Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Pawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Cr.A.134 of 2019
Decided On : 11-05-2023
MURDER - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was found guilty of murdering his wife by slitting her throat with a knife. The prosecution presented evidence including the appellant's call to the police, recovery of the murder weapon, and testimonies of witnesses. The appellant denied involvement and alleged false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the evidence against the appellant to be sufficient, including the call to the police, recovery of the murder weapon, and testimonies of witnesses. The court rejected the appellant's denial and concluded that the prosecution had proven the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues included the admissibility of the appellant's call to the police, recovery of the murder weapon, and the appellant's denial of involvement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's call to the police was admissible as evidence, and the recovery of the murder weapon and testimonies of witnesses established the appellant's guilt. The court also applied the principle that the absence of a satisfactory explanation from the accused can indicate guilt.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of conviction and sentence was upheld.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of learned Trial Court dated 19th September, 2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for murder of his wife Meena ("deceased") by slitting her throat with a knife and also the order on sentence dated 26th September, 2018 whereby the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.20,000/- in default whereof, rigorous imprisonment for 1 year for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC").
2. Case of the prosecution is that on 12th April, 2014, at about 4.00 AM, the appellant made a call to the police from mobile No.8750988081 and informed that "mene apni aurot ka murder kar diya hai jiska naam Meena hai" which was recorded in the PCR form (Ex.PW-4/A), pursuant to which, ASI Garib Das (PW-22) along with staff reached Gali No.15, Sudamapuri and started searching for house as the house number was not provided by the caller/appellant. Thereafter, ASI Garib Das talked to the caller/appellant and when he reached house No. C-44/300, he was asked to come inside and on the second floor of the house, ASI Garib Das met the appellant and also found dead body of a female lying in a naked condition. Appellant produced the knife with which he stated to have committed the murder of his wife/deceased from under the pillow of his bed which was seized (Ex.PW-29/B). Crime team was called at the spot. IO/Insp. Mahavir Singh (PW-31) prepared the rukka and got the FIR No. 343/2014 dated 12th April, 2014 under Section 302 IPC at PS New Usmanpur (Ex.PW-12/B) registered. Dead body was sent for post mortem examination to GTB Hospital and the appellant was arrested by the IO/Insp. Mahavir Singh (PW-31).
3. Dr. Neha Gupta (PW-15) at the GTB Hospital conducted the post mortem examination on the deceased and tendered her report (Ex.PW-15/A) and opined:
"External Antemortem Injuries:
1. Incised cut throat wound of size 11 x 0.5 cm. x 3 cm present horizontally over neck, 9.5 cm below chin 4.5 cm above supra sterna notch. The right end 8 cm below right angle of mandible and left end is 4 cm below left angle of mandible. The right end is 6 cm from midline and left end is 5 cm away from midline left end of wound shows tailing. The wound goes cutting skin, subcutaneous tissue muscles of neck, cutting the carotid sheath structures including large blood vessels of neck bilaterally cutting trachea, esophagus and making a cut fracture over the body of C4 cervical vertebrae Extravasation of blood present throughout the tract.
2. Incised wound 2 x 0.1 cm x 0.5 cm present over right acrominum vertically.
3. Incised wound 4 x 0.2 cm x 0.8 cm present horizontally over right shoulder top 12 cm from midline.
4. Incised wound 7 x 0.1 cm x 0.5 cm present obliquely over right shoulder front 11 cm from midline, upper midline end is touching injury No. 3.
5. Incised stab wound 4.6 x 0.2 cm x 12 cm present horizontally over left side back, medial angle acute 2 cm from midline, 12 cm above natal left. Direction of wound goes upwards medically forwards. Track of wound goes cutting skin, subcutaneous tissue, muscles of the back and paravertebral vessels on the left side with Extravasation of blood present throughout the tract and in retroperitoneal space.
6. Incised stab wound 3 x 0.2 cm x 10.5 cm present horizontally over right side flank, 11 cm above anterior superior iliac spine and 14 cm from midline. Direction of wound goes upwards, medially forward cutting the skin subcutaneous tissue, 10'*' intercostal space, lower end of right kidney. Right lobe of liver and diaphragm with extravasation of blood throughout tract.
7. Incised wound L-shaped 1.5 x 0.1 cm .0.3 cm present over medial aspect of 2nd left knuckle.
Time since death: About one and a half days.
Cause of death: Haemorrhagic shock as a result of ante- mortem injury to neck associated blood vessels and abdomen produced by sharp edged weapon. Injury No. 1, 5 and 6 are sufficien
The absence of a satisfactory explanation from the accused can indicate guilt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, including extra-judicial confession, motive, and recovery of the weapon of offence, to establish the guilt....
Double strangulation murder on circumstantial evidence: unbroken chain (motive-honour killing via pregnancy, presence via calls, failed alibi, no S.106 explanation) rules out suicide absent contrivan....
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt in homicide cases, particularly when the accused fail to provide a credible explanation for events that occurred in their vicinity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the shift of burden under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to the accused to explain facts within his knowledge, and the accused's obli....
The chain of circumstances, last seen theory, and recovery of the weapon and blood evidence can establish guilt in a murder case even in the absence of a clear motive.
[The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases, particularly in murder cases where direct evidence is lacking.]
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
