IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Siddharth Mridul, Anup Jairam Bhambhani, JJ.
Nadeem - Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.A. 8 of 2020, Crl.A. 10 of 2020, Crl.A. 79 of 2020 and Crl.A. 111 of 2020
Decided On : 28-04-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction and events leading to murder (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. evidence collection and witness testimonies (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. defenses raised by the appellants (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. counterarguments from defense (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. assessment of intention in homicide (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. credibility of eyewitness testimony (Para 15 , 19) |
| 7. interpretation of seldom reliable witnesses (Para 16 , 17 , 20) |
| 8. considering related witnesses as credible (Para 21 , 22) |
| 9. recovery of weapons and forensic evidence (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 10. final verdict based on comprehensive evidence (Para 27 , 28) |
| 11. confirmation of lower court's ruling (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT
Siddharth Mridul, J. The present batch of criminal appeals being Criminal Appeal Nos. 8/2020, 10/2020,79/2020 and 111/2020 instituted under the provision of section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C), assail the judgment of conviction dated 11.10.2019 and the order on sentence dated 17.10.2019, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, West-02, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in Session Case No. 58184/16, titled as `State vs. Nadeem and Ors.', emanating from F.I.R. No. 174/2011 registered under Sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), at Police Station Nihal Vihar.
2. By way of the impugned judgment dated 11.10.2019 and the order on sentence dated 17.10.2019, appellants namely Nadeem (`Appellant No.1'), Naresh @ Raju (`Appellant No.2'), Mohsin @ Raju (`Appellant No.3'), and Nitin @ Pintu @ Aatish (`Appellant No.4') were convicted for committing the murder of the deceased victim Manoj s/o Charan Singh by inflicting deadly injury upon the deceased with dandas and subsequently stabbing him with a knife in furtherance of their common intention. All the Appellants were convicted and sentenced for the offences mentioned as under:
"i. qua offence punishable u/s 302/34 IPC, to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each. In default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months;
ii. qua offence punishable u/s 307/34 IPC, to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- each. In default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months."
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently, whilst according the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C to all the convicts/appellants, herein.
3. The fulcrum of the case of the prosecution is that on the night of 03/04.06.2011,the Appellant Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 (hereinafter collectively referred to as `Appellants'), sharing common intention, caused stab injuries on the body of Manoj s/o Sh. Charan Singh r/o G-44/14, Laxmi Park, Nangloi, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as `the deceased') leading to his death. The injuries were caused with a knife [Ex.PW-26/B] and danda [Ex.PW-21/O] as a vendetta owing to previous enmity and animosity with the deceased. After committing the murder, the appellants absconded from the crime spot. The entire incident was witnessed by PW-4 Smt. Gudiya w/o Jagbir Singh; PW-6 Jagbir Singh (brother of deceased and injured eye witness); and PW-2 Amit Bhardwaj (neighbour and eyewitness who turned hostile); who were statedly present with the deceased at the time of the incident.
4. A PCR call [Ex.PW-5/A] was received from mobile No. 9891285918 by Ct. Anita (PW-5) regarding stabbing of one person with knife, and Daily Diary No.42-B was lodged at Police Station: Nihal Vihar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as `the Police Station'). Sub-Inspector Dinesh Chandra (PW-14) alongwith Constable Yudhbir Singh (PW-18) reached the crime spot where they found blood on the road and upon inquiry, it was revealed that the injured has been shifted to the hospital. By this time, beat constable Ct. Kuldeep (PW-17) also arrived at the spot. SI Dinesh Chandra (PW-14) prepared the rukka (Ex.PW-6/A, CX, 15/B) and handed over the same to Ct. Yudhbir (PW-18) with a direction to get the FIR registered (Ex.PW-15/A) and also reque
The testimonies of eyewitnesses, recovery of the weapon of offence, and medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of intention and knowledge in determining the offence under Section 307 IPC, the principles of vicarious liability under Section 34 ....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder, establishing that a single fatal blow with a weapon can constitute murder if intended to cause serious injury, rejecting claims of provocation.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, highlighting that the accused acted with sufficient intent, despite claims of provocation, based on consistent eyewitness testimoni....
The reliability of an injured eye-witness testimony and its corroboration by medical evidence are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.