Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA, R.K.GAUBA, JJ.
KUNDAN SINGH - Appellant
versus
THE STATE - Respondent
CRL.A. 711/2014
Decided on : 24.11.2015
The court held that the appellant, Kundan Singh, was guilty of murdering his friend, Vipin Kumar, based on circumstantial evidence. The court found that the appellant's mobile phone records placed him at the scene of the crime, and that he had made a call to a landline number that was registered to the appellant's mother. The court also found that the appellant had been seen with the victim on the day of the murder, and that he had fled the scene after the murder was committed. The court rejected the appellant's alibi that he was at his mother's house at the time of the murder, and found that the appellant had not provided any credible evidence to support his alibi.
Fact of the Case:
On 13th August, 2007, at about 8.45 p.m., one Brahm Singh, who has deposed as PW1, noticed an unknown person throwing a black colour rexine bag in the bushes at the crossing of Lado Sarai bus stand. Brahm Singh (PW1), who at that time was going in a car, stopped the car, but the said person fled from the spot on a motorcycle parked near the bus stand. Brahm Singh could not note down the exact number of the motorcycle except noticing that the motorcycle had a number with the letters KA 9735. Contemporaneously, Constable Raghubir Singh (PW13) came running to the spot as he had also seen the same incident. Constable Raghubir (PW13) and Brahm Singh (PW1) proceeded to open the said black colour rexine bag upon which parts of a human body including a human head were found.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was guilty of murder based on the following evidence: * The appellant's mobile phone records placed him at the scene of the crime. * The appellant had made a call to a landline number that was registered to the appellant's mother. * The appellant had been seen with the victim on the day of the murder. * The appellant had fled the scene after the murder was committed. The court rejected the appellant's alibi that he was at his mother's house at the time of the murder, and found that the appellant had not provided any credible evidence to support his alibi.
Issues: The issues in this case were: * Whether the appellant was guilty of murder. * Whether the appellant's alibi was credible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant was guilty of murder based on the circumstantial evidence that was presented. The court found that the appellant's mobile phone records placed him at the scene of the crime, that he had made a call to a landline number that was registered to the appellant's mother, that he had been seen with the victim on the day of the murder, and that he had fled the scene after the murder was committed. The court rejected the appellant's alibi that he was at his mother's house at the time of the murder, and found that the appellant had not provided any credible evidence to support his alibi.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appellant's appeal and upheld his conviction for murder.
SANJIV KHANNA, J:
1. In this appeal, Kundan Singh challenges judgment dated 18th January, 2014, passed in S.C. No.32/2008 arising out of charge sheet filed in FIR No.592/07, Police Station Mehrauli, convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for murder of his friend Vipin Kumar. The appellant has also been convicted under Section 201 and 404 IPC.
2. By order on sentence dated 21st January, 2014, the appellant has been sentenced to imprisonment for life, fine of Rs 15,000/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC with a direction that in default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year. For the offence under Section 201 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of seven years, fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. For the offence under Section 404 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/-. On failure to pay the fine, the appellant will undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. Benefit of Section 428 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) would be given.
3. Before we elucidate and adjudicate upon the contentions raised by the appellant with reference to the evidence led by the prosecution, it would be appropriate to note the case of the prosecution in brief.
4. On 13th August, 2007, at about 8.45 p.m., one Brahm Singh, who has deposed as PW1, noticed an unknown person throwing a black colour rexine bag in the jungle near Lado Sarai bus stand. Brahm Singh (PW1), who at that time was going in a car, stopped the car, but the said person fled from the spot on a motorcycle parked near the bus stand. Brahm Singh could not note down the exact number of the motorcycle except noticing that the motorcycle had a number with the letters KA 9735. Contemporaneously, Constable Raghubir Singh (PW13) came running to the spot as he had also seen the same incident. Constable Raghubir (PW13) and Brahm Singh (PW1) proceeded to open the said black colour rexine bag upon which parts of a human body in the form of two hands (chopped), two legs (chopped from the knee) and a head, without the torso, of a male person were found.
5. On the statement of Brahm Singh (PW1) marked Ex.PW1/A, FIR No.592/2007 marked Ex.PW21/A was registered at Police Station Mehrauli. The identity of the person, whose body parts were found in the bag, could not be ascertained. Wireless text messages sent to the SHOs of Delhi and National Capital Region did not help. Inquest papers, under Section 171 Cr.P.C. were prepared and post-mortem, vide report marked Ex.PW-25/A, was conducted at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) on 21.08.07, after which the remains of the unidentified person were cremated.
6. On 10th September, 2007, one Nirbhay Prashant (PW3), on seeing the photographs/advertisement published for identification of the deceased, came to Police Post IGNOU, Mehrauli and identified the deceased as Vipin Kumar, son of late Kanahiya Singh and husband of his sister. Nirbhay Prashant (PW3) disclosed that the deceased used to work at Hotel Plaza Soliter, Gurgaon and he (PW-3) had lodged a missing report of Vipin Kumar at the Police Station Civil Lines, Gurgaon on 5th September, 2007. Other relevant information that the deceased had a saving bank account number 009901532543 with ICICI Bank at Panchsheel Park branch and had last talked to his wife on 12th August, 2007 from his mobile phone number 9313341707, came to light.
7. On examination of the call detail records (CDRs, for short) and after examining the video footage of the ATM of the ICICI Bank at Saket from where money was withdrawn using the ATM card of the deceased, the present appellant was arrested. The evidence and materials collected during the police investigation including the recoveries made at the behest of the appellant form the core evidence of the prosecution case
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
