Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Jitender Alias Vikash Alias Allu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Delhi – Respondent
Cr.A. 1195 of 2018
Decided On : 24-06-2023
MURDER - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302/34 - The judgment discusses the dying declaration of the deceased, the medical evidence, and the witness testimonies to establish the guilt of the appellant for murder. The court relied on the dying declaration, supported by medical evidence and witness testimonies, to convict the appellant for murder under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was shot by the appellant and his friends at a godown. The dying declaration of the deceased, medical evidence, and witness testimonies formed the basis of the case. The appellant challenged the discrepancies in witness statements and the investigation's lapses, while the state relied on the dying declaration, medical evidence, and witness testimonies to support the conviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the dying declaration of the deceased to be credible and supported by medical evidence and witness testimonies. The discrepancies in witness statements and investigation lapses did not outweigh the compelling evidence of the dying declaration, leading to the conviction of the appellant for murder.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the dying declaration, discrepancies in witness statements, and the adequacy of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the dying declaration, supported by medical evidence and witness testimonies, as the primary evidence to establish the guilt of the appellant for murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the learned Trial Court were upheld.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of the learned Trial Court dated 22nd September, 2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for murder of one Ankit @ Gulu ("deceased"). The appellant also challenges the order on sentence dated 24th September, 2018 whereby the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default whereof simple imprisonment for 1 year for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"). Co-accused Ravi @ Tati was acquitted of the charge.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that information was received from SRHC Hospital by Ct. Parambir (PW-5) that the deceased was admitted in the hospital with the history of gun-shot injury which was recorded vide DD No.2B (Ex.P-9) which was marked to SI Jaibir (PW-22). Accordingly, SI Jaibir along with HC Mehtab reached the hospital where the deceased was found admitted and was fit for statement. SI Jaibir recorded the statement of the deceased (Ex.P-12). As per the deceased, on the intervening night of 4th-5th November, 2017, he was getting ready for a meal with his friends Ranbir @ Lala son of Sh. Pratap Singh, Amit @ Kanhaiya son of Gopal Ram and Sonu son of Nanak Chand at a room near stairs at the godown of Ranbir @ Lala situated at 33 foota Road, Village Bakoli, Delhi. At about 11.30 PM, Vikas @ Allu who was a resident of Alipur and who was well known to him came at the said room with his three friends and stated "tu aaj kal Jitender Gogi ka bada saath de raha hai", and in the meanwhile, the three friends of Vikas @ Allu told Vikas "time nahi hai, goli maar saale ko" and immediately after saying this, Vikas @ Allu took out a pistol from the right pocket of his pant and fired three shots at him. After getting struck with the bullet, he fell down from the chair and Vikas @ Allu ran away with his friends. Ranbir @ Lala, Sonu and Amit @ Kanhaiya took him to Raja Harish Chandra Hospital, Narela in a car. He further stated that Vikas @ Allu had shot him with the intention of killing him and that he can identify those three persons.
3. After recording the statement, SI Jaibir went to the spot, i.e. godown of Ranbir @ Lala and inside the said room, two empty cartridges were found lying on the floor and blood was also found lying on the left side of the empty cartridges. SI Jaibir prepared the rukka on the statement of the deceased on which FIR No.502/2017 dated 5th November, 2017 under Section 307/34 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act, 1959 was registered at PS Alipur (Ex.P-5). Crime team was called at the spot and exhibits were seized. Thereafter, SI Jaibir went to LNJP Hospital where the deceased was under treatment and at the hospital, eye-witnesses Ranbir @ Lala, Sonu and Kanhaiya met him who were taken to the police station and their statements were recorded. Efforts were made to trace the accused persons but no clue was found. On 9th November, 2017, information was received vide DD No.30B (Ex.P-25) regarding death of the deceased. Thereafter, the dead body was sent for post mortem examination and after the post mortem examination, the dead body was handed over to the relatives of the deceased.
4. Dr. Kishore Singh Thakur (PW-2) along with Dr. Dheeraj Buchade conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 9th November, 2017 and tendered the post mortem report (Ex.PW-2/A). It was opined:
"VIII. PROBABLE TIME SINCE DEATH:
About six hours from MLC timing of `declaring dead' at Lok Nayak hospital and is consistent with postmortem findings.
IX. EXTERNAL EXAMINATION
1. Firearm ammunition wound in the form of laceration of the skin (making a gutter), measuring 1.4 cm x 0.4 cm x subcutaneous deep, horizontally present over lateral aspect of right side abdomen, 17 cm lateral to midline and 10 cm above right superior iliac spine, with dark brown scabbed abrasion collor of 0.2 cm diameter present over anterior aspect. The wound is s
The dying declaration, when found to be credible and supported by medical evidence and witness testimonies, can be the primary basis for conviction, even without the need for corroboration.
Dying declarations can alone sustain a conviction if deemed reliable and made in a fit state of mind, without corroborative evidence being strictly necessary.
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations, along with the admissibility of medical evidence and the prosecution's obligation to produce evidence, were central to the court's decision.
The reliability of dying declarations and sufficiency of evidence for invoking Section 34 IPC were central legal points established in the judgment.
A dying declaration is only valid if the victim was in a fit mental state to give it, which wasn't established; thus, conviction based solely on it is unsafe.
The court held that a dying declaration requires corroboration and careful scrutiny to establish reliability, particularly when inconsistencies with medical evidence arise.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if found credible, with no strict requirement for corroboration.
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
