The judgment establishes the principle that circumstantial evidence, when conclusive and consistent, can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

Anish Dayal, J. - These appeals have been filed assailing the impugned judgment dated 29th January 2019 passed by the learned Trial Court convicting the 2022/DHC/004380 appellants for offence punishable under Section 365/302/201/120-B IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act; and order of sentence dated 13th February, 2019 sentencing both the appellants for rigorous imprisonment for life of fine of Rs. 25,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC r/w Section 120 B IPC (SI for three months in default thereof); rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for offence punishable under Section 365 r/w Section 120 B IPC (SI for three months in default of payment of fine); rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for offence punishable under Section 201 r/w Section 120 B IPC (SI for three months in default of payment of fine); rigorous imprisonment for three years each and fine of Rs. 5000/- (SI for three months in default thereof) for offence punishable under Section 25 Arms Act. All these sentences were to run concurrently except for the one for offence punishable under Arms Act.

The Incident:

2. As per the case of the prosecution, appellants along with other co-accused Asha (since deceased), A (juvenile), S (juvenile) and Kiran Pal in furtherance of criminal conspiracy hired Innova Car number DL-4 CAE 5596 on 24th June, 2010 from Yatrika Tourist Centre, Opposite New Delhi Railway Station, Paharganj, for Haridwar-Dehradun-Mussoorie. They travelled to these locations and somewhere on the way murdered the driver of the said vehicle Manish Mann (the deceased) on 26th June 2010 and threw his dead body to cause disappearance of the evidence. Accused A and S were juvenile and produced before the Juvenile Justice Board. Accused Asha expired during pendency of the trial and proceedings against her abated vide order dated 7th July, 2014 of the learned Trial Court. Appellant Jaswant, Asha 'A' and 'S' were arrested in this case on 29th September, 2010 and upon their disclosure 2022/DHC/004380 appellant Rishi Rallan was arrested from Tis Hazari Court on receipt of information that he would be produced before the Court in FIR No. 106/2010 PS Rajender Naga, as per which a pistol and six live cartridges were recovered from appellant Rishi Rallan and a magazine of pistol with three live cartridges recovered from appellant Jaswant. The trial was conducted together for both FIRs (Nos. 106/2010 and 170/2010). After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was filed and charges were framed against the appellant under Section 302/365/201 r/w Section 120 B IPC in FIR No. 170/2010 and under Section 25 of the Arms Act in FIR No. 106/2010. The prosecution examined 45 witnesses in support of the case, statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and none of the accused persons led any evidence in their defence.

Submissions on behalf of the Appellants

3. Through their respective appeals and arguments on their behalf led by learned counsel, it was submitted that the case of the prosecution was totally based upon circumstantial evidence, they failed to prove a composite unbroken chain and link in the pieces of evidence presented. It was contended that the booking of the car was done in the name of one Satya Prakash (PW-8) on 24th June, 2010 by PW-5 Deepak Kumar and no connection has been established of the appellants with PW-5 or PW-8. It was contended that the genuineness of the booking receipt issued by Yatrika Tourist Centre was not proved nor was there any evidence that booking was not done by Satya Prakash. PW-5 had stated that he had first called another driver by the name of Amit to carry the passengers in the Innova. Subsequently, it was not possible for Amit to reach in time, therefore he recommended name of the deceased and that Amit was neither investigated nor examined and no corroboration was presented 2022/DHC/004380 for this version of PW-5 relating to Amit. The prosecutio