Back
2016 Supreme(Del) 881
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
G.S.SISTANI, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, JJ.
HARI BAHADUR @ HARI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRL.A. 47/2004
Decided on : 18-2-2016
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Braham Singh, Advocate
Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility and evidentiary value of extra judicial confession, the admissibility of the First Information Report, and the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also clarified the circumstances relevant to finding the intention to cause death on the part of the accused to determine the applicability of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Extra Judicial Confession - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, Section 302 - Section 25 of the Evidence Act, Section 304 Part II - The court discussed the admissibility and evidentiary value of extra judicial confession, the admissibility of the First Information Report, and the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also considered the applicability of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and the circumstances relevant to finding the intention to cause death on the part of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for strangulating his sister-in-law to death. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and an extra judicial confession made by the appellant. The appellant denied the allegations and claimed false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the extra judicial confession was weak evidence and required careful examination. The First Information Report was admissible in part, and the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was partly admissible in evidence. The court concluded that the prosecution had connected the chain of events to the extent of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Issues: The issues included the admissibility and evidentiary value of the extra judicial confession, the admissibility of the First Information Report, and the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also considered whether the offence fell under the purview of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the extra judicial confession was weak evidence and required careful examination. It also ruled that the First Information Report was admissible in part, and the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was partly admissible in evidence. The court applied the circumstances relevant to finding the intention to cause death on the part of the accused to determine the applicability of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The court found the appellant guilty under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and allowed the appeal in part with regard to the period already undergone.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
1. The matter was passed over once as none was present on behalf of the appellant and taken up post lunch.
2. Mr. Braham Singh, Advocate who is present in court is appointed as Amicus Curiae in the matter.
3. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 12.11.2003 and order on sentence dated 15.11.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
4. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Trial Court are as under:
“On 27.8.99 when SHO Inspector R.S. Nehra was to move for the VVIP route duty, Hari Bahadur @ Hari resident of WZ-113, Naraina village, Delhi met him in the police station and disclosed that he has killed his sister (Muhboli) Vishnu in his room at his house no. WZ-113, village Naraina by strangulating her throat. On this disclosure vide DD no.18A SI Sunil Kumar along with const. Yogender Kumar went for inquiry to WZ-113 village Naraina. In the meantime Nar Bahadur and landlord Prem Singh also arrived at the spot. In their presence the key of the room was taken from Hari Bahadur and lock of the room was got opened and they went inside the room. There a dead body of the deceased Vishnu W/o Nar Bahadur was found lying by the side of a wall. There was silky chord around the neck of the deceased tied twice which was having a strong knot, back side. The inspector through wireless called Additional SHO Inspector Sudhir Kumar for taking over the inquiry who along with const. Phool Kumar reached at the spot where ASI Hukam Singh with const. Balwan Singh also reached. Inspector Sudhir Kumar recorded the statement of Nar Bahadur, husband of deceased Vishnu. Nar Bahadur in his statement disclosed that for one month she was living with his brother Hari Bahadur as she had quarrelled with him (Nar Bahadur) and living separately with Hari Bahadur who is a resident of Nepal and presently living at WZ-113, Village Naraina. He also disclosed that Hari Bahadur came to him around at 5:30 AM .on that day at his house informed that he was fed up with the activities Of Vishnu, therefore, he was going to finish himself also. He tried to stop Hari Bahadur but Hari Bahadur ran away. Thereafter he was coming in search of Hari Bahadur and his wife and found the police at the spot i.e. WZ-113, Village Naraina. In view of this statement, a case of offence u/s. 302 IPC was made out. The Inspector prepared a Tahrir and through constable Rajinder Singh got recorded the FIR. The crime team was called at the spot for examination. Photographs were taken through photographers. After the examination of the spot, the site plan was prepared. The notebook was lying near the dead body. In this notebook on the rear cover it was written that he could not bear his insult, therefore, he has killed her and he will also not live. The notebook was seized. The dead body was sent for post mortem to Safdarjang hospital. The statements of witnesses were recorded. During the investigation Hari Bahudur confessed that due to activities of his sister (Muhboli Behan) has murdered her by strangulating her throat. The disclosure statement was recorded and accused was arrested. In the post mortem report Doctor gave the cause of death strangulation by ligature. Scaled site plan was got prepared through Draftsmen. The notebook and specimen hand writing was sent to FSL Malviya Nagar for examination and the accused was committed for trial.
The formal charge against the accused was framed on 2.8.2000 under section 302 of IPC which was read over and explained to the accused and the accused Hari Bahadur pleaded not guilty and claimed trial."
5. The prosecution in all examined 13 witnesses. One witness was examined by the defence. The statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure wherein the appella
