Crl. A.1167/2017

Page 1 of 18

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on: 26^th July, 2022

Pronounced on: 24^th August, 2022

CRL.A. 1167/2017

MANOJ

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate

Amicus Curiae) with Mr. Shiv Varma,

Advocate

Appellant produced through VC.

versus

STATE

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Prithu Garg, APP for State

SI Nitin, PS Farsh Bazar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

J U D G M E N T

ANISH DAYAL, J.

1.

This appeal assails the judgment dated 18^th September, 2017

convicting the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC

and order on sentence dated 27^th September, 2017 sentencing the

appellant to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and simple

imprisonment for three months in default of payment of fine.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003234

Crl. A.1167/2017

Page 2 of 18

The Incident:

2.

As per the case of the prosecution an information was received

on 17^th July, 2012 that a person had fallen from the roof in

Karkardooma Courts, Mediation Complex. When the police team

arrived at the place of occurrence, a wall fan was found lying in

broken condition and the roof of the Mediation Centre made up of

plastic at the first floor was found damaged. The injured had already

been taken to the hospital where he was declared brought dead. Upon

the police checking the CCTV footage of second floor B Block, it was

observed that the deceased was sitting on the parapet and some boys

were found standing with the deceased and talking with each other and

at about 10:13 a.m. one of the boys standing next to the deceased

seemingly pushed him down. The crime team was called, Rukka was

prepared and FIR No.256/2012 was registered. Pursuant to the

investigation by the Investigating Officer (IO) Inspector Raj Kumar

SHO PS Farsh Bazar, the deceased Nazim was identified by his

brother who also identified the appellant as the person who had

pushed the deceased. On 18^th July, 2012 with the help of the brother

of the deceased and upon a search by the police, the appellant was

arrested who on interrogation confessed his guilt. Later, he pointed

out the place of occurrence and upon completion of investigation

charge-sheet was filed. Charges were framed for the offence

punishable under Section 302 IPC to which the appellant pleaded not

guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined 19 witnesses,

statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and

no evidence was led by the defence.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003234

Crl. A.1167/2017

Page 3 of 18

Submissions by the Appellant:

3.

The appellant contended through the appeal and arguments on

his behalf by the learned counsel that no statement of eye witness had

been recorded despite many persons who were seen on the CCTV

footage and that the FIR lodged was also under Section 34 IPC besides

Section 302 IPC. The appellant further contended that the prosecution

did not place on record any CCTV footage of the ground and the first

floor of the court premises which would have made it clear as to how

the deceased fell through the plastic sheet. Besides no blood was

found at the site and the photographs by the police would show that

the plastic sheet was loosely fixed to the iron frame as a cover to the

first floor and had come undone. The alleged act of the appellant in

pushing the deceased could not have been said to have been done with

intent to commit murder since knowing there was a plastic sheet

covering the ground floor, there was no intention to cause an injury

which would result in death. The death of the deceased was caused

due to shock as a result of the injury to the head produced by the blunt

force impact. Accordingly, the appellant relied upon the decision of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarabjeet Singh and Ors. v