SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 886

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Vinod Alias Kake – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Cr.A. 1028 of 2017 Cr.A. 630 of 2017, Cr.A. 762 of 2017, Cr.A. 792 of 2017, Cr.A. 905 of 2017 & Cr.A. 1094 of 2017
Decided On : 22-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Aishwarya Rao & Ms. Mansi Rao, Advocates, for the Appellant in CRL.A. 1028/2017.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for the State in CRL.A. 1028/2017 & CRL.A. 630/2017 & CRL.A. 762/2017 & CRL.A. 792/2017 & CRL.A. 905/2017 & CRL.A. 1094/2017.
M.L. Yadav, Advocate, for Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A. 630/2017.
Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A. 762/2017.
Ms. Maulshree Pathak, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A. 792/2017.
Mr. Ajit Kumar, Ms. Nikita Sharma, Ms. Nutan Kumari and Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A. 905/2017.
Mr. Bipin Kumar Jha and Ms. Komal Jha, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A. 1094/2017.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302/34 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 27 - Conviction for murder - Appellants convicted for the murder of Sonu and sentenced to life imprisonment with fines; one appellant convicted under Arms Act - Testimony of eyewitnesses questioned due to potential hostility, however court upheld reliability based on corroborative evidence and circumstances. (Paras 1, 11, 15, 31)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were charged with the murder of Sonu, occurring on 27th November 2010, involving multiple assailants, and witnesses reported shots being fired. Eyewitness accounts questioned during trial on the basis of reliability. (Paras 1, 6, 11)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution evidence, particularly eyewitness accounts and the post-mortem report, substantiated the appellants' involvement in the murder, deeming their conviction justified. (Paras 28, 34)

Issues: Whether the testimony of hostile eyewitnesses could be relied upon to establish guilt and if the evidence presented sufficiently proved the involvement of the appellants in the murder. (Paras 30, 34)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that even if eyewitnesses turned hostile, their credible testimony could still be utilized to support the prosecution's case, especially when corroborated by circumstantial evidence and medical reports. (Paras 27, 34)

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. conviction details and prosecution case established. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. chronology of arrests and charge-sheet filing. (Para 4 , 5)
3. arguments against eye-witness credibility. (Para 6 , 7)
4. defense arguments regarding evidence reliance. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. court's observation on witness credibility and incident conduct. (Para 13 , 14 , 32)
6. witness testimonies relating to the incident. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
7. circumstantial evidence supporting prosecution's case. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
8. investigation details and evidence collection. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
9. dna evidence and its implications. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)
10. legal standards for evaluating hostile witnesses. (Para 27 , 28 , 29)
11. final determination of guilt based on evidence. (Para 30 , 31)
12. conclusion of appeals and judgment tasks. (Para 34 , 35)

JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J. By way of these appeals the appellants Vinod @ Kake, Vicky @ Gobind, Chander Prakash @ Pappu, Anil, Vijay @ Nauty and Mahesh challenge the common judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 7th June, 2017, wherein the appellants were convicted for murder of Sonu @ Bhola (deceased); and the order on sentence dated 8th June, 2017 by which the appellants were directed to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default whereof, rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Appellant Vinod @ Kake was also convicted for offence punishable under Section 27 Arms Act, 1959 and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof, rigorous imprisonment for three months. Appellant Chander Prakash @ Pappu was also convicted for offence punishable under Section 201 IPC and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof, rigorous imprisonment for three months. Accused Prakash Passi was acquitted for offence punishable under Section 216 IPC.

2. In nutshell, case of the prosecution is that on 27th November, 2010 an information was received by the police vide DD No.46A (Ex.PW-8/A) regarding firing incident near Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kali Basti near Kura Khatta in front of Hastsal Village. SI Shiv Dutt Jamini (PW-15) along with Ct. Rajender (PW-7) reached the spot and found blood along with one empty cartridge lying at the spot. As the injured had already been taken to DDU Hospital, he went to the hospital. At the hospital, SI Shiv Dutt (PW-15) found that one Sonu, son of Sh. Rajpal was admitted at the hospital with history of gunshot injury who was declared "brought dead". At the hospital, SI Shiv Dutt (PW-15) met Sunny (PW-19), brother of the deceased and his friend Bunty (PW-3). He recorded the statement of Sunny who informed that the family of appellant Vijay @ Nauty had an old enmity with his family and that on an earlier occasion as well a quarrel had taken place between the members of his family and the family members of appellant Vijay @ Nauty. Sunny further informed that the deceased were going to drop his friend Bunty at Peepal Chowk, Hastsal Village and at about 8.30 PM, the appellants came at the spot. Ranjit @ Rahul, Vicky @ Ganja, Vicky, Mahesh and Anil caught the deceased from behind while Vijay @ Nauty and Chander Prakash @ Pappu fired bullets at the deceased. Bunty and Sunny managed to escape towards Hastsal Village, and after sometime when the assailants left, he and Bunty came back at the spot and took the deceased to DDU Hospital. On this statement of Sunny, FIR No.385/2010 dated 27th November, 2010 under Sections 302/34 IPC read with Section 27 Arms Act was registered at PS Uttam Nagar. The investigation of the case was taken over by Inspector Jai Kishan (PW-30) who prepared the site plan (Ex.PW-30/A) and the crime team was called at the spot. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination on 28th November, 2010 at DDU Hospital.

3. Dr.B.N. Mishra (PW-26) con

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top