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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Del) 7358

DELHI HIGH COURT
, J
Surender alias Tannu v. State of NCT of Delhi
Criminal Revision Petition | FIR No. 635/2014 | Sessions Case No. 2712/2016



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Anushree Kapadia
For the Respondents: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma

A supplementary chargesheet must be based on new evidence, not a mere reconsideration of prior materials, for it to be legally valid under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 173(8) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302/34 - Supplementary chargesheet filed without fresh material or evidence held to be illegal; initial chargesheet had listed the petitioner in column 12 for lack of evidence - The impugned charges were framed based on unsubstantiated allegations from family members, despite existing exculpatory evidence from eyewitnesses - The validity of the supplementary chargesheet and the order framing the charge against the petitioner was under scrutiny - Court quashed the supplementary chargesheet and the order of charge due to lack of new evidence. (Paras 24-42)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to set aside a supplementary chargesheet and subsequent charge under Section 302 IPC regarding the murder of Raja Babu, arguing he was falsely implicated without any substantial evidence against him.

Findings of Court:
The charges against the petitioner were quashed as the supplementary chargesheet lacked new evidence and was in violation of procedural law.

Issues: The core issues revolved around the legality of the supplementary chargesheet and whether the initial evidence warranted the framing of charges against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: A supplementary chargesheet can only be submitted if new material is discovered; previous evidence cannot be reappraised for additional charges without fresh facts.

Result: Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. outline of the case background and charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. petitioner's denial of involvement and implications. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. counterarguments by the state denying petition. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
4. court's analysis and interpretation of procedural law. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
5. conclusion regarding quashing of the supplementary chargesheet. (Para 41 , 44 , 46)

1. The instant petition had been converted from a Criminal Writ Petition to a Criminal Revision Petition vide order of a coordinate bench of this Court dated 26 February, 2018, and had been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking setting aside of Supplementary Chargesheet dated8 August, 2016 filed in FIR No. 635/2014 registered at Police Station Sarita Vihar and of charges framed against the petitioner vide order dated5 September, 2017 under S.302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ' IPC ') in Sessions Case No. 2712/2016 pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge - 03, South - East, Saket Courts, New Delhi.

2. BACKGROUND
A brief background of the case reveals that an FIR was lodged by the complainant, Ram Babu, wherein he stated that his brother, Raja Babu, now deceased, got into a fight with some boys from their locality and from Ali Vihar a few days before the incident. It is stated that on 23 September, 2014, at around 10 pm, the deceased was returning to his house and he went to a cemented water tank near his jhuggi. The complainant, alongwith his neighbour, had gone to a temple at Ali Village where accused Vijay alias Mandi was present, who told the complainant that he was going towards his home and if anyone from the complainant's jhuggi tried to stop him, he would not leave them. When accused Vijay alias Mandi went towards the jhuggi he started abusing the deceased whereupon the complainant, his mother, father and sister came out of their house. They found that accused Vijay alias Mandi was hitting the deceased and when the complainant tried to stop the accused from hitting the deceased, the accused Vijay alias Mandi pushed him.

3. It is stated in the FIR that accused Vijay alias Mandi, with an intention to kill, stabbed the deceased, Raja Babu, in the chest and neck and ran away from the spot. Consequently, DD No. 82B was recorded in Sarita Vihar Police Station, with regard to the injury to the deceased caused due to a knife stabbing at Jhuggi No.472, New Priyanka Camp, Madanpur, Khadar, Sarita Vihar and the FIR No. 635/2014 was lodged under S.302 of the IPC against the accused.

4. The accused Vijay aias Mandi was arrested and presented before the Juvenile Justice Board, since, he was under the age of 18 years, and he confessed to the concerned Inspector that he stabbed the deceased. Statements of the family members of the deceased as well as other witnesses were recorded. As per the statement of the mother and the sister of the deceased, the petitioner herein was involved in the commission and murder of the deceased. It was stated by mother of the deceased that the petitioner and accused Aamin were holding the deceased when accused - Vijay alias Mandi stabbed him in the chest. A Chargesheet dated 6 December, 2014 was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board and the main accused Vijay alias Mandi was released on bail by the Juvenile Justice Board.

5. Thereafter, an application for further investigation was moved by the complainant before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for monitoring of investigation and the same was allowed with the directions to the Investigating Officer to submit a Status Report. The Investigating Officer, vide order dated 27 April, 2016, was directed to file a further report and on 31 August, 2015, the Investigating Officer filed a Supplementary Chargesheet dated 8 August, 2016, under S.173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter 'Cr.P.C').

6. Vide order dated 31 August, 2016

































































































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