Delhi District Court
State vs . Vinod @ Happy Etc. on 29 August, 2011
: 1 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
IN THE COURT OF SH. N. K. KAUSHIK
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE - 02
DISTRICT COURTS DWARKA ; NEW DELHI
S. C. No. 17/08
Date of Institution: 24.01.08
Date on which Judgment Pronounced: 17.08.2011
FIR No.566/07
P.S. Najafgarh
U/s. 120B IPC, 364 read with section 34 IPC, 302 read with
section 34 IPC and 201 read with section 34 IPC & under
section 25 & 27 of Arms Act
In the matter of:
STATE Vs. 1. Vinod @ Happy,
S/o Suresh,
R/o VPO Kair, PS JP Kalan,
New Delhi.
2. Anand @ Annu @ Rohit,
S/o Sh. Omkar Singh,
R/o RZB263,
Gopal Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 1 of 95 pages
: 2 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
3. Sunil,
S/o Dhanpat Singh,
R/o Village Kultan,
PS Sopala,
Rohtak, Haryana.
4. Sher Singh,
S/o Sh. Ramveer Singh,
R/o Gali Mawashiyan,
District Mathura, UP.
..... Accused
JUDGMENT
1. The case set up by the prosecution, is that, on 16.06.07, the complainant Manveer, who happens to be the father of the deceased Taruna, told the police that the deceased Taruna was undergoing training as a Constable in Delhi Police at PTC Jharoda Kalan and that she was missing since 13.06.07, from there.
2. He further stated to the police that her room mate Kiran had introduced his deceased daughter Taruna to the accused Anand Singh, who used to call her on the mobile phone of FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 2 of 95 pages : 3 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Kiran. That the said Kiran had told him that accused Anand had given threat to kill Taruna about 15 days back. That accused Anand had an affair with deceased Taruna and visited their house to propose marriage with her. That since on inquries, it was revealed to them that accused Anand was already a married person having children, complainant Manveer Singh asked accused Anand to stop meeting his daughter Taruna, any further.
3. The complainant stated subsequently, that his daughter Taruna had been kidnapped by accused Anand with sole intention to murder her and that the said Kiran was his accomplice in the crime committed in this case, which resulted in the murder of Taruna.
4. The further story of the prosecution is that on 15.06.07 the complainant Manveer received a call from ASI Subey Singh from Police Post Mandothi, PS Bahadurgah, Haryana, regarding 'dead body of a girl', which was found. That he FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 3 of 95 pages : 4 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. went, thereafter, to Police Station Najafgarh and along with staff of Police Station Najafgarh, reached the spot in Village 'Chara', Haryana near a drain, where he found that the body of deceased Taruna was lying. He identified the same. The body of deceased Taruna was later subjected to postmortem.
5. After this, the police of Police Station Najafgarh took over the investigation. The police registered FIR in this case on 16.06.07 at about 8.00pm. It is pertinent to mention that earlier DD entry no. 38A, dated 13.06.07, was recorded in Police Station Najafgarh, by Inspector Mahender Singh.
6. Further investigation, after the FIR was recorded, followed which, culminated into final report under section 173 Cr.P.C. The challan was filed before the court of Ilaqa Magistrate.
7. The case, being exclusively triable by the court of Session, was was committed to this court, for trial. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 4 of 95 pages : 5 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
8. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.06.07, all the accused persons except accused Sher Singh, in furtherance of their common intention, abducted deceased Taruna, daughter of Sh. Manveer Singh, for the purpose of murdering her, from PTC, Jharoda Kalan, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Najafgarh. Accused persons, thus, are alleged to have committed an offence punishable, under section 364 read with section 34 IPC.
9. It is further alleged that all the accused persons except accused Sher Singh, between 13.06.07 to 15.06.07, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of Taruna, daughter of Sh. Manveer Singh. Accused persons, thus, are alleged to have committed an offence punishable, under section 302 read with section 34 IPC, also.
10. It is further alleged that all the accused persons except accused Sher Singh, during the period 13.06.07 to 15.06.07, in furtherance of their common intention, after having FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 5 of 95 pages : 6 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. murdered the said Taruna, daughter of Sh. Manveer Singh, eliminated evidence, in order to screen themselves from the punishment of the offence, committed by them. Accused persons, thus, are alleged to have committed an offence, punishable under section 201 IPC.
11. It is further alleged that all the accused persons on or before 13.06.07, entered into a criminal conspiracy to murder Taruan, daughter of complainant Sh. Manveer Singh. The said Taruna was undergoing training as a Constable in PTC, Jharoda Kalan, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Najafgarh. All the accused persons, thus, are alleged to have committed an offence punishable under section 120B IPC.
12. It is further alleged that on 22.06.07, at the instance of accused Anand @ Annu @ Rohit, a revolver, made in England, mark IV39, No. A25648 and two used cartridges and two live cartridges were recovered. He, therefore, was in possession, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 6 of 95 pages : 7 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. without license of the aforesaid firearms, and used the same in contravention to the Arms Act. Accused person, thus, is alleged to have committed an offence punishable, under section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.
