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) 5265

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Anish Dayal, JJ.
Sh. Pradeep Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Cr.A.488 of 2019 and Cr.A.499 of 2019
Decided On : 26-06-2023

Advocates appeared:
Dr.L.S.Chaudhary, Dr. Ajay Chaudhary, Mr.D.S.Chaudhary, Mr.Vishesh Kumar and Mr.Dinesh Kumar, Advocates, for the Appellant in CRL.A.488/2019 and CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr.Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.488/2019 and CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh and Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Advocates, for Complainant in CRL.A.488/2019 and CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh and Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Advocates, for Complainant in CRL.A.499/2019.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.537/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.537/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh, Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Advocates, for Complainant in CRL.A.537/2019.
Mr.Sidharth Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh Sehrawat, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.622/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.622/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh and Ms.Pratiksha Tripathi, Advocates, for Complainant in CRL.A.622/2019.
Mr.Sidharth Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh Sehrawat, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.624/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.624/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh and Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Advocates, for Complainant in CRL.A.624/2019.
Mr.Divyesh Pratap Singh, Ms.Pratiksha Tripathi, Mr.Ajay and Mr.Vikram Pratap Singh, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.1023/2019.
Mr.Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.1023/2019.
Mr.Dalip Kumar Santoshi and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocates, for R-2 in CRL.A.1023/2019.
Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh, Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Mr. Ajay and Mr.Vikram Pratap Singh, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.1024/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.1024/2019.
Mr.Sidharth Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh, Advocates, for R-2 & 3 in CRL.A.1024/2019.
Dr. L.S. Chaudhary, Dr. Ajay Chaudhary, Mr. D.S. Chaudhary, Mr.Vishesh Kumar and Mr.Dinesh Kumar, Advocates, for R-4 in CRL.A.1024/2019.
Mr.Divyesh Pratap Singh, Ms.Pratiksha Tripathi, Mr.Ajay and Mr.Vikram Pratap Singh, Advocates, for the Petitioner in CRL.A.1025/2019.
Mr. Prithu Garg, APP, for State in CRL.A.1025/2019.
Mr. Sidharth Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh, Advocate, for R-2 in CRL.A.1025/2019.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 365, 304, 220, 167, 34 - Convictions of police officers for offences including abduction and culpable homicide due to custodial torture resulting in death - Court emphasized that police officials cannot escape scrutiny due to their occupational deference, and credible evidence must be presented to ascertain accountability. (Paras 11.28, 12(b)).

(B) Accused were acquitted due to lack of evidence linking them to the crime scene during abduction and death of victim.

(C) The absence of mandatory medical examination post-arrest of the deceased in police custody raises substantial suspicion regarding the treatment received while detained.

Findings of Court:
Convictions affirmed for all except one respondent acquitted due to lack of evidence; torturing the victim led to his death under police custody as per testimonies corroborating victim's injuries and suspicious GD entries.

Issues: The court examined the legality of the abduction, the circumstances of custody, and the integrity of evidence involving police personnel.

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the principle that police officers share the same obligations as civilians regarding custody management and that failure to provide legitimate explanations leads to inferences of misconduct.

Result: Appeals dismissed in part, convicts held responsible under IPC Sections 304 and 365.

Table of Content
1. convictions and appeals against police involvement (Para 1 , 2)
2. transfer of case for fair trial (Para 3 , 4)
3. circumstances surrounding the arrest (Para 5 , 6)
4. delay and inconsistencies in police procedure (Para 10 , 11)
5. custodial torture leads to liability under ipc (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT

Anish Dayal, J.

1. These appeals have been filed against the judgment of conviction dated 14th March, 2019 passed by the Ld. ASJ (FTC-04), Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts:

a) convicting appellant Kunwar Pal Singh (herein referred to as `A-1') for offence under Sections 365/34 IPC;

b) convicting the police officers - appellant Hindveer Singh (herein referred to as `A-2'), appellant Mahesh Mishra (herein referred to as `A-3'), appellant Pradeep Kumar (herein referred to as `A-5') and appellants Pushpender Kumar and Haripal Singh (herein referred to as `A-6' and `A-7' respectively) for offences punishable under Sections 365/304/220/167/34 IPC;

c) acquitting the police officer - respondent Vinod Kumar Pandey (herein referred to as `A4').

Appeals, Convictions and Sentences

2. Accused No. 1, 2, 3, 5 filed appeals against their conviction and sentence being Crl. A. 537/2019, Crl. A. 624/2019, Crl. A. 622/2019, Crl. A. 488/2019 respectively, and Accused No. 6 and 7 filed Crl. A. 499/2019. Complainant Dalbir Singh also filed three appeals: Crl. A. 1023/2019 for conviction of A-1 under Section 302 IPC; Crl. A. 1024/2019 for conversion of conviction of A-2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 from Section 304 IPC to 302 IPC and proportionate enhancement of the sentence, accordingly; and Crl. A. 1025/2019 against the acquittal of A-4. State of NCT of Delhi, the prosecuting entity, placed submissions in support of the appeals filed by the complainant seeking convictions of the convicted police officers under Section 302/34 IPC.

3. By order dated 20th March, 2019 following sentences were awarded:

Accused No.AccusedSentence
1.Kunwar Pal SinghRI 03Y + Fine Rs. 05K u/s 365/34 IPC (3m SI in default)
2.SI Hindveer SinghRI 10Y + Fine Rs. 20K u/s 304/34 IPC (3m SI in default)
RI 05Y + Fine Rs. 05K u/s 220 IPC (3m SI in default)
RI 03Y + Fine Rs. 05K u/s 365/34 IPC (3m SI in default)
RI 03Y +Fine Rs. 05K u/s 167 IPC (3m SI in default)
(sentences to run concurrently)



3.SI Mahesh Mishra,
5.Ct. Pradeep Kumar,
6.Ct. Pushpender Kumar,
7.Ct. Haripal Singh,
4.SI Vinod Kumar PandeyAcquitted

Transfer of Case from U.P. to Delhi

4. The Sessions Case No. 89/2008 and Sessions Case No. 85/2008 were transferred from the Court of the Ld. ASJ (FTC-04), Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. to the Court of Sessions Judge, Delhi by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 24th January, 2011 in Trf. Pet. (Crl.) No.D25244/2010. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the manner in which the investigation was conducted after registration of the case at the instance of the petitioner showed that free and fair trial of the case would not be possible within the State of U.P, since the accused were members of U.P. Police Force.

The Complaint

5. FIR No.1004/2006 (Crime Case No. 752A/06) was registered under Section 302 IPC at PS Sector-20, Noida, U.P. upon the written complaint made by Dalbir Singh (father of the deceased) on 2nd September, 2006 which was addressed to SSP, Gautam Budh Nagar mentioning that on 1st September, 2006 at 6:00 p.m., the Noida Police in civil dress took away his son Sonu @ Somveer from the village. On 2nd September, 2006 in the morning, he received information from PS Khurja Dehat that Sonu had committed suicide in PS Sector-20, Noida, U.P. When he reached the place of the post mortem along with his co-villagers, he saw various injuries on the body of Sonu including a burn mark near his ear. He had a serious apprehension that his son was murdered by the police after being tortured and it had been given a colour of suicide. After investigation by CBCID, charge-sheet No.156A was filed against the accused persons, who were police officials stating that accused No.2 to 7 had taken So

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