Back
2016 Supreme(Del) 1438
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG & MUKTA GUPTA, JJ.
JAGBIR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
CRL.A. 605/2000
Decided On : 21-03-2016
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate.
Mr. Varun Goswami, APP for the State with SI Tulsi Ram, PS Najafgarh.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on corroborative evidence, including the opinion of the post-mortem doctor and the admissibility of recovered weapons, to establish the guilt of the accused.
Headnote:
Murder - Criminal Law - Indian Evidence Act, Section 27, Indian Penal Code, Section 302 - The court discussed the testimony of the eyewitness, recovery of weapons, and the opinion of the post-mortem doctor. The key legal provisions discussed were Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The court relied on the corroborative evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted for the murder of the victim based on the testimony of an eyewitness, recovery of weapons, and the opinion of the post-mortem doctor. The court found the accused guilty and dismissed the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of the offence of murder based on the corroborative evidence presented, including the testimony of the eyewitness and the recovery of weapons.
Issues: The key issues involved the credibility of the eyewitness, the admissibility of the recovered weapons, and the plea of alibi raised by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the corroborative evidence, including the opinion of the post-mortem doctor and the blood-stained clothes of the deceased, to establish the guilt of the accused. The court also found the plea of alibi raised by the accused to be unsubstantiated.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused was ordered to surrender to custody.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
1. Jagbir Singh has been convicted for the offence of murder of Vajinder vide the impugned judgment dated August 29, 2000 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life vide order on sentence dated August 31, 2000. The learned Trial Court held that the testimony of Suraj Mal, recovery of weapons of offence coupled with the opinion of the post-mortem doctor proved beyond reasonable doubt that Jagbir Singh committed the murder of Vajinder.
2. Police machinery was set into motion on receipt of DD No.34A Ex.PW-11/G at 7.42 AM and DD No.3A Ex.PW-1/A at 8.05 AM informing that a dead body has been found in the bus on July 07, 1996. SI Varinder Singh, PW-2 reached the spot and found a blue line bus bearing No.DL 1P 2037 standing towards the left side of the road. The dead body was lying in the bus near the front gate on a seat, in a pool of blood. There were injuries on the head and the neck. SI Shyam Pal recorded the statement of Suraj Mal, the eye witness on the basis of which ruqqa Ex.PW-8/A was sent.
3. Suraj Mal, PW-8, the eye-witness stated that from July 03, 1996 he was working as helper on bus No.DL-1P-2037, which operated on route No.817 from Najafgarh to Koriya Pul. Raj Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Chotu Ram, the owner of the bus has given the said bus to Vajinder on contract basis. Vajinder was working as a conductor on the said bus and Jagbir was the driver. On July 06, 1996 after completing the last round, as usual he along with Vajinder and Jagbir ate the dinner at Laxmi Dhaba and went inside the bus. Before taking the meal they had taken the liquor. After taking the dinner bus was taken to Baba Haridas Nagar, near Anaj Mandi, Najafgarh and parked near the house of Jagbir in a plot. Thereafter, while Jagbir and Vajinder were settling the earning of bus, a quarrel took place between them. He tried to pacify both of them and told them to settle the dispute next day in the morning. Then Jagbir taunted Vajinder that earlier a helper now a contractor is teaching him how to settle the accounts, Jagbir would see him and went to his house. Thereafter, Vajinder slept inside the bus and he slept outside the bus on the pile of bricks. At about 4.00 a.m. he heard shriek noise, he awakened and saw that Jagbir was standing on the steps of front side door of the bus and inflicting injuries on the head and neck of Vajinder with the Gandasi. After giving 3/4 blows Jagbir came down and he was having blood stained Gandasi in his hand. On this, Suraj Mal asked Jagbir as to what he has done. Jagbir told Suraj to keep quiet otherwise he would also face the same. After that, Jagbir left the gandasi near Vajinder in the bus and went to his house. Then, Suraj entered the bus and saw that Vajinder was lying there in injured condition in a pool of blood. In the meanwhile Jagbir again came in the bus with Phawra (kassi) and asked Suraj to accompany him. As he was frightened and was suffering from old injuries on his feet due to an accident, he slowly went to the house of the owner of bus. Then both of them searched for the bus and later on came to know that near the Anaj Mandi in a bus a dead body was lying. When they reached at the spot, the police was already present. The dead body of Vajinder, conductor was lying in the bus. Murder of Vajinder was committed by the driver of bus namely Jagbir.
4. Dr.L.T.Ramani, PW-3 who conducted the post-mortem found the following external injuries on the body of the deceased:
“1. One deep incised wound. 3½ inch x 1½ inch x bone deep, placed vertically behind left ear. The lower end of the injuries was trailing into a linear abrasion one inch long and then continued as an incised wound of ¾ inch size.
2. Incised wound 2½ inch x 1½ inch x bone deep placed parallel to injuries to the injuries No.1.
3. Incised wound 2 inch x ¾ inch/ muscle deep transversally placed on the left lateral aspect of neck with anterior and posterior ends trailing into linear abrasion.
4. Incised wound 3 inch x 1 inch x