13. Primafacie, offences under section 120B IPC against all the accused persons, under section 364 IPC read with section 34 IPC, 302 IPC read with section 34 IPC and 201 IPC against all the accused persons except accused Sher Singh and under section 25 & 27 of Arms Act against accused Anand @ Annu @ Rohit, were made out.
14. Charge, accordingly, was framed against the accused persons, to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
15. The prosecution, in order to substantiate its claim and contentions examined 43 witnesses, in all.
16. Thereafter, the accused persons were examined under FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 7 of 95 pages : 8 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. section 313 Cr.P.C. The defence preferred not to lead any evidence, in defence.
17. Ld. Defence Counsel has cited the following case law, in support of his contentions:
1. Ankush Wadhwa vs. State of Rajasthan, CRI LJ 2009, page 1611 (SC).
2. Mani vs. State of Tamil Nadu, 2008 (1) CC Cases (SC) Page 217.
3. Niwas @ Patel vs. State, 2010 (1) CC Cases (HC) Page 83.
4. Liyakat Hussain vs. State, Delhi High Court, CC Cases 2008 (4), Page 373.
5. Hira Lal vs. State, Delhi High Court, CRI. LJ. 2011, Page 2088.
6.Sattatiya @ Satish Rajanna Kartalla vs. State of Maharashtra, 2008 (1) CC cases (SC) Page 226.
7. Mehtab Singh & Anr. vs. State of UP, AIR 2009 SC (2298). FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 8 of 95 pages : 9 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
18. The prosecution cited no case law.
19. I have carefully gone through the entire relevant material appearing on record and have given considered thoughts to the arguments that have been advanced, at the bar. My findings are as under:
20. So far as, case law, cited by defence is concerned, there is no quarrel on the principles of law discussed in the aforesaid case law.
21. PW1, Sh. Manveer Singh is the father of the deceased. He deposed that the deceased Taruna was undergoing training in PTC Jharoda and that she had a room mate in the hostel by the name of Kiran, who introduced the deceased to accused Anand.
22. PW1 has further deposed that about five months prior to the FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 9 of 95 pages : 10 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. occurrence, accused Anand came to their house with the proposal of getting married to his daughter Taruna. That upon this, they wanted to verify certain particulars. That Accused Anand told them not to see his parents as they were very bad.
23. This witness has further deposed that, however, they conducted enquiry and came to know that accused Anand was already married and was having two children. That the offer (of marriage brought by accused Anand), therefore, was declined by them and he was advised to severe all connections with his deceased daughter. That about one and half month prior to the occurrence, his wife got a message from Taruna, the deceased, that accused Anand was troubling his daughter through Kiran.
24. This witness has further deposed that on 13.06.07, a confusing message was received from the mobile phone of deceased Taruna, which they could not understand. This FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 10 of 95 pages : 11 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. witness, therefore, along with his wife went to PTC Jharoda.
25. PW1 has further deposed that on reaching Jharoda, it was revealed that in the morning, at about 7.30am, deceased was present, however, subsequently, she went to the barrack and was untraceable, thereafter. That her room mate Kiran was called, who tried to reveal nothing. That in the meanwhile, one girl by the name of Rachna appeared and disclosed that accused Anand used to communicate with the deceased through telephone of Kiran. That on this, the said Kiran told this witness, in the presence of other staff, that about 15 days prior to the occurrence, accused Anand told Kiran that he would murder the deceased.
26. This witness has further deposed that as his daughter was not traceable in PTC Jharoda Kalan despite efforts, they along with one Mahender Singh of PTC Jharoda Kalan, went to Police Station Najafgarh and lodged the report. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 11 of 95 pages : 12 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
27. PW1 has further deposed that on 15.06.07, he received a telephonic call from ASI Subey Singh, regarding body of a girl, recovered by them. That he then along with his friend approached the IO of Police Station Najafgarh and thereafter, along with IO he went to the spot between 1.00pm to 2.00pm. That after seeing the body of deceased, he identified the same to be of his daughter, Taruna.
28. This witness has further deposed that on 16.06.07, the postmortem of the deceased was conducted, after which, the body of deceased was handed over to them and the deceased was cremated. He has further deposed that the deceased was shot dead as a gun shot injury on the temple and on the chest of deceased was visible. That Najafgarh police recorded his statement, which is Ex.PW3/A, signed by him at point B.
29. This witness has further deposed that on 22.06.07, he along with IO, 23 other police officials and accused Anand, at the FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 12 of 95 pages : 13 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. instance of accused Anand, went to the house of the accused, which is in Najafgarh. That on the first floor of that house, from the head side box of the bed, accused Anand took out a revolver, which was seized by the police, vide memo, Ex.PW1/A, signed by him at point A. That before seizing the revolver, it was found containing two live cartridges and two fired cartridges. That the same were sealed with the seal. That he also signed sketch of the revolver and cartridges, recovered, which is Ex.PW1/B, signed by him at point A.
30. This witness has further deposed that from the aforesaid house, they all went to Rai Farm House at Jhatikara Road. That on the back street of the said farm house, an Esteem Car of white colour, bearing no. DL9C5750, was got recovered at the instance of accused Anand. That from inside the Esteem Car, on the back side of the front seat pocket, a personal diary, one locket and admit card with photograph of his deceased daughter, Taruna, were recovered. The same FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 13 of 95 pages : 14 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. were taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW1/C, bearing his signatures at point A.
31. PW1 has further deposed that blood stains were also lifted from the Esteem Car. The recovered Admit card is Ex.PW1/P1, diary is Ex.PW1/P2. This witness specifically deposed that Ex.PW1/2 i.e. the diary, contained handwriting of the deceased, as this witness had seen the deceased writing.
32. In cross examination, this witness admitted that neither he nor IO went to PTC Jharoda after recording of DD entry no. 38A. The State admitted that except the statement, Ex.PW1/D1, there is no other statement of this witness, which was recorded on 13.06.07.
33. This witness has further deposed that he did not go to Police Station Najfgarh on 16.06.07. That his wife did not possess FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 14 of 95 pages : 15 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. any telephone. That his mobile telephone number was 9312225984, on which he received the message. That the police did not seize his mobile phone. This clearly brings out willful neglect on the part of the police during investigation. PW1 has further deposed that he did not remember the mobile phone number of the deceased.
34. This witness has further deposed that two letters, one, allegedly, a resignation letter and another suicide note, written allegedly, by the deceased, were shown to him in PTC Jharoda but he had not gone through the same. He has further deposed that he did not remember whether police recorded the statement of Kiran in his presence.
35. This witness has further deposed that on 15.06.07, when he made statement to Delhi Police, he had expressed his doubt, regarding involvement of accused Anand. Ld. APP for State, however, pointed out that there was no such statement of 15.06.07, made to Delhi Police. A suggestion FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 15 of 95 pages : 16 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. was given to this witness that it was a case of honour killing and that this witness got implicated the accused persons to save themselves or that no such recovery was effected, which suggestions, he denied.
36. From the evidence of this witness it emerges that accused Anand had intimacy with the deceased. He wanted to marry her and when it was discovered that he was already married, having two children, the proposal extended by accused Anand got smashed. That Kiran, another room mate of deceased was acting as a middle person between the deceased and accused Anand. It appears that Kiran had full knowledge of the entire story.
37. From the testimony of this witness, the prosecution has tried to demonstrate that accused Anand had a motive to kill deceased Taruna as his design to have Taruna as his wife was frustrated.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 16 of 95 pages : 17 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
38. PW2, Smt. Sahib Kaur is the wife of PW1Sh. Manveer Singh and mother of the deceased. She has corroborated, in material particulars, the deposition of PW1, substantially. She has also deposed that accused Anand approached them to marry deceased Taruna. That the proposal was declined once, it was discovered that accused Anand was already a married person and was having two children. She has also corroborated the version of PW1 that they went to find out their daughter in PTC Jharoda, who was found missing there.
39. Nothing appeared in her cross examination, which could contradict, whatever, she has deposed in her examination in chief.
40. PW3, ASI Ramesh Turkey is a formal witness. He has proved the rukka, copy of which is Ex.PW3/A. Copy of FIR, proved by him is Ex.PW3/B. He has deposed that he was duty officer on 1606.07, when FIR in this case was recorded by him. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 17 of 95 pages
: 18 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
41. PW4, Mukesh Kumar has deposed that he bought an
Esteem Car, bearing no. DL9C5750, on 23.08.06, from one Sunil and that he sold him back the same and at that time, an affidavit was executed, copy of which is Mark A. The original of that affidavit is Ex.PW4/A.
42. PW4 has further deposed that the said Sunil subsequently, told him that he had sold the said car to one Anand. Anand is an accused in this case.
43. PW5 is Head Constable Ram Rishi. He deposed that on 15.06.07, he was posted at Police Post Mandothi, Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh. That on that day, he along with ASI Subey Singh were doing patrolling near Chhara Chowk in the area of Police Post Mandothi. That one Tarif Singh met them and informed about a dead body lying in his agricultural field. That ASI Subey Singh recorded his FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 18 of 95 pages : 19 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. statement. That Constable Raj Pal was sent, then to, Police Post Mandothi, to record the DD entry.
44. This witness has further deposed that thereafter, he along with ASI Subey Singh and Tarif Singh went to the spot. That at the spot, they found a dead body, which was inspected and Rs.6,710/ were found from the pocket of the pant, worn by the deceased. That a SIM Card of Idea and two recharge coupons of Rs.100/ were recovered from the knee pocket of that pant. That one muffler, one handkerchief and one cloth piece having holes, were also lying near the dead body. That blood and blood stained earth control were lifted from the spot after preparing separate pulandas and were sealed with the seal of 'SS', vide memo, Ex.PW5/B, signed by this witness at point A. That the articles recovered from the body of the deceased were seized and sealed with the seal of 'SS', vide memo, Ex.PW5/A, bearing his signatures at point A. FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 19 of 95 pages : 20 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
45. This witness has further deposed that photograph of the body of deceased was also taken by the photographer. That his statement was recorded. He identified the recovered currency notes, collectively, as Ex.P1, two coupons as Ex.P2 and Ex.P3, SIM Card as Ex.P4, one white colour maala as Ex.P5, Tabiz as Ex.P6 and wrist watch as Ex.P7. One blood stained cloth piece was proved as Ex.P8, handkerchief as Ex.P9, one jaali (net) as Ex.P10 and one match box, containing blood stained soil has been proved as Ex.P11.
46. This witness has further deposed that all these articles were collected by ASI Subey Singh in his presence, from near the body of deceased.
47. In cross examination, he deposed that seal after use was given to him by PW7 ASI Subey Singh. That on 15.06.07, PW7 did not come to the Police Post Mandothi. At what time on 16.06.07, PW7 came to said Police Post, was not known to FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 20 of 95 pages : 21 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. him. He has further deposed that except Tarif Singh, no member of public was examined by PW7 in his presence.
48. PW6, ASI Surender Kumar has deposed that on 15.06.07, he was called at the spot i.e. fields of Village Chhara, District Jhajjar (Haryana) by ASI Subey Singh. That he took six photographs of the spot. Those photographs have been proved as Ex.PW6/A1 to Ex.PW6/A6.
49. PW7, SI Suby Singh has corroborated the version given by PW5HC Ram Rishi. He has also proved the memos, Ex.PW5/A and Ex.PW5/B. He deposed that Constable Raj Pal reached the spot after lodging DD entry no. 7A. That he prepared rough site plan of the scene of occurrence, vide memo, Ex.PW7/A, bearing his signatures at point A. That he completed the proceedings under section 174 Cr.P.C, which are Ex.PW7/B, bearing his signatures at point A. He proved the statement of Tarif Singh as Ex.PW7/C, having his FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 21 of 95 pages : 22 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. signatures at point A. He also recorded the statement of HC Ram Rishi, which is Ex.PW7/D, bearing signatures of this witness at point A. Form no. 25.351B, which was filled up by him has been proved as Ex.PW7/E, bearing his signatures at point A.
50. This witness has further deposed that after postmortem, the doctor handed over to him a sealed pulanda, containing clothes and jewellary items of the deceased, which were worn by the deceased. That the same were taken into possession, vide seizure memo, Ex.PW7/F, bearing his signatures at point A. That the body of deceased after postmortem was handed over to the father of the deceased, vide memo, Ex.PW7/G. That he recorded the statements of Rampal and Manveer Singh, which are Ex.PW7/H and Ex.PW7/I. That the DD, which was recorded as 7A in Police Post Mandothi, has been proved as Ex.PW7/J. FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 22 of 95 pages : 23 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
51. PW7 has further deposed that on 16.06.07, statements of Rajpal and Manveer were recorded by him, having his signatures at point A. These statements are Ex.PW7/K and Ex.PW7/L. He identified the case property and deposed that the photographs taken by the photographer, were handed over to the police of Police Station Najafgarh. The photographs, which were given to him by the doctor, who conducted postmortem of the deceased, were deposited by him in the maalkhana of Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh. He identified the case properties, which were identified by PW5, in the same manner.
52. The cross examination of this witness was conducted at length but nothing substantial, contradicting the story of the prosecution qua this witness appeared in his cross examination.
53. PW8, Dr. Basant Lal Sirohiwal conducted postmortem on FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 23 of 95 pages : 24 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. the body of deceased Taruna on 16.06.07. He has proved the postmortem report, Ex.PW8/A, signed by him at point A. According to him, the cause of death, in this case was due to 'fire arm injuries and their complication'. That the time since death was 35 days at the time of examination.
54. PW8 has further deposed that he seized 1 to 7 samples, mentioned in the aforesaid report, after duly sealing them with his own seal and handed over those samples to the police along with sample seal. He has specifically deposed that the body of deceased was in advanced stage of decomposition but was identifiable.
55. PW9, Sh. Naresh Kumar deposed that on 22.06.07, on the request of Inspector Mahender Singh of Police Station Najafgarh, he along with other officials of FSL, visited Police Station Najafgarh and inspected the Esteem Car, bearing no.
DL 9C 5750. That the car was first examined by Sh. V.R.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 24 of 95 pages
: 25 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
Anand, SSO Ballastic and thereafter, he examined the same. He found blood on the rear seat of the car and then he took exhibits Mark A and Mark B. That the exhibits were kept in separate envelopes and sealed with the seal of 'NK FSL Delhi' and were handed over to Inspector Mahender Singh. He has further proved crime team report, Ex.PW9/A, bearing his signatures at point A. He has also proved the reports, prepared by him after examination of the samples, which are Ex.PW9/B and Ex.PW9/C. That parcel no. F1 was produced by MHC(M) in the court. That he identified that portion of the seat cover, which was taken by him from the car, the same is Ex.P12. That he also identified the stain, which appeared in the gauze cloth and which was taken by him from the aforesaid car and later on, examined by him in the lab and same is Ex.P13.
56. PWs HC Rajpal and Ramphal, were dropped by the then Ld. APP for State.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 25 of 95 pages : 26 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
57. PW10, Sh. Pankaj did not support the case of the prosecution as he turned hostile to the version of the prosecution.
58. PW11, Sh. Shailender @ Surender also turned hostile and did not support to the case of the prosecution.
59. PW12, HC Joginder Singh has deposed that he arrested accused Anand on 20.06.07 and that the said accused Anand made disclosure statement, regarding his involvement, in this case. That he informed about this to the IO. That the IO formally arrested the accused, in this case.
60. PWs Constable Ranjan and Constable Naresh of Special Staff, were also dropped by the prosecution.
61. PW13, Sh. Jyotish Moharana is a Nodal Officer from Vodaphone. He has proved the attested copy of customer FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 26 of 95 pages : 27 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. application form in respect of phone no. 9899848081, which is Ex.PW13/A. The attested copy of declaration and ID Proof, relating to the said phone have been proved as Ex.PW13/B and Ex.PW13/C, respectively, having his signatures at point A.
62. PW13 has further proved the computerized copy of call details of the said mobile for the period from 13.05.07 to 15.06.07, vide Ex.PW13/D, collectively, consisting of four pages.
63. PW14, Pawan Singh proved the customer application form in respect of mobile phone no. 9911031389 as Ex.PW14/A, the attested copy of ID Proof as Ex.PW14/B, both having his signatures at pt. A. The computerized copy of statement of call details in respect to the said phone, have been proved as Ex.PW14/C, collectively and Ex.PW14/D, collectively. That the aforesaid call details are for the period from 01.06.07 to FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 27 of 95 pages : 28 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. 11.06.07 and 12.06.07 to 15.06.07, respectively.
64. In cross examination, PW14 admitted that the photos on both Ex.PW14/A and Ex.PW14/B were different. Again he deposed that the documents were same. Regarding Ex.PW14/B, he deposed that he cannot read and point out as to whom the said document pertains to.
65. It is not understood what the prosecution intended to prove in this case through PW13 and PW14. Further, the evidence collected by the police qua mobile phone numbers, mentioned above, is not in conformity with section 65B of the Evidence Act and hence, are not admissible.
66. Prosecution dropped PW Captain Bakshi from the list of witnesses.
67. PW15, Constable Rajender Kumar has deposed that on FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 28 of 95 pages : 29 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. 21.06.07, he was posted in Police Station Najafgarh. He joined the investigation of this case on that day. He has further deposed that accused Anand pointed out the site of the place of the incident. The pointing out memo was accordingly, prepared. The same is Ex.PW15/A, bearing signatures of this witness at point A.
68. This witness has further deposed that from Village Chhara, District Jhajjar, accused got recovered some burnt clothes, ash and buckle of belt, which were taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW15/A and were sealed with the seal of 'MS'. Ash and buckle of the belt were, collectively identified by him as Ex.P14, collectively.
69. In cross examination, he admitted that there was an apparent overwriting in the date on the seizure memo, Ex.PW15/A. FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 29 of 95 pages : 30 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
70. PW16, HC Shishupal Yadav deposed that on 21.06.2007, he was posted in Police Station Najafgarh and joined the investigation of this case. That accused Anand pointed out the site, where he had thrown away the dead body of the deceased, Taruna and where he had murdered her. The pointing out memo, in this regard, is Ex.PW16/A. This spot, however, was already in the knowledge of the police.
71. PW16 has further reiterated the memo, Ex.PW15/A, already proved by PW15. This witness further reiterated the memos, Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW1/B and Ex.PW1/C. The identity card of deceased Taruna, her locket and personal diary etc. were seized by this witness, who identified the same as Ex.P1, Ex.P2 and Ex.P15, respectively. Identity of Esteem Car was not disputed by the defence. He also identified the revolver and the cartridges, which were recovered in this case. Same are Ex.P16, Ex.P17 to Ex.P20, respectively. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 30 of 95 pages
: 31 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
72. PW17, SI Mahesh Soni deposed that on 13.06.07, he was
posted in Police Station Najafgarh. That on that date, he received DD entry no. 38A, regarding missing of a woman Constable Taruna, copy of the said DD entry is Ex.PW17/A.
73. This witness has further deposed that on 15.06.07, an information from Police Station Bahadurgarh was received, regarding recovery of dead body of deceased in whose pocket, a mobile chip was found. That upon receipt of said information, he along with others and the complainant Manveer, went to Village Chhara, vide DD entry no. 19A, copy of which is Ex.PW17/B.
74. PW17 has further deposed that on 16.06.07, postmortem of the deceased was got conducted in PGI Rohtak. That after postmortem, the complainant Manveer came to Police Station and on the basis of his statement, case was got registered.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 31 of 95 pages : 32 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
75. PW17 has further deposed that on 20.06.07, Inspector Mahender Singh received an information that accused Anand was arrested by Special Staff, North West District. That on this information, accused Anand was arrested with the permission of the court concerned. That after the accused Anand was formally arrested, he made disclosure statement, Ex.PW17/C, bearing signatures of this witness at point A.
76. This witness has further deposed that during investigation, IO got recovered ash of burnt clothes and buckle of belt at Village Chhara at the instance of accused Anand on 21.06.07, vide memo, Ex.PW15/A, which this witness deposed was in his handwriting. He has reiterated the memo, Ex.PW16/A, already proved by PW16.
77. This witness has further deposed that on 22.06.07, accused Anand got recovered a revolver and four cartridges, out of FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 32 of 95 pages : 33 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. which, two were live, from his house, same were taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW1/A. That the said memo is also in his handwriting. He has further deposed that prior to the seizure, IO prepared sketch of the cartridges and that of revolver. He has further deposed that at the instance of accused Anand, a Maruti Esteem Car was recovered, which was taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW1/C. The said memo is also in his handwriting.
78. PW17 has further deposed that from the rear pocket of the said car, a locket, an Identity Card of Taruna and her personal diary were found when the car was inspected by the crime team. That the said articles were taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW1/C, which is also in his handwriting.
79. PW17 has further deposed that during inspection of the alleged car, Incharge of FSL took some exhibits from the car, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 33 of 95 pages : 34 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. which were sealed with the seal of 'FSL NK' and were handed over to the IO. The same were taken into possession, vide memo, Ex.PW17/D, which is also in his handwriting but does not bear his signatures.
80. This witness has further deposed that on 26.06.07, accused Anand was got medically examined. He identified the case property Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P15, Ex.P16 and the cartridges Ex.P17 to Ex.P20, already proved by other witnesses.
81. In cross examination, he admitted that the DD entry in question was assigned to him on 13.06.07 during investigation of the case. That he did not record the statements of parents of deceased till 15.06.07. That he was aware of the mobile number of Constable Taruna prior to 15.06.07 as it was put on surveillance. He, however, failed to tell the same, when he deposed in the court. Admittedly, he did not track or investigate in respect of the mobile phone of FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 34 of 95 pages : 35 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Tarunathe deceased. This is very strange and is a serious lapse on the part of this witness.
82. PW17 has further deposed that an application was moved by ACP Najafgarh to put the mobile phone of deceased on surveillance on 13.06.07 but he did not know, what action was taken by the ACP on that application. This is also very strange. He could not tell the name of company whose mobile phone was that of the deceased Taruna.
83. This witness has admitted that he had read the suicide note and resignation letter of the deceased prior to 15.06.07, photocopies of the same were although seized but strangely no seizure memo was prepared. This is also a serious lapse on his part. Further, he has admitted that he made no attempt to enquire from the Constables, deputed at PTC Jharoda Kalan on 13.06.2007 and 14.06.2007. A lady Constable was missing from PTC Jharoda Kalan but he was FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 35 of 95 pages : 36 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. taking it very lightly by sitting tight over the matter. This is very much shocking.
84. This witness has further admitted that on 13.06.2007, complainant alongwith with his wife came to Police Station but their statements were not recorded by him. It is very strange, surprising and shocking. It appears that after assignment of investigation to him on 13.06.07, despite the fact that the matter was very serious, as it was of missing of woman Constable trainee from police training school, yet, he seems to have not conducted any investigation as to how the deceased could have escaped or was abducted from PTC Jharoda Kalan on 13.06.07, itself.
85. PW17 has deposed that he got filled up missing form on 13.06.07. Had he been alert, vigilant and dutiful, the occurrence in this case could have been averted or else actual offenders/accused persons could have been nabbed with cogent and relevant evidences much earlier. He has, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 36 of 95 pages : 37 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. therefore, tried to fail the case of the prosecution from 13.06.07, itself.
86. PW17 has deposed that he got filled up missing form on 13.06.07, when was shown, he admitted that this contains on the top, the date of 14.06.07. It shows the manipulation done by him. He failed to tell as to whether he visited PTC Jharoda Kalan on 14.06.2007 and 15.06.07 or not.
87. PW17 has further deposed that he continuously tried to contact on the mobile phone of deceased Taruna but every time the response was switched off. This fact was, however, nowhere, recorded by him on record. He has deposed that he had stated this fact to the IO in his statement but in his statement, Mark X1, it nowhere contains this. This indicates that as an afterthought he deposed and in fact, he did nothing like this.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 37 of 95 pages
: 38 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
88. This witness has admitted that he did not seize missing
record from PTC Jharoda, regarding missing of Taruna
either on 13.06.07, 14.06.07 or 15.06.07. He did not collect any proof of ownership of Taruna of her mobile phone, which she was having or was using, at the relevant time.
89. This witness has further deposed in his cross examination that he had no talk with any Haryana Police Official on 15.06.07 prior to leaving Police Station Najafgarh and that the police did not seize any chip of the mobile phone found to be belonging to the deceased from her pocket upto 15.06.07. He has admitted that no suspicion or doubt was raised on 13.06.07, when DD entry no. 38A was recorded by the police. He admitted that he did not confirm as to whether the chip in question was activated or not.
90. PW17 has deposed that on 22.06.07, when they were led by accused Anand to his house, the mother and wife of accused were present there. Other suggestions of the defence were FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 38 of 95 pages : 39 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. denied by him.
91. PW18, Constable Balwan Singh did not support the case of the prosecution. He was cross examined at length by Ld. APP for the State and was confronted with the statement, mark PW18/A, the contents of which were denied by him.
92. PW19, Constable Ranbir Singh also turned hostile to the version of the prosecution. He also admitted the contents of statement mark PW19/A, when was put to him by Ld. APP for the State.
93. PW18, PW19, PW21 and PW23 being the police Constables have turned hostile. Either they have told lies or IO (PW42) has falsely fabricated their statements, under section 161 Cr.P.C. As such, either of them are required to be prosecuted. The Commissioner of Police, therefore, shall take appropriate action in the matter, under intimation to this court. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 39 of 95 pages : 40 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
94. The prosecution dropped PW Inspector Kusum Sharma from the list of witnesses.
95. PW20, ACP Mahender Singh deposed that on 13.06.07, he was posted at PTC Jharoda Kalan as RI. That on receiving information that a lady Constable by the name of Taruna was absent, he reported the matter to Police Station Najafgarh, where DD entry no. 38A was recorded, the same is Ex.PW17/A.
96. In cross examination, he deposed that suicide note and resignation letter of deceased were handed over by him to the Police Station on that date. The police of Police Station Najafgarh, however, did none of the investigation, regarding all this.
97. PW21, Head Constable Jagvir Singh did not support the case FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 40 of 95 pages : 41 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. of the prosecution and turned hostile. Nothing emerged in his cross examination, which could help the prosecution. He has specifically denied the statement, Mark PW21/A, having been made by him to the police during investigation of this case.
98. PW22, Constable Naveen is a formal witness, who deposed that on 23.08.07, he collected exhibits, pertaining to this case and took them to FSL, Rohini, vide road certificate no. 273/21 and deposited there one pulanda and that remaining pulandas were returned, which, he in turn, deposited in the maal khana. That till the case property remained with him, the same was not tampered with.
99. PW23, Constable Dimple deposed that in the year 2007, she was undergoing training at PTC Jharoda Kalan. That the deceased Taruna was in her platoon. That she used to talk with one person namely, Anand, over telephone, frequently, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 41 of 95 pages : 42 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. by using her phone. That one Kiran was also in the same platoon. That there used to be talk in their platoon that deceased had a friend and she kept on talking with him over telephone. She did not support the other version of the prosecution. She was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State but to no advantage to the prosecution.
100. PW24, HC Nihal Singh deposed that he joined the investigation on 18.11.07. That during investigation, accused Vinod @ Happy was arrested, vide memo, Ex.PW24/A. That his personal search was conducted, vide memo, Ex.PW24/B, bearing his signatures at point A. The disclosure statement of accused Vinod was recorded in his presence, vide memo, Ex.PW24/C, bearing signatures of this witness at point A.
101. PW25, Woman Constable Rajbala deposed that in the year 2007, she was undergoing training as Constable at PTC Jharoda Kalan. That deceased Taruna was also with them. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 42 of 95 pages : 43 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. That she befriended a boy by the name of Anand. That she used to go with him outside and used to be absent, at times, because of an affair with him. That one Kiran was also with us. That Kiran got introduced said Anand to the deceased. That there was talk amongst female trainees that the deceased because of the affair with Anand, was frequently absent from the training center and that on this count, she was ill reputed. That the deceased used to talk over mobile phone.
102. In cross examination, she, however, was unable to give the mobile phone number of the deceased.
103. PW26, Constable Rachna deposed that she was trainee in the year 2007 in PTC Jharoda Kalan in platoon no. 4. That deceased Taruna was also under training and she be friended a boy by the name of Anand. That she used to go with him because of her affair with him. That some of them tried to FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 43 of 95 pages : 44 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. make the deceased understand that she should give up her affair with Anand as he was already married and having two children.
104. This witness has further deposed that on 12.06.07, Taruna had gone to main gate with a bag to hand over the same to someone. That on 13.06.07, she was absent from PTC Jharoda at the time of PT in the morning. That a suicide note was found on 13.06.07 after her absence from the bed of one Dimple, who was also undergoing training with them.
105. In cross examination, she deposed that parents of the deceased came in her presence on 13.06.07.
106. PW25 and PW26 have corroborated the version of PW1 and PW2, regarding intimacy/relations between accused Anand and the deceased. This shows that there could be a motive imputable to accused Anand to have planned to eliminate Tarunathe deceased, on account of his frustration. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 44 of 95 pages : 45 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
107. PW27, ASI Suraj Bhan is a formal witness, who has proved DD entry no. 56A, copy of which is Ex.PW27/A, having his signatures at point A.
108. PW28, Inspector Rajender Sharma deposed that on 10.09.07, on the requisition of the IO, he handed over the list of trainees of platoon no. 4. That from the morning of 13.06.07, Taruna was absent.
109. PW29, Constable Mahavir Singh is a formal witness, who deposed that on 31.08.07, he received exhibits, pertaining to this case from MHC(M), in duly sealed condition and took the same to FSL, Rohini and deposited there. That till the exhibits remained with him, the same were not tampered with.
110. The prosecution has dropped PW Head Constable Raja Ram FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 45 of 95 pages : 46 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. from the list of witnesses.
111. PW30, Constable Hardeep Singh deposed that on 13.06.07, he prepared site plan, Ex.PW30/A on the basis of rough notes. He identified his signatures at point A on the said scaled site plan.
112. PW31, K.C. Varshney is the ballistic expert. He has deposed that he examined the revolver in question and four cartridges in question. That on examination, he gave detailed report, dated 13.12.07, which is Ex.PW31/A, bearing his signatures at point A, on both the pages. The forwarding letter of FSL, has been proved by him as Ex.PW31/B. The cartridges, which were examined by him, were proved as Ex.P17 to Ex.P20 and revolver as Ex.P16.
113. In cross examination, he deposed that he did not come across anything to show that the weapon, Ex.P16 was FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 46 of 95 pages : 47 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. subjected to acid wash.
114. PW32, Retired Inspector Vijay Sachdeva deposed that on 12/13.06.07, he was working as Duty Officer. That on 13.06.07, HC Balwan Singh from main gate of PTC Jharoda Kalan informed him at about 5.45am that a woman trainee Constable named Taruna had come to the gate for going out and that since she did not have any permission, he sent her back. That the said Constable Taruna did not report thereafter. That on search, she was not found. That she was marked absent and a report was lodged to this effect.
115. PW33, SI Virendra Singh deposed that on 22.04.08, in pursuant to a secret information, accused Ajay @ Sunil was arrested by him from Surakhpur Morh, Najafgarh. That he accordingly, informed IO of this case and handed over relevant documents to the IO.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 47 of 95 pages : 48 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
116. PW34, Sh. Anurag Sharma is a senior Scientific Officer, who was examined by the State. He examined the documents referred to him, consisting of six sheets and one volume. He gave his report as Ex.PW34/A, which bears his signatures at point A. He had specifically deposed that it was not possible to express any opinion on Q2/1, Q9/1 and Q10/1 whereas, he opined that the person, who wrote the red enclosed writings stamped and marked A1 to A68, also wrote the red enclosed writings similarly, stamped and marked Q1 to Q10 for the reasons given by him in the report.
117. In cross examination, he deposed that it is not feasible to ascertain the exact age of writing in the Indian conditions. The prosecution, however, could not link the opinion of this witness to anything to generate a link or complete the chain of circumstances contradicting the innocence of the accused persons, on the basis of the aforesaid report of the expert. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 48 of 95 pages : 49 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
118. PW35, Sh. Ravijeet Singh brought the hotel record of Hotel Groovie, Mehrauli Road, Gurgaon from 10.02.2010 to 05.06.2010. He has proved guest registration card collectively as Ex.PW35/A. The prosecution was unable to tell the relevance of the record, proved by him.
119. Further, what he has produced were the loose sheets of a register. He did not produce the entire record to show that the documents, produced by him, were maintained in regular course of business and were from such a record, which might have been maintained as per rules/law by the hotel management. His testimony was not only a burden on the State but was also demonstrative of the incompetence of the prosecution to raise uncalled for dust and confusion.
120. PW36, Sh. Sumit Kumar Grover proved his report, Ex.PW36/A, bearing his signatures at point A. According to him, after inspecting the Esteem Car of white colour seized in FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 49 of 95 pages : 50 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. this case, no chance prints could be found.
121. PW37, Constable Vedpal Singh proved pointing out memo, Ex.PW37/A, bearing signatures of this witness at point A, which is alleged to be the pointing out memo, prepared at the pointing out of accused Sunil and similarly, Ex.PW37/B is the pointing out memo, prepared at the instance of the said accused. The said memo, bears signatures of this witness at point A. He has deposed that Ex.PW37/B was prepared at the pointing out of accused Sunil @ Ajay of the place, where he pointed out that the clothes of deceased Taruan were burnt. There was complete lack of sense to get these pointing out memos prepared as this fact was already in the previous knowledge of the police.
122. PW38, HC Ravinder Singh deposed that on 22.06.07, he was posted in the Mobile Crime Team. That on the request of IO, he took three photographs of Maruti Esteem Car. The FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 50 of 95 pages : 51 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. photographs are collectively proved as Ex.PW38/A and its negatives have been proved, collectively, as Ex.PW38/B.
123. PW39, HC Devender Kumar proved the extract of register no. 19 and the relevant road certificates. The photocopies of register no. 19, have been proved, collectively, as Ex.PW39/A, containing six pages and copies of road certificates have been proved, collectively, as Ex.PW39/B, consisting of two pages.
124. Vide the aforesaid documents, deposits/exhibits in this case, samples were transacted in the maalkhana of the concerned Police Station.
125. PW40, HC Randhir Singh proved