Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Navi – Appellant
Versus
The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Cr.A. 866 of 2018
Decided On : 26-06-2023
Murder - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - [MURDER] - [Criminal Law] - [IPC 302] - The court discussed the admissibility of the appellant's confession, the recovery of the dead body, and the DNA evidence. The court found the appellant's conduct admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act and his pointing out of the dead body admissible under Section 27. The DNA evidence linking the appellant to the crime was considered conclusive, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was found guilty of murdering his sister-in-law. He had confessed to the police and led them to the spot where the deceased's body was found. The prosecution presented DNA evidence linking the appellant to the crime. The appellant challenged the judgment on various grounds, including the admissibility of his confession and the DNA evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant's conduct admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act and his pointing out of the dead body admissible under Section 27. The DNA evidence linking the appellant to the crime was considered conclusive, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: Admissibility of the appellant's confession, recovery of the dead body, and DNA evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant's conduct and confession were admissible under Sections 8 and 27 of the Evidence Act. The DNA evidence linking the appellant to the crime was considered conclusive.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment was upheld.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of learned Trial Court dated 08th May, 2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for murder of one Gudiya ("deceased"). The appellant also challenges the order on sentence dated 17th May, 2018 whereby the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment of life along with Fine of Rs.5,000/- in default whereof, simple imprisonment for 1 year for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC").
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on the intervening night of 15th-16th April, 2017, at about 1.50 AM, the appellant came to ASI Bishan Singh (PW-6) and ASI Dharam Chand (PW-7) who were at picket duty at Mukandpur Chowk and informed them that he had strangulated the neck of his bhabhi/deceased by chunni and killed her. This information was passed to the PCR Incharge ASI Jagdish who passed the information to duty officer Rang Bahadur (PW-5), which was recorded vide DD No.7A (Ex.PW-5/A) and was marked to ASI Om Prakash (PW-12), who reached the Mukandpur Police Post where ASI Bhishan Chand and ASI Dharam Chand produced the appellant before him. Thereafter, ASI Om Prakash along with the appellant went to the spot i.e. H.No.648, B-Block, Gali No.16, Mukandpur Part-I, where dead body of one female with a chunni around her neck was found on the staircase of the first floor of the house. Crime team was called at the spot and exhibits were seized and thereafter, the dead body was sent to the mortuary at BJRM Hospital. Statement of the husband of deceased Ramjani (PW-11) was recorded (Ex.PW-11/A) on which rukka (Ex.PW-12/A) was prepared and FIR No.247/2017 dated 16th April, 2017 under Section 302 IPC was registered at PS Bhalswa Dairy (Ex.PW-5/B). After interrogation, the appellant was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-9/E and his disclosure statement (Ex.PW-9/G) was recorded. Thereafter, the dead body was sent for post mortem examination.
3. Dr. Niranjan Kumar Gunjan conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 16th April, 2017 and tendered the post mortem report Ex.PX. It was opined:
"EXTERNAL INJURIES:
1) Ligature mark: A reddish brown coloured abraded ligature mark was present around the neck, completely encircling the neck. In the centre, mark was 2.2 cm broad and 06 cm below chin, placed at the thyroid prominence. On left side, mark was going horizontally backward. It was 2.1 cm broad and present 5.5 cm below angle of left mandible, and further it was 02 cm broad and 07 cm below left mastoid process. Further the mark was going towards the back of neck. On right side, mark was going horizontally backward. It was 02 cm broad and present 05 cm below angle of right mandible, and further it was 03 cm broad and 06 cm below the right mastoid process. Further the mark was going towards the back of neck. On the back of neck mark was 0.7 cm broad at a point situated 08 cm below the external occipital protuberance.
2) Reddish scratch abrasion, measuring 0.2x0.1cm, was present over right foot, situated 05 cm away from the medial malleolus.
Ligature material: Not Present.
INTERNAL EXAMINATION
.....
B) Neck
Subcutaneous tissue: The soft tissues underlying ligature mark were showing contusions at places bilaterally.
Pharynx, Larynx and Trachea: Tracheal mucosa showed petechial hemorrhages and congestion. Fracture of left greater horn of hyoid bone associated with surrounding contusion was present. Thyroid cartilage was intact. Thyroid gland was grossly normal in appearance.
Oesophagus and blood vessels: Unremarkable.
OPINION:
Cause of death in this case is asphyxia, secondary to constriction of neck structures with a ligature material (Ligature Strangulation).
Time since death: Within 12 hours at the time of preservation of dead body in mortuary.
Total inquest papers: 08 (Eight) Papers.
Total pages of PM report: 03 (Three)."
4. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the appellant was charge
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 burden of proof on the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to offer a plausible explanation for the cause of death and the consequences of offering false explanations.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances and motive in murder cases; failure to do so warrants acquittal.
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 burden of proof on the accused in cases of crimes committed in privacy is comparatively lighter, and the accused has a duty to offer a cogent explanation as to how the crime was committed.
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
