 3) on receipt of the above said telephonic message entered a report at serial No. 116 of the daily diary, copy Exhibit PW 3/a, and passed on the message to Police.
( 5 ) SUB-INSPECTOR Mohan Chander (Public Witness 8) on receipt of the message from the control room made entry in the daily diary at number 10-A, a copy of that entry, copy Exhibit Public Witness Public Witness 8/a, was given to Sub-Inspector Prithvi Singh (Public Witness 24) for investigation of the case. On receipt of the copy, Prithvi Singh went to the spot where he learnt that the injured had already been removed to the Hospital. He went to the lrwin Hospital and collected the injury sheets of Mathra Pershad and Pardeep. Both of them were declared to be unfit for making statement. He met Dalip and Nanwa Ram at the hospital, and recorded the statement of Nanwa Ram Exhibit Public Witness Public Witness 7/a. He sent the same with his endorsement, Exhibit Public Witness Public Witness 9/a, to police station Sadar Bazar for registeration of the case.
( 6 ) ASSISTANT Sub-Inspector Vishwa Nath (Public Witness 9) on receipt of the above said Ruqqa recorded first information report No. 272 dated 30th March, 1975 (Copy Exhibit Public Witness PW9/b ). He sent its copy with the original Ruqqa to Sub-Inspector Prithvi Singh for investigation.
( 7 ) ACCOMPANIED by Nanwa Ram Public Witness Public Witness Sub-Inspector Prithvi Singh visited the spot and prepared rough site plan. Exhibit Public Witness Public Witness 24/a. He also recorded the supplementary statement of Nanwa Ram. On 31st March, 1975, he went to the lrwin Hospital and recorded the statement of Pardeep who was declared fit by the doctor to make a statement. Mathra Pershad, however, was still declared unfit for making a statement. In the evening Ramji Lal (Pw 12) and Harish Kumar (Public Witness 11) came to the police station and informed Sub-Ins
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
