Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Bablu – Appellant
Versus
State NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Cr.A. 861 of 2018, 860 of 2018 & 1115 of 2018
Decided On : 26-06-2023
MURDER - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302/34 - The court upheld the conviction of the appellants for the murder of Girdhari Mandal. The appellants were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine. Appellant Ram Padarth was also held guilty for wrongfully restraining the deceased and was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Sections 341/34 IPC.
Fact of the Case:
On 13th March, 2017, the appellants were involved in a quarrel with the deceased. The appellants, along with a juvenile, beat the deceased with lathis, resulting in his death. The police reached the spot and recorded the statement of the witness, Pankaj. The deceased was taken to the hospital and later died due to head injuries.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellants guilty of murder based on the testimonies of the witnesses and the medical evidence. The court rejected the appellants' claims of self-defence and lack of intention to cause fatal injuries.
Issues: The issues included delay in FIR registration, reliability of witnesses, connection of lathis to the offence, and the applicability of self-defence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in FIR registration was justified due to the immediate medical attention given to the injured. The court also emphasized the reliability of the witnesses, especially the injured witness. The court rejected the appellants' claims regarding the lathis and self-defence, concluding that the injuries caused by the appellants led to the death of the deceased.
Final Decision: The court modified the conviction of the appellants to an offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC instead of Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The sentence of the appellants was modified to the period already undergone.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By way of these appeals, the appellants challenge the common impugned judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 2nd August, 2018 whereby all the three appellants were held guilty for murder of one Girdhari Mandal ("deceased"); and also the order on sentence dated 4th August, 2018 whereby all the three appellants were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default whereof simple imprisonment for one year for offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"). Appellant Ram Padarth was also held guilty for wrongfully restraining the deceased for which he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for offence punishable under Sections 341/34 IPC.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 13th March, 2017 at about 2:00 PM, Pankaj (PW-1, complainant) was watching the festival of holi being celebrated outside his house at F-226, Shahbad Dairy when he heard some noise and saw his uncle/deceased being manhandled by appellant Ram Padarth and one `S' (a juvenile). When Pankaj reached the spot, appellant Ram Padarth said that deceased would not be allowed to go any further. In the meanwhile, other two appellants namely, Shiv Kumar and Bablu also came at the spot and thereafter, all four of them started beating the deceased with sticks and `S' gave a blow on deceased's head because of which deceased fell on the ground. Thereafter, the police reached the spot and removed PW-1 and deceased to BSA Hospital and on the complaint of PW-1, rukka (Ex. PW-1/A) was recorded on which FIR No.144/2017 dated 14th March, 2017 under Sections 308/341/34 IPC was registered at PS Shahbad Dairy. During the course of treatment, deceased died and, therefore, Section 302 IPC was added and investigation was entrusted to IO/Insp. Avinash Tyagi (PW-15). The body was identified by Sunil (PW-3) and Pankaj (PW-1) and thereafter, was sent for post-mortem examination.
3. Dr. Narayan Dabas (PW-4) conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 14th March, 2017 and vide the report (Ex. PW-4/A) opined as under:
"VII. PROBABLE TIME SINCE DEATH
About within one day, consistent with the hospital records.
Body preserved in cold storage.
VIII. EXTERNAL EXAMINATION
1. Sutured wound measuring 6 cm with 6 sutures, opening of sutures revealed split laceration, reddish margins, measuring 5.5 x1 cm x bone deep present over the head in midline over vertex, 8 cm below the glabella associated with bilateral black eye.
2. Sutured wound measuring 2 cm with 2 sutures opening revealed split alceration, measuring 1.7x0.2 cm x bone deep present over outer end of right eyebrow associated with abaraded contusion measuring 7x5 cm.
3. Contusion, bluish measuring 5x3 cm present over right ear pinna.
4. Contusion, bluish, measuring 2x1 cm present over the left side of chest.
5. Tramline contusion, bluish measuring 8x2 cm with gap of 1.3 cm present over the outer aspect of left shoulder.
6. Abraded contusion, reddish brown, measuring 3x1 cm present over the back of left forearm, 15 cm below the left elbow.
IX. INTERNAL EXAMINATION
a. Head
On reflection of the Scalp, diffuse effusion of blood was present over the all over. Communicated fracture of bilateral parietal bone and frontal bone present with lacerated duramater underneath the both parietal bones. Brain matter oozing out the parietal bones. Multiple lacerations present over the surface of the bilateral parietal area of brain. Diffuse subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhage present over brain surface. Brain parenchyma was edematous and weighed 1403 grams. Intraventricular hemorrhage present on cut section of brain. Comminuted fracture present over the base of skull in bilateral anterior and middle cranial fossa.
b. Neck
No Extravasation of blood was seen in the soft tissues of neck. The Larynx, pharynx and tracheal mucosa was congested. Tracheal lumen was unremarkable. Muscles, cartilage and Vessels of n
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, based on the circumstances and intentio....
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to manslaughter under Section 304 Part II IPC, emphasizing lack of premeditation and specific intent due to sudden provocation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the evaluation of evidence to determine the nature of injuries and the presence of intention or knowledge to cause death, leading to the alteration....
The judgment establishes the principle that the intention to cause death can be inferred from various circumstances, leading to different convictions under the Indian Penal Code.
Murder conviction quashed for lack of proof that specific appellants inflicted fatal blow; eyewitness contradictions, medical evidence allowing death by fall, parity with acquitted co-accused, and un....
Conviction requires reliable evidence and knowledge of victim's medical condition; lacking such knowledge limits liability to lesser offenses.
The judgment establishes that for a conviction under Section 302 IPC, there must be clear evidence of intent and direct involvement in the act leading to death, and that joint liability under Section....
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
