Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 5151
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Cr.A. 677 of 2019
Decided On : 26-06-2023
Ms. Adit Subramaniam Pujari, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Ms. Aditi Tiwari and Mr. Maitreya Subramaniam, Advocates, for the Appellant.
Ms.Shubhi Gupta, APP for State.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on testimonies, CCTV footage, and FSL reports to establish the appellant's guilt, while considering the defense an afterthought.
Headnote:
Conviction - Offences under Ss 302/307/436 The Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC Ss 302/307/436 - The court discussed the testimonies of witnesses, CCTV footage, FSL reports, and the appellant's admission under Section 313 Cr.P.C. - The court found the appellant guilty based on the testimonies of PW-1, PW-7, and PW-8, the CCTV footage, and the FSL report. The appellant's defense was considered an afterthought and was not put to any witnesses in their cross-examination. The court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offences under Ss 302/307/436 IPC for setting ablaze a building, resulting in the death of four persons and severe burn injuries to five others. The prosecution's case was supported by testimonies, CCTV footage, and FSL reports. The appellant's defense was considered an afterthought and was not put to any witnesses in their cross-examination.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty based on the testimonies of PW-1, PW-7, and PW-8, the CCTV footage, and the FSL report. The appellant's defense was considered an afterthought and was not put to any witnesses in their cross-examination. The court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal.
Issues: The main issue was the appellant's involvement in setting ablaze the building, resulting in fatalities and severe injuries. The court also considered the admissibility of the CCTV footage and FSL reports.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimonies of witnesses, the appellant's admission under Section 313 Cr.P.C, and the FSL report to establish the appellant's guilt. The defense was considered an afterthought and not put to any witnesses in their cross-examination.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal, considering the enormity of the appellant's actions.
JUDGMENT
Poonam A. Bamba, J.
1.0 Vide this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment dated 15.01.2019 passed by Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Special Judge (NDPS), Dwarka Courts, Delhi, ("impugned judgment" in short) whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence u/Ss 302/307/436 The Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC" in short) in FIR no. 121/2015, Police Station Palam Village; and order on sentence dated 28.01.2019, whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life u/S. 302 IPC along with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03 months; the amount if deposited shall go to the family of deceased in equal proportion, the appellant was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years u/S. 307 IPC along with fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 months; and the appellant was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 04 years u/S. 436 IPC along with fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 01 months.
2.0 Briefly stating, the prosecution case is that on 28.02.2015 at about 03:20 a.m., an information was received at PS Palam Village regarding the fire in house no. F-140, Sadh Nagar Part-ll, Palam Colony, New Delhi, which was recorded vide DD No. 6A/Ex.PW36/A. On receipt of the same, SI Sandeep Kumar/PW-43 along with Ct. Ram Niwas/PW-19 reached the spot at about 03:35 a.m., where Insp. Akhilesh Kumar Mishra/PW-44, the then SHO, was also present along with the staff. There was fire in the building and fire brigade staff was trying to douse the fire and the CAT ambulance was shifting the injured persons from the spot. Initially, as the possibility of short circuit was not ruled out by the in-charge of the fire brigade, SI Sandeep Kumar (PW-43) prepared rukka (EX. PW43/A) and got the FIR (Ex. PW36/C) registered through Ct. Ram Niwas (PW-19) for the offence under section 304A IPC. CCTV footage of the nearby houses including the house of Sh. Shashi Kant Thakur (PW-26) and Sh. Anil Kumar (PW-35) were checked by HC Bharat Lal (PW-20) and Ct. Kapil (PW-21). In the said CCTV Footage, one person was seen carrying some object in a polythene in his hand out of which some liquid was dropping. The CCTV footage was taken in pen-drive and the same was shown to Sh. Vijender Singh Ahlawat (PW-8), owner of the building under fire; and on seeing the same, he identified the person in the CCTV footage as Anil Kumar the appellant, son-in-law of one of his tenants in the building namely Smt. Kailash (deceased). CCTV footage was also shown to Smt Mamta (PW-7), daughter of Smt Kailash (deceased) and on seeing the same, she also identified the person in the footage as her husband namely Anil/the appellant. It was further revealed that the appellant had set ablaze the building by throwing petrol as he wanted to take revenge from his mother-in- law Smt. Kailash as he believed that she was the reason behind his strained relations with his wife Smt Mamta (PW-7). In the incident, four persons namely Smt. Kailash, Sh. Jagdeep, his wife Ms. Indu and son Akshay lost their lives and Ms. Mamta (PW-7), Sh. Ritesh Aggarwal (PW-9), Sh. Sheetladin (PW10), Ms. Shweta (PW-11) and Ananya Aggarwal sustained severe burn injuries. Accordingly, Sections 436/307 and 302 IPC were added in the case.
2.1 It is further the case of the prosecution that on the same day, i.e. on 28.02.2015, Dr. Amitosh Kumar (PW-11) along with Sh.U.S.Thakur (PW- 13) and Sh. R.K.Meena of CFSL, CBI (PW-25) inspected the scene of crime and examined the electric fittings, junction-boxes and burnt vehicles. SI Sandeep Kumar (PW43) prepared site plan (Ex.PW8/A) at the spot at the instance of Sh. Vijender Singh Ahlawat (PW8), owner of premises no. F- 140, Sadh Nagar Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi. On the same day, the spot was also inspected by SI Khajan Singh, in-charge Mobile Crime Team and HC Ashok K
