Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA AND R.K.GAUBA, JJ.
MOHD. SHAHID and Ors. – Appellant
Versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 32, 373/2015
Decided On : 4.12.2015
The court examined the facts of the case, including the post-mortem report, FSL report, and witness testimonies, to determine the cause of death and the involvement of the appellants. The court found that the deceased was strangled to death while under the influence of a sedative, and that the appellant Imrana's version of events was false and fabricated. The court also found that the appellant Mohd. Shahid was in possession of the deceased's mobile phone soon after the crime, and that the appellant Sunil was in possession of the deceased's jewelry at the behest of Mohd. Shahid. Based on these findings, the court convicted Imrana and Mohd. Shahid of murder and conspiracy, and acquitted Sunil of the same charges.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Nasir, was found dead in his residence on 11th February, 2009. The post-mortem report indicated that the cause of death was strangulation. The appellant Imrana, who was the wife of the deceased, initially gave a statement to the police claiming that unknown persons had entered their residence and killed Nasir. However, subsequent investigation revealed that Imrana's statement was false and that she was involved in the murder along with the appellants Mohd. Shahid and Sunil.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased was drugged and strangled to death, and that the appellant Imrana's version of events was false and fabricated. The court also found that the appellant Mohd. Shahid was in possession of the deceased's mobile phone soon after the crime, and that the appellant Sunil was in possession of the deceased's jewelry at the behest of Mohd. Shahid.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant Imrana's statement to the police was true and accurate. 2. Whether the appellants Mohd. Shahid and Sunil were involved in the murder of the deceased. 3. Whether the appellants were guilty of murder and conspiracy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant Imrana's statement to the police was false and fabricated, and that the appellants Mohd. Shahid and Sunil were involved in the murder of the deceased. The court relied on the following evidence to reach this conclusion: * The post-mortem report, which indicated that the cause of death was strangulation. * The FSL report, which confirmed the presence of a sedative in the deceased's blood. * The testimony of witnesses, who stated that Imrana's version of events was false. * The recovery of the deceased's mobile phone from Mohd. Shahid soon after the crime. * The recovery of the deceased's jewelry from Sunil at the behest of Mohd. Shahid.
Final Decision: The court convicted the appellants Imrana and Mohd. Shahid of murder and conspiracy, and acquitted the appellant Sunil of the same charges.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
1. This common judgment will dispose of the aforementioned appeals by Imrana, Mohd. Shahid and Sunil, who by the judgment under challenge dated 31st July, 2014 have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for having murdered Nasir, husband of Imrana in the intervening night between 10th and 11th February, 2009. Imrana and Mohd. Shahid have also been convicted for the offence under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC. Imrana has been individually convicted under Section 211 IPC. By the order on sentence dated 15th November, 2014, the three appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Sections 302/120B IPC. Imrana and Mohd. Shahid have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 201/34 IPC. Imrana has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 211 IPC.
2. It is not disputed or under challenge that the deceased Nasir was a kabadi who used to reside at D-534, Wazirpur, JJ Colony with his wife, one of the appellants herein, namely, Imrana. This was the second marriage of both Imrana and Nasir, solemnised about 2 months prior to the occurrence. After their marriage, Imrana and Nasir had cohabited for 8-10 days in the village Vankhala, Dist. Bijnaur, U.P., before Nasir returned to his place of work i.e. Delhi. Nasir had brought Imrana to Delhi on 8th February, 2009 i.e. about 2/3 days before the occurrence.
3. It is an undisputed fact that Imrana and Mohd. Shahid belong to and were inhabitants of village Rajopur, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bijnaur, U.P., whereas deceased Nasir was originally a resident of village Vankhala, Police Station Kotwali, District Bijnaur, U.P. The factum that Nasir had suffered homicidal death in the intervening night between 10th and 11th February, 2009 is proved from the post-mortem report (Exhibit PW28/A), which was conducted by Dr. Deepak Mathur (PW28). On external examination, a contused mark completely encircling the neck, running transversely around the neck measuring 39x1 cm and creating a groove was noticed. On internal examination, brain was found to be congested with betechial haemorrhages in white matter and bruising of strap muscles of the neck surrounding the mark with diffused extravasation of blood along the upper one-third of the muscle. There was also fracture of the upper horn of the hyoid bone at both ends covered with haematoma. The stomach contained semi-digested unidentifiable yellowish food and the walls were congested. The cause of death was opined as asphyxia following ligature pressure upon the neck. In cross-examination, PW-28 clarified that the ligature mark was visible to the naked eye. Dr. Deepak Mathur (PW28), in his deposition and in the post-report Ex.PW28/A, has stated that they had preserved the viscera to rule out the possibility of poisoning. We shall be referring to the said viscera report subsequently.
4. Presence of the appellant Imrana with the deceased Nasir during the intervening night of 10th and 11th February, 2009 is an accepted and admitted position. This factum is also proved by ACP Om Prakash (PW31), Insp. Satya Prakash (PW30), SI Dev Raj (PW29) and HC Naresh (PW11). SI Dev Raj (PW29) has stated that at about 8.10 A.M., DD No. 8 PP Wazirpur JJ Colony was marked to him regarding a quarrel at House No. D-534, Wazirpur JJ colony and he along with Head Constable Naresh Kumar (PW11) had reached the spot where a crowd had assembled. On going inside the house, one dead body was found on a cot and a lady was sitting in front of the door of the store room which was adjacent to the room whe
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
