Back
2014 Supreme(Del) 870
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA, G.P. MITTAL, JJ.
ARUN & ORS. – Appellants
Versus
STATE – Respondent
CRL.A. 773/2011 & Crl.M.(B).2332/2013, 646/2011, 1094/2011
Decided on: 18th March, 2014
Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for Appellant No.1 Ms. Nandita Rao, Advocate for Appellants No.2 & 3, Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP, Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal with Mr. Gautam Khazanchi, Advocates, Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate
The judgment underscores the requirement for clear and conclusive circumstantial evidence to establish conspiracy and guilt in criminal cases.
Headnote:
Conspiracy - Murder - IPC 1860 Section 302/34, Section 120B - Last seen together, Recovery of incriminating articles, Motive
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for the offence of murder under IPC Section 302/34 read with Section 120B. The prosecution alleged that the appellants conspired to eliminate the deceased, who was a manager at a factory, due to various grievances.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the circumstantial evidence insufficient to establish guilt. The 'last seen together' theory was deemed unbelievable, the recovery of incriminating articles was weak evidence, and the motive was not sufficiently proven. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the 'last seen together' theory, the strength of the recovery of incriminating articles, and the sufficiency of the alleged motive.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the need for clear, cogent, and believable circumstantial evidence to prove conspiracy. It highlighted the importance of establishing conclusive circumstances and the incompatibility of innocence in circumstantial evidence cases.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the judgment and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges.
G.P. Mittal, J.
1. Appellants Arun Kumar, Ram Parkash @ Guddu, Krishan Kumar @ Krishna, Prithvi Raj and Rani impugn the judgment dated 26.02.2011 and the order on sentence dated 15.03.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), West 02, Delhi whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/ 34 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, each of the appellant was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
2. Succinctly stated, case of the prosecution is that Satdev Rathi (the deceased) was working as a Manager in a factory named K.N. Inter Plast Pvt. Ltd. owned by one Kuldeep Singh Dalal (PW-13). The five appellants were employed in the earlier said factory. It is case of the prosecution that 2-3 months before the incident, appellants Ram Parkash @ Guddu, Krishan Kumar @ Krishna and Prithvi Raj had consumed liquor in the factory while they were on duty and had then misbehaved with the deceased. On account of this misbehaviour, they were expelled from service.
3. It is further alleged that appellant Arun Kumar and Rani were in love with each other. One day, Rani and Tarun (brother of Arun) started a quarrel in the factory in a loud voice. They were called in the office and were advised to have patience. It is also alleged that the deceased once found appellants Arun Kumar and Rani in objectionable condition in a vacant room inside the factory. It is also alleged that thereafter appellant Arun Kumar stopped coming to the factory as he was under the impression that his services had been terminated. Thus, grievance of these two sets of appellants is alleged to have given them the motive to eliminate the deceased.
4. Hence, all the appellants allegedly entered into a conspiracy. The appellants decided that appellant Rani would lure the deceased to open fields where the remaining four appellants would finish him. In pursuance of the conspiracy, on 17.10.2008, appellant Rani asked the deceased to celebrate karvachauth and persuaded him to meet her (Rani) at Tikri border in the evening. As per the plan, Rani met the deceased at Tikri border and took him to a Tur (Arhar) field. The remaining four appellants followed the two, keeping safe distance. Rani made the deceased undress himself and thereafter the appellants Arun Kumar, Krishan Kumar @ Krishna and Ram Parkash captured him while appellant Prithvi Raj kept a watch on the road. Thereafter, appellants Arun Kumar, Krishan Kumar @ Krishna and Ram Parkash inflicted knife blows on the deceased and after killing him made good their escape.
5. It is alleged that on 17.10.2008, it was karvachauth and PW-1’s mother (Mrs. Sushila) had called up his father (the deceased) on his mobile number 9416052814 at about 6:00 p.m. to inquire about his return. His father told his mother that he would return in half an hour. Thereafter PW-1 went out to play. He returned at about 7:30-7:45 p.m. and his mother informed him of his father (the deceased) not reaching home. PW-1 tried to contact the deceased on his mobile phone but the same was found to be switched off. PW-1 also went in the night to the factory where the deceased worked but he could not get any clue of his father as he was informed by the guard that all the employees had left the office at closing time. Thus, PW-1 along with his other relations including PW-2 searched for his father the whole night but in vain.
6. On 18.10.2008 at about 7:15 a.m., PW-1 again started his search and ultimately at about 8:15 a.m., he reached Police Post Tikri. The police informed PW-1 that one dead body had been found at Nizampur road. While PW-1 and PW-2 were leaving from the Police Post, Kuldeep Singh Dalal (PW-13), owner of K.N. Inter Plast Pvt. Ltd. also reached the Police Post. They proceeded to the spot where the dead body was allegedly lying. On seeing the dead bo
