Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Dilip Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Cr.A. 1087 of 2018
Decided On : 26-06-2023
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By way of these appeals, the appellants challenge the common impugned judgment of learned Trial Court dated 9th October, 2018 and order on sentence dated 11th October, 2018 whereby the appellants were held guilty and were sentenced as under:
| S. No. | Appellant(s) | Offence(s) | Sentence |
| 1. | Neelu, Sushma, Dilip Mishra and Anchal | Section 147 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one month. |
| Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for three years along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one month. | ||
| Section 325 r/w Section 149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for six months. | ||
| Section 302 r/w Section 149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.50,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for two years. | ||
| 2. | Anchal | Section 452 r/w Section 149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for six months. |
| 3. | Akash, Deepak @ Dutta, Naushad, Suraj @ Tinda and Jitender @ Guddu Passi | Section 147 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one month. |
| Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for three years along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one month. | ||
| Section 302 r/w Section 149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one year. | ||
| Section 452 r/w Section 149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for six months. |
2. As per the prosecution facts of the case are that on 29th March, 2017 at about 12.00-12.15 PM, Rahul (injured/PW-21) was caught hold by appellant Anchal and his associates in D Block, Mukundpur, beaten up and taken to Anchal's house, where he was again beaten up. Under fear and threat, Rahul disclosed the whereabouts of Narender (deceased) to the assailants. Thereafter, PCR officials reached the spot and while some of the assailants/appellants ran away from the spot, three assailants/appellants namely Dilip Mishra, Neelu and Sushma were taken to the police station by PCR officials along with injured Rahul (PW-21). Information about this incident was also given by one Chandan to the police which was recorded vide DD No.37B at about 12.50 PM that Rahul who was a murder suspect has been caught, however, when ASI Ramesh Chand (PW-25) along with HC Balu Palve (PW-7) reached the spot, they could not find anyone and were informed that Rahul and the three appellants were taken to the police station. These two police officers came back to the police station at about 1.30 PM and at the police station, injured Rahul and the said three appellants were present and Rahul was taken to the hospital by Ct.Chander Prakash (PW-6) and at the same time the three appellants left the police station. In the meanwhile, at about 12.30-12.45 PM, two appellants Anchal and Akash along with appellants Deepak, Suraj, Jitender @ Guddu Passi and Naushad entered the house of deceased and assaulted the deceased. Thereafter, the deceased was dragged out of his house till Aam Aadmi Chowk, Gali No.8, where he was again beaten up. In respect to this incident, information was given to the police by one Pradeep, which was recorded vide DD No.43B on which PW-7 and PW-25 reached the Aam Aadmi Chowk where Dilip, Neelu and Sushma along with their associates were seen beating the deceased by the police officials. Police officials were able to apprehend and arrest five of the appellants at the spot namely Sushma (Ex.PW-22/A), Neelu (Ex.PW-22/B), Dilip Mishra (Ex.PW- 19/A1), Anchal (Ex.PW-19/B1) and Akash (Ex.PW-19/C1). The deceased was taken to the hospital by PW-25 and at about 4.50 PM, the deceased died at the hospital. At the hospital, s
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses, the dying declaration of the deceased, and the chain of circumstantial evidence to establis....
The court ruled that the attack was a result of provocation without premeditation, altering offenses from murder to lesser charges under Section 304 of the IPC.
The court reinforces that eyewitness identification is reliable even in low visibility, especially when witnesses are familiar with the accused.
Murder and rioting – Sans unlawful assembly case of each accused has to be considered according to his individual act.
Conviction for mass murder under 302/149 IPC set aside due to unreliable, contradictory ocular evidence from related witnesses; doubtful night identification, improbable presence/story; benefit of do....
Point of law: It is not the duty of the appellate court when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by th....
The court applied exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC to determine the appropriate charges and convictions based on the nature of injuries and the circumstances of the incident.
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
