2016 Supreme(Del) 1831
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
G.S. SISTANI, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, JJ.
SANDEEP KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
GOVT OF NCT DELHI - Respondent
CRL.A.1473/2014, CRL.A.1642/2014, CRL.A.596/2015, CRL.A.1751/2014
Decided on : 28-4-2016
Mr.Satish Kumar with Mr. Umesh Mishra, Advocates
Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP
Headnote:
Murder - Section 302/34 IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act - [302/34 IPC, 27 of the Arms Act] - The court convicted the appellants for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The prosecution relied heavily on the testimonies of three eye witnesses. The testimonies of the witnesses were analyzed, and the discrepancies in their testimonies were considered. The court found the testimonies of the witnesses to be reliable and trustworthy, and upheld the judgment and order on conviction with regard to one of the appellants. However, the court acquitted three appellants due to lack of evidence showing their involvement in the crime.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution relied on the testimonies of three eye witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused. The witnesses testified to the events leading to the murder of the deceased and the involvement of the appellants in the crime. The appellants pleaded innocence and stated that they had been falsely implicated in the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimonies of the witnesses to be reliable and trustworthy, and upheld the judgment and order on conviction with regard to one of the appellants. However, the court acquitted three appellants due to lack of evidence showing their involvement in the crime.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the reliability of the testimonies of the witnesses, the presence and involvement of the appellants at the scene of the crime, and the establishment of common intention among the appellants to commit the murder.
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the testimonies of the witnesses and considered the discrepancies in their testimonies. It found the testimonies of the witnesses to be reliable and trustworthy, leading to the conviction of one appellant. However, the court acquitted three appellants due to lack of evidence showing their involvement in the crime.
Final Decision: The court upheld the judgment and order on conviction with regard to one of the appellants, while acquitting three appellants due to lack of evidence showing their involvement in the crime.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
1. Four appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 20.08.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-04(N/W), Rohini Courts, Delhi by which the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine further simple imprisonment of two months.
2. As per the prosecution, all the four appellants including one Mahesh(not arrested) in furtherance of their common intention committed the murder of Dharambir @ Dharmu (hereinafter referred to as “since deceased”) on 11.02.2008 at 2:45 a.m. at plot no.BG-128, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, Delhi. Further, as per the prosecution Suresh @ Guru used a country-made pistol to fire at the deceased thereby also committed an offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 26 witnesses. Statement of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They pleaded innocence and stated that they had been falsely implicated in the present case. All the four appellants herein did not lead any defence evidence.
4. Before considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, we deem it appropriate to analyse the testimonies of some of the material witnesses. The prosecution has relied upon heavily on the testimonies of three eye witnesses being PW-1, Jai Bhagwan, PW-2, Deepak and PW-3, Satish Kumar.
5. PW-1, Jai Bhagwan has deposed that he was employed with the MCD, at Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar. He was also running a meat shop in MCD Colony, S.P. Badli, Delhi where his younger brothers, namely, Deepak and Sriom used to sit in his absence. Dharambir @ Dharmu was his cousin brother and he was also staying at MCD Lal Bagh, Civil Line Zone. He also used to run a part time business of piggery. He deposed that about 5-10 days prior to the incident, someone has stolen 10-12 pigs of his brother Dharambir. Thereafter, they started guarding their pigs. He deposed that on 11.02.2008, he along with his younger brother Deepak and Dharambir were watching their pigs at S.G.T. Nagar as the pigs used to graze in that area. At about 2:00 to 2:15 a.m. in the night intervening 10/11.02.2008, when he along with Deepak were present near the Shochalya, they heard noise of barking of dogs thereafter he along with Deepak started walking towards BG Block SGT Nagar to verify and presumed that thieves might have come over there. When they reached the BG Block of that premises, two persons whom they did not know, met them there who the witness identified in the Court. This witness correctly pointed at accused Mohd Ahad @ Gopal and Sandeep. The witness deposed that Mohd Ahad @ Gopal had a countrymade pistol in his hand while the accused Sandeep had a gupti. Both the accused persons told them to sit. In the meantime, Dharambir @ Dharmu also reached there. When Dharambir joined them, the accused persons gave a whistle with the help of their fingers and mouth. After hearing the whistle, all the remaining persons including accused Suresh, Vijay and Kake also reached there. This witness deposed that he knew accused Suresh and Vijay prior to the incident as they were residents of MCD Colony, SP Badli and accused Kake used to walk with accused Suresh and Vijay in that area and had seen them many times prior to the incident. The accused persons Suresh, Vijay and Parvinder @ Kake were correctly identified by this witness in Court. The witness also claimed that he can identify one more accomplice of the accused persons, if he was shown to him. This witness deposed that accused Vijay had an iron rod in his hand, accused Parvinder @ Kake had a knife in his hand and while accused Suresh had a countrymade pistol(katta) in his hand. The other accused persons, namely, Suresh, Vijay and Parvinder and their associate reached the spot from behind a building. He deposed that accused Gopal kicked