Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Liyakat Ali – Appellant
Versus
The State of NCT Delhi – Respondent
Cr.A. 38 of 2019
Decided On : 26-06-2023
DNA Analysis - Murder - IPC 302, IPC 201 - The court analyzed the evidence of DNA analysis and concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant for the murder of his daughter punishable under Section 302 IPC as well as the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his daughter and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC. The prosecution's case was based on the evidence of DNA analysis to establish the identity of the deceased as the biological daughter of the appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant for the murder of his daughter and set aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence. The appellant was directed to be released forthwith.
Issues: The main issue was whether the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant for the murder of his daughter and the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the analysis of the DNA evidence and the lack of conclusive proof to establish the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence were set aside, and the appellant was directed to be released forthwith.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By way of this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 7th July, 2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for murder of his daughter Gulshama ("deceased") and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.5,000/- in default whereof simple imprisonment for six months for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") and was also held guilty for offence punishable under Section 201 IPC for which the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years along with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default whereof simple imprisonment for three months. Accused Aashiq Ali was acquitted of all charges.
2. Briefly case of the prosecution is that on 10th May, 2013, information was given to the police about a dead body in a gunny bag in a nullah near Auliya Masjid, Ward No.8, Mehrauli which was recorded vide DD No.34A (Ex.PW-1/E) which was marked to SI Pushpender (PW-28). SI Pushpender reached the spot along with Ct. Praveen (PW-21) from where one plastic bag containing human skeleton was found in the presence of Mohd. Ishtiyaq @ Laddo (PW-7) and Rustam (PW-2). From the bag a skeleton, one lady's shirt, salwar and undergarments worn by the skeleton were recovered. The dead body was around five feet in height but could not be identified and thereafter, was sent for post-mortem examination. Thereafter, PW-28 prepared the rukka (Ex.PW-28/A) on which FIR No.280/2013 dated 10th May, 2013 under Sections 302/201 IPC was got registered at PS Mehrauli (Ex.PW-1/C).
3. Dr.Hans Raj Singh and Dr.Akhilesh Raj conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body and prepared the post-mortem report No.587/2013 dated 17th May, 2013 (Ex.PW-26/A). As per the post-mortem report:
"Post-Mortem changes:
1. Rigor Mortis: Advanced Decomposition
2. Lividity: Advanced Decomposition
3. Decomposition Changes: Face. Neck, Chest, Upper Limbs, Upper Abdomen and both legs are skeletonised. Adipocere formation is present over lower abdomen, both thighs and pelvis, live maggots of length about 0.5 to 1.5 cm are present.
4. External appearance: Internal organs absent due to decomposition, external genitalia of female type (vagina present) right radius and ulna absent, left ulna absent. Both foot and hand absent. Weeds are present. Left humerus, right and left tibia and fibula are disarticulated.
a. Eyes: Advanced decomposition.
b. Mouth: Advanced decomposition.
c. Nostrils: Advanced decomposition.
d. Ears: Advanced decomposition.
e. Nails: Advanced decomposition.
f. Condition of orifices: NAD
5. Injuries (Type, size, shape, location and direction etc.) No antemortem injury appreciated over the body (Advanced decomposition)"
4. As the skeleton could not be identified, the same was got electrically cremated by HC Jaiveer vide receipt Ex.PW-55/I. On receipt of secret information on 6th June, 2013, it came to the knowledge of IO/Insp.Dalip Kumar (PW-55) that the appellant had committed murder of his daughter and dumped the body in the nala as the appellant had become aware of his daughter/deceased's illicit relationship with someone. The said secret information was recorded vide DD No.37A (Ex.PW-55/J). The secret informer led the IO and his team to house of the appellant. Appellant was asked about his children and as he could not give satisfactory replies, he was taken to the police station for sustained interrogation. Thereafter, he was arrested vide memo Ex.PW-33/B and his disclosure statement Ex.PW-8/B was got recorded. On 7th June, 2013, the appellant led the police party to a room of his house where he throttled his daughter/deceased and thereafter to the nala where he had thrown the body of his daughter/deceased. Supplementary disclosure statement of the appellant (Ex.PW-35/C) was also got recorded wherein the appellant had disclosed that his son Ashiq Ali had assisted him in disposing of the body. Blood samples of the appellant and his wi
The admissibility of the appellant's conduct and confession under Sections 8 and 27 of the Evidence Act, and the conclusive nature of DNA evidence in establishing guilt.
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.
Conviction for murder and evidence tampering requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence and valid confessions must corroborate the prosecution’s claims.
Circumstantial evidence can sustain a murder conviction when it demonstrates motive, opportunity, and establishes a clear temporal connection between the accused and the crime.
Circumstantial evidence must be corroborated by substantial forensic analysis; absence of direct witness testimony does not negate conviction if evidence establishes chain of culpability.
The need for concrete evidence to prove homicidal death and the importance of the Doctor's opinion in cases of circumstantial evidence.
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
