SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(P&H) 348

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Rajiv Sharma, Kuldip Singh, JJ.
Mayank Chaudhary and Another – Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D) Nos. 820, 832 of 2015
Decided On : 06-03-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Manish Soni, Robin Dutt, Shubhra Singh.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that a criminal conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence and that the offence can be proved either by adducing circumstantial evidence or by way of necessary implication.

Headnote:

Criminal Conspiracy - Murder - Indian Penal Code, Section 302, 392, 397, 120-B, 34 and Arms Act, Section 25

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392, 397, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act for the murder of Anil Chaudhary. The prosecution's case was that the appellants hatched a conspiracy which led to the murder of Anil Chaudhary.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellants that they hatched a conspiracy which led to the murder of Anil Chaudhary. The court upheld the judgment and order of the trial court, dismissing the appeals and cancelling the bail bonds of appellants Rahul Ghosh and Kejar Verma.

Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants were involved in a criminal conspiracy leading to the murder of Anil Chaudhary.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a criminal conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence and that the offence can be proved either by adducing circumstantial evidence or by way of necessary implication. The court also emphasized that a conspiracy is generally hatched in secrecy, making direct evidence difficult to obtain.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the judgment and order of the trial court were upheld. The bail bonds of appellants Rahul Ghosh and Kejar Verma were cancelled, and they were directed to surrender to undergo the remaining part of their sentence.

JUDGMENT :

Rajiv Sharma, J.

1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in CRAD-820-DB-2015 and CRA-D-832-DB-2015, therefore, these are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. These appeals are instituted against the judgment dated 20.04.2015 and order dated 24.04.2015, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, in Sessions Case No. 34 of 2013, whereby appellants Mayank Chaudhary, Rahul and Kejar Verma, who were charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392, 397, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act, were convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each for the commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, they were sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. They were further convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each for the commission of offence under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, they were sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Appellants Rahul and Mayank were further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each for the commission of offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. In default of payment of fine, they were sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Tarika Chaudhary (PW-5) lodged report vide Ex.PC on 06.03.2013 at about 9.00 PM to the effect that she was resident of house No. T-4/1305, Park View Residency, Sector 3, Palam Vihar, Gurgaon. She was student of 10+2. She was taking examinations. At 9.30 AM, she left her house to take her examination in Saint Michel Senior Secondary School, Shivpuri, Gurgaon. She was accompanied by her brother Saurabh Chaudhary. Her father Anil Chaudhary (since deceased) and her elder brother Mayank Chaudhary were present in the house. Her mother had passed away three years back. Saurabh Chaudhary came back to his house. Accused Mayank Chaudhary, her brother, was pressing hard her father to sell the present house to purchase another house. However, her father did not appreciate the said idea. It led to the continuous bickering. Mayank Chaudhary used to call bad names to the deceased. Her examination was over at 1.30 PM. Accused Mayank Chaudhary came to the school to pick her. She accompanied him. She came back to her house and found the door of the house unlocked. She went inside the room of the deceased. Her father was lying on the bed. His face was covered with pillow. She lifted the pillow. She found that her father was bleeding from behind his left ear. The bed and bed sheet were soaked in blood. She was scared. She screamed. Mayank Chaudhary asked what happened. She and Mayank Chaudhary tried to put their father on a chair. Mayank Chaudhary examined the cupboard in the room of the deceased. He stated to her that the cupboard was lying open. He made her to believe his story that some burglar had come inside the house. He had killed their father. He had made good his escape with the money. Neighbourers came on the spot. The deceased was removed to Columbia Asia Hospital, Palam Vihar, Gurgaon. The doctor declared him brought dead. She suspected that her brother Mayank Chaudhary had killed her brother. The blood stained bed sheet, pillow, empty cartridge and fired bullet were recovered from the flat. Accused Mayank Chaudhary was arrested on 06.03.2013 at 9.40 PM. A country made pistol along with one live cartridge and magazine were recovered on the basis of disclosure statement made by accused Mayank Chaudhary. The recoveries were effected from the office of Safe Packers and Movers in Mahipalpur, Delhi. On 07.03.2013, accused Rahul and






























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top