Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Satender Solanki – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.A. 804 of 2019
Decided On : 26-06-2023
Conviction Appeal - Indian Penal Code - Section 302/307 - Summary of the case
Fact of the Case:
The appellant appealed against the judgment convicting him for the offences punishable under Section 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of the complainant, who claimed to be an eyewitness to the incident. The appellant challenged the credibility of the witness and raised doubts about his presence at the scene of the crime. The appellant also argued that the investigation was biased and tainted, and crucial evidence was not forensically examined.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the presence of the complainant at the scene of the crime beyond reasonable doubt. It also noted discrepancies in the witness's testimony and raised doubts about the registration of the FIR and the credibility of the evidence presented. The court concluded that the conviction of the appellant could not be sustained and set aside the judgment of conviction and order on sentence.
Issues: Presence of the complainant at the scene of the crime, credibility of the witness, bias in the investigation, forensic examination of crucial evidence
Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution failed to prove the presence of the complainant at the scene of the crime beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in the witness's testimony raised doubts about the credibility of the evidence presented. The court also noted bias in the investigation and the lack of forensic examination of crucial evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence were set aside. The concerned Superintendent Jail was directed to release the appellant forthwith if not required in any other case.
JUDGMENT
Poonam A. Bamba, J.
1.0. Vide this appeal, the appellant is assailing the judgment dated 29.04.2019 (`impugned judgment' in short) passed by Ld. ASJ-02, Fast Track Court (FTC), New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302/307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC' in short), in FIR/crime no. 317/1997, Police Station Civil Lines, Meerut, UP; and order on sentence dated 07.05.2019, whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC; the appellant was also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 307 IPC. The appellant was also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5 Lacs each to the LRs of the deceased/injured- his dependents, recoverable in the manner as provided in Section 421 Cr.PC
2.0. Briefly stating, the prosecution case is, that on 24.06.1997, one Inder Pal Dhaka along with Ashok Kumar was travelling in a Maruti car bearing registration number UP 15E-7042 from his residence to University. At about 10.00 am, when they reached near the Green Nursery (next to Suri Nursing Home), complainant Amarpal Singh Dhaka (PW-1), elder brother of Inder Pal Dhaka and advocate by profession, saw his brother coming from front side. On seeing them, PW-1 Inder Pal Dhaka had stopped his car. Suddenly, Satender Solanki/the appellant and his brother Billu, sons of Krishan Singh @ Kishan Chand, resident of Village Jiwana Guliyan, P.S. Binaoli, District Meerut, came on a scooter and both of them started firing on Inderpal Dhaka, due to which he received many bullet injuries. When Ashok Kumar objected to it, the appellant also fired at Ashok Kumar, which hit him on his hip. Out of fear, said Ashok Kumar hid himself in front of the seat. After firing, the assailants said `kaam ho gaya hai jaldi bhag jao' and ran away. Thereafter, the complainant Amarpal Singh Dhaka with the help the persons gathered at the spot, took both the injured namely Ashok Kumar and his brother Inderpal Singh to Suri Nursing Home, where the doctors declared Inderpal Dhaka as brought dead. Thereafter, injured Ashok Kumar was got admitted in Medical College, Meerut, where he was treated and discharged on 30.06.1997. PW-1 Amarpal Singh Dhaka made a written complaint (Ex. K-1) on the basis of the which, present FIR (Ex. K-7) came to the registered at PS Civil Lines, Meerut, UP and investigation was assigned to PW-11A Ins. Prakash Chand Pathak, Inspector, PS Civil Lines, UP.
2.1. After assignment of the investigation, PW-11/A Ins. Prakash Chand visited the spot and got prepared the panchayatnama/inquest report through Ct. Yogender Kumar. PW-11A found Maruti car of the injured/deceased stationed on the right side of the road. One empty cartridge was found near the road on the right side of the Maruti car and four empty cartridges were found on the left side and the same were lifted, sealed and seized. Said car was also seized. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted by PW-2 Dr. M.C. Gulecha, CMO, P.L. Sharma Hospital, Meerut, who vide post- mortem report (Ex. K-3) reported and opined as under:
"Inder Pal Singh Daka S/o Sh. Jile Singh r/o Dhikauli, PS Chandi Nagar, District Meerut.
..... dated: 24.06.97, time: 05:40 PM
General Age: about 42 years
Estimated time after the death: about 1/2 Day
A - Internal Examination
(Head and Neck)
1. Bones of the scalp or skull: NAD
2. THOREX
A. Walls, Ribs, Cartilages: Described fracture of 6th rib on left side anteriorly 7th rib on right side of axillary line
D. Right Lung: lacerated middle lobe
E. Left Lung: lacerated middle lobe
I. Additional Specific Details: Contains 2 litre of blood, one bullet recovered from left side [of] anterior chest wall and one
The prosecution must prove the presence of a witness at the scene of the crime beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in the witness's testimony can raise doubts about the credibility of the evid....
The prosecution failed to establish the credibility of its key witness, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence.
Point of Law : The appellant shall be released from jail forthwith, unless wanted in any other case, subject to compliance of the provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. to the satisfaction of the trial c....
The court upheld the conviction of three appellants for murder, emphasizing the credibility of eyewitnesses and the established motive, while acquitting two due to insufficient evidence.
Discrepancies in eyewitness accounts undermined the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt of their involvement in the crime.
Merely, because they have not been examined is not a ground to disbelieve an otherwise credible ocular account rendered by a person injured in the incident whose presence, otherwise also, is natural ....
Eyewitness testimony, particularly from injured witnesses, is crucial in establishing guilt, even with minor inconsistencies in their accounts.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt as to the guilt of the accused, the accused must be acquitted.
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
