Back
2020 Supreme(Del) 1538
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
J.R. Midha, Brijesh Sethi, JJ.
Charan Singh - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.A. 614 of 2019
Decided On : 25-11-2020
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction of the accused for murder based on circumstantial evidence and dying declaration of the deceased stating that he was stabbed by the accused following a monetary dispute of Rs.700/- - The prosecution witnesses witnessed the deceased and the accused together shortly before the incident - On appeal, the court upheld the conviction noting that the testimony of prosecution witnesses was consistent and credible despite minor discrepancies regarding the timing of events. (Paras 1, 9, 18, 26, 48)
(B) Last Seen Evidence - The concept of being last seen together establishes a critical link; when a person is last seen alive with the accused shortly before death, the burden shifts to the accused to provide an explanation for their presence together. (Paras 24, 25)
(C) Dying Declaration - The court emphasized the credibility of the dying declaration made by the deceased moments before his death to several witnesses, which under section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act is admissible as evidence. (Paras 26, 27)
(D) Contradictions - Minor contradictions in witness testimonies are permissible and do not undermine the overall credibility of their accounts if the statements are consistent in substance. (Para 45) (E) Delay in FIR - The court noted that delays in lodging FIR should not be fatal to the prosecution case and can be justified based on the circumstances surrounding the incident. (Para 40) (F)
Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. outline of factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding weaknesses in prosecution evidence. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence integrity and credibility. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 30 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 45 , 49 , 51) |
| 4. final conclusion and order of the court. (Para 52 , 54) |
JUDGMENT
Brijesh Sethi, J. The appellant has filed the present appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `Cr.P.C') against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 26th November, 2018 and 22nd December, 2018 respectively, in Session Case No. 1899/2016, arising out of FIR No.304/2009, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar; whereby the learned trial court has convicted the accused Charan Singh (hereinafter referred to as the `appellant') to rigorous imprisonment for life along with the fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and in default of payment of fine, appellant was ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
2. Before considering the rival submissions of learned counsels for the parties, we deem it appropriate to outline the case of the prosecution as discussed by learned trial court and it reads as under:
"1...the case of the prosecution is that a wireless information, DD No 46A, was got recorded on 10.08.2009 at about 9:45 PM that in Street No.6, E-Block, Sangam Vihar at Bans Shop a boy was attacked by knife. Ct. Sajjan Kumar along with Ct. Vijay Narayan reached at the place of incident and took the victim to the hospital. Ct. Vijay Narayan was left behind for taking care of the place of incident and on the same day i.e. on 10.08.2009 at about 11:45PM DD No. 54A was got recorded regarding the death of the victim. Thereafter, IO/Inspector J.D Meena went to the place of incident and recorded the statement of Gopal and on his statement, Ct. Meendya Ram went to the P.S. and registered the case. PW Gopal stated that deceased live with his uncle Lal Diwan. Accused Charan singh lives in front of his house. On 10th August, 2009 at about 09:00 PM, both of them had come to his house and they had a little talk and then Ram Avatar (deceased) and accused Charan Singh had left stating that they had to take food. At about 09:40 PM, Ram Avtar (deceased) came shouting and sat outside his house. He was stabbed with a vegetable knife which was lying inserted in his chest. Knife was pulled out by the deceased on his own. Ram Avtar had stated that knife blow was given by accused Charan Singh, because he had asked Charan Singh to return his money i.e. Rs.700/- which he (Ram Avtar) had given to him. However, Charan Singh had, stabbed him with a knife. In the meanwhile, someone had called the police at 100 number and the PCR had arrived at the spot and had removed the victim to the hospital. He came to know later on that Ram Avtar has died. IO/Inspector Meena had prepared the sketch of the knife Ex.PW10/B and seized the vegetable cutting knife vide Seizure memo Ex. PW10/C. The IO had also seized the cap of accused Charan Singh vide seizure memo Ex. PW10/D. Accused was arrested by the IO, his personal search was conducted and his disclosure statement was recorded. Thereafter, accused was sent to JC. On completion of the investigation and other formalities, a charge sheet was finally filed against accused Charan Singh in the court of Ld.MM. The Ld.MM after complying with the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C., had committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial."
3. Vide impugned judgment dated 26th November, 2018, passed by Sh. Gulshan Kumar, learned ASJ-03/South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC and vide order dated 22nd December, 2018, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for Life and with a fine of Rs.20,00
