Back
High Court of Delhi
SANJIV KHANNA & G.P. MITTAL
Gurdeep Singh
Versus
State
Criminal Appeal No. 517 of 1999
Decided On : 03-04-2014
Conviction - Murder - IPC 302, Arms Act 1959 - Section 27
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenges his conviction for murder under IPC Section 302 and violation of Section 27 of the Arms Act. The occurrence took place on 15th October, 1997, and the prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony, dying declarations, recovery of the weapon, abscondence of the appellant, and motive.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimonies of eyewitnesses and the recovery of the weapon to be credible, establishing the guilt of the appellant. The court also noted the past history of enmity and the appellant's attempt to discredit the witnesses, ultimately affirming the trial court's findings and confirming the sentence.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the credibility of witnesses, the recovery of the weapon, and the presence of a motive for the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the quality of witness testimonies, the recovery of the weapon, and the past history of enmity to establish the guilt of the appellant.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the trial court's findings and sentence were affirmed. The appellant was directed to surrender to undergo the remaining sentence.
Sanjiv Khanna, J.
1. Appellant-Gurdeep Singh challenges his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for murder of Baljit Singh and violation of Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, vide judgment dated 15th March, 1999 in Sessions Case No. 30/98 arising out of FIR No.946/1997, Police Station Patel Nagar. By order on the point of sentence dated 16th March, 1999, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.500/- under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo six months’ rigorous imprisonment. For the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of which, he has to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months. Sentences have been ordered to run concurrently and benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been directed to be given.
2. The occurrence in question had taken place on 15th October, 1997 at about 9.45 p.m. near Lal Mandir, Baljit Nagar in West Patel Nagar. The prosecution has relied upon testimony of the eye witness Devinder Singh (PW-12), dying declarations made by the deceased to Parabhjeet Singh (PW-6) and Amrik Singh (PW-10) immediately after the occurrence, recovery of knife pursuant to disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872, abscondence of the appellant immediately after the occurrence and motive.
3. The testimonies of witnesses, namely, Devinder Singh (PW-12), Parabhjeet Singh (PW-6) and Amrik Singh (PW10), have to be read along with the testimonies of Tejinder Singh (PW-9) and Santok Singh (PW-11), brother and father of the deceased. While examining the said testimonies, we have to keep in mind that the MLC Ex.PW2/A was recorded at 10.40 p.m. on 15th October, 1997, nearly one hour after the occurrence. The hospital in question, i.e. RML Hospital, was situated at some distance from the place of occurrence, which as noted above, was in West Patel Nagar.
4. Devinder Singh (PW-12) has deposed that on 15th October, 1997 at about 9.45 pm while returning from West Patel Nagar after buying ice-cream and upon passing Lal Mandir, Baljit Nagar, he spotted the appellant armed with a knife, chasing deceased Baljit Singh. Baljit Singh solicited PW-12 to save him from the appellant. But when PW-12 tried to intervene, the appellant tried to assault him. Appellant gave 2-3 knife blows to Baljit Singh. PW-12 escaped and ran towards the house of Baljit Singh and informed his father and brother. Thereafter, he went to his own house and returned to the spot along with his father. He was told that Baljit Singh had been taken to a hospital by Amrik Singh. Thereupon, he along with his father went to the hospital. Father of Baljit Singh had also reached the hospital. Baljit Singh had been taken to Ward No.12, where he was declared dead after sometime. On the basis of statement (Ex.PW1/A) made by PW-12, rukka was prepared and the FIR in question was registered.
5. The FIR in question was registered at about 12.50 a.m. on 16th October, 1997 and this fact was recorded in DD No.46A. The said FIR (Ex.PW1/B) was proved by Head Constable Rohtas Singh (PW-1), in which name of the appellant as perpetrator stands recorded. The name of the appellant also finds mention in DD No.40A (Ex. PW13/A), which was recorded earlier at 11.15 pm on 15th October, 1997 as per which the appellant had assaulted Baljit Singh with knife. The DD entry records that as per the information provided by the PCR Van, Gurdeep Singh had stabbed Baljit Singh at Road No.20, Janta Park, Baljit Nagar.
6. We have perused the cross-examination of Devinder Singh (PW-12), but do not think that there is any ground or reason to disbelieve or not to accept his testimony/version. PW-12’s conduct cannot be categorized as unnatural or suspicious. Trial court has rightly observed that it was natural and normal for PW-12 to first go to t
AI
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
