2023 Supreme(Del) 5144
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
Smt. Rajesh & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State – Respondent
Cr.A. 865 of 2018
Decided On : 26-06-2023
Mr.J.K.Sharma, Advocate with Mr.Siddharth Pandit, Ms.Chhaya Arya & Mr.V.Prakash, Advocates, for the Appellant.
Mr.Laksh Khanna, APP, for the State.
Benefit of doubt in criminal cases - The judgment establishes the principle that in cases where there are discrepancies in witness statements and doubts regarding the prosecution's version, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Headnote:
Murder - Indian Penal Code - Section 302/34 - The judgment discusses the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense, including the post mortem report, witness testimonies, and crime scene investigation. The court analyzes the discrepancies in the witness statements, the doubts regarding the presence of the appellant at the scene, and the lack of corroboration for the prosecution's version. The court ultimately finds that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt and sets aside the conviction and sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were charged with the murder of Amit. The deceased was allegedly abused and attacked by the appellants, resulting in his death. The prosecution presented witness testimonies, post mortem report, and crime scene investigation as evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found discrepancies in the witness statements, doubts regarding the presence of the appellant at the scene, and lack of corroboration for the prosecution's version. As a result, the court concluded that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt and set aside the conviction and sentence.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of witness testimonies, the presence of the appellant at the scene, and the corroboration of the prosecution's version.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the discrepancies in witness statements, doubts regarding the presence of the appellant at the scene, and lack of corroboration for the prosecution's version.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and sentence, and ordered the release of the appellant Rajesh.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. By this common appeal, the appellants Smt. Rajesh and Kanwar Singh had challenged the judgment of learned Trial Court dated 06th July, 2018 whereby the appellants were held guilty for murder of one Amit ("deceased") and as also the order on sentence dated 13th July, 2018, whereby the both the appellants were directed to undergo imprisonment of life alongwith fine of Rs.50,000/- each, in default whereof, simple imprisonment for six months for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC").
2. During the pendency of this appeal, appellant No.2 Kanwar Singh passed away on 15th June 2020 while he was lodged in Mandoli Jail. As per the status report received in the Court, the factum of death was verified and it was stated that in the inquest proceedings, the death was found to be natural. Thus, vide order dated 9th May 2023, this Court held that the appeal qua the appellant No. 2 namely Kanwar Singh has abated and thus, the appeal was required to be heard only qua appellant No. 1. Appellant No. 1 Rajesh had undergone custody period of 3 years 9 months and 10 days as on 15th June 2020 when she was released on interim suspension of sentence. However, as she had not surrendered after the expiry of the interim suspension of sentence, she was thereafter arrested and sent to judicial custody. She is presently in judicial custody and has undergone till date nearly 4 years of imprisonment including remissions.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 11th March, 2011, at about 8 PM, the deceased returned back home and parked his car, and the appellants were standing outside their house and on seeing the deceased, the appellant Kanwar Singh started abusing the deceased. The deceased asked appellant Kanwar Singh as to why was he abusing, on which Kanwar Singh started abusing more loudly and furiously and came out with a knife. Rajbala (PW- 1), Babita (PW-9) and Sushila (PW-24) took the deceased inside the house to save him. Thereafter, both the appellants along with one more person reached the roof of their own house and Rajesh told Kanwar Singh to finish the deceased and solve all their daily quarrels. Thereafter, Rajesh gave Kanwar one wooden phatta and Kanwar threw the said phatta on the deceased because of which, the deceased sustained head injury, fell on the ground and became unconscious. Babita also sustained injuries due to the throwing of the phatta. Arun (PW-13) and Ravi (PW-14) took the deceased to the hospital. Information was given to the police, which was recorded vide DD No.33A which was marked to SI Sri Bhagwan (PW-22) who reached the spot i.e. house of Bhim Singh where he got to know that the injured was taken to Brahm Shakti Hospital and on reaching the said hospital, he got to know that the deceased was shifted to SGM Hospital. While on his way to the SGM Hospital, he received information vide DD No.49B (Ex.PW-22/A) regarding death of the deceased. The dead body was sent to the mortuary and thereafter, SI Sri Bhagwan returned back to the spot where he met the complainant Rajbala (PW-1) and recorded her statement (Ex.PW-1/A) and prepared the rukka (Ex.PW-22/B) on which FIR No. 66/2011 dated 12th March, 2011 under Section 302/34 IPC was registered at PS Aman Vihar (Ex.PW-5/A). From the spot exhibits were lifted and the wooden plank was also seized. Thereafter, appellant Smt. Rajesh was arrested by IO/Insp. Neeraj Kumar (PW-26) from her house vide arrest memo Ex.PW-26/C and appellant Kanwar Singh was arrested on 18th March, 2011 from Bhagya Vihar at the instance of the brother of the deceased Sushil vide arrest memo Ex.PW-12/A. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the appellants were charged for offences punishable under Sections 302/323/34 IPC. To prove its case, the prosecution led 26 witnesses.
4. Dr. Shalini Girdhar (PW-18) conducted the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased on 12th March, 2011 and tendered her report (Ex.PW- 18/A)