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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 166

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, Vimal Kumar Yadav, JJ
SMT. HEERA DEVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI – Respondent
CRL.A. 32/2002



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Tarun Gaur, Mr. Shubham Arora
For the Respondents: Mr. Aashneet Singh

The legal standard for circumstantial evidence requires that the evidence must conclusively establish guilt and exclude any hypothesis consistent with innocence, as reaffirmed by the court.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder conviction - Appeal against conviction - The trial court convicted the appellant for the murder of Ram Lal Meena based solely on circumstantial evidence, concluding that the prosecution established the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant claimed the deceased committed suicide, but the evidence indicated strangulation and foul play. (Paras 1, 6, 10, 24, 35)

(B) Circumstantial Evidence - Legal standard - In murder cases, a chain of circumstantial evidence must be conclusive and exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused. The court applied this standard to affirm the conviction. (Paras 13, 35)

(C) Alibi - Defence - The plea of alibi presented by the appellant was deemed unreliable due to lack of corroboration, and conflicts with independent witnesses who placed her at the scene. (Paras 27, 34)

JUDGMENT

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1. The present Appeal has been filed against the Judgment on Conviction dated 27.11.2001 and Order on Sentence dated 28.11.2001, respectively passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No.60/2000, arising out of FIR No.214/2000, registered at Police Station, Punjabi Bagh, under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”). By the Judgment on Conviction dated 27.11.2001, the Appellant herein, Heera Devi was convicted for committing the murder of one Ram Lal Meena. By a separate Order on Sentence dated 28.11.2001, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in case of default of payment of fine, she shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for the commission of the offence punishable under of .

2. The Appellant, being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, has preferred the present Appeal.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the present Appeal as stated in the Impugned Judgment are as follows:

a) On 25.03.2000, DD No.13A was recorded at Police Station Punjabi Bagh at about 3:05 PM on the basis of information received from the wireless operator that person had committed suicide at House No.16D/2, East Punjabi Bagh, Railway Colony, near the General store.

b)It is stated that the said DD entry was entrusted to SI Ram Phal Singh, who, along with Ct. Ramesh (PW-9), proceeded to the spot. Thereafter, upon reaching House No.16D/2, they found the dead body of one Ram Lal Meena lying inside the premises.

c) Thereafter, SI Ram Phal inspected the scene and noted that the flat comprised of two bedrooms, one adjacent to the entrance was locked and stated to have been let out, while the other bedroom, located towards the west contained the dead body.

d)It is further stated that both the hands of the deceased Ram Lal Meena had been tied with a blue plastic rope, having three loops and two knots. Similar loops of plastic rope, four in number with two knots, were found around the neck of the deceased Ram Lal Meena, with one loop additionally tied with a yellow plastic rope.

e) It is also stated that blood had oozed from the mouth of the deceased and had flowed toward the right ear, while the body lay with the face upward. It is further stated that from the condition of the body and the ligature marks, it appeared to be a case of death by strangulation.

f) It is stated that the wife of the deceased Ram Lal Meena, namely, Smt. Heera Devi (“Heera”) was present inside the room at the time. Upon receiving information regarding the incident, SHO - Punjabi Bagh, Inspector Ram Singh (PW-17) and the ACP also arrived at the spot.

g) SI Ram Phal thereafter made his endorsement vide Ex. PW-17/A and sent the same for registration of an FIR under Section 302 of IPC . He also requisitioned the crime team photographer and initiated the process for dispatch of the special report.

h)Thereafter, the investigation was taken over by the SHO, who inspected the scene through the crime team of the West District and prepared the site plan. He further conducted inquest proceedings under Section 174 CrPC and recorded the statements of the witnesses who identified the body of the deceased Ram Lal Meena. Further, PW-17 also recorded the statement of the accused Heera Devi. The body was thereafter sent to the mortuary for post-mortem examination.

i) During the course of investigation, PW-17 interrogated various persons, including PW-4, a tenant in the flat and a ticket collector with the Railways. The Appellant was arrested. Further, during custodial interrogation, she made a detailed disclosure statement, marked as Ex. PW-4/B, in the presence of PW-4, SI Ram Phal and PW-2. Pursuant to the said disclosure, a remaining piece of nylon rope was recovered from the balcony of her house. Furthermore, a pair of scissors was also recovered, seal in two sep

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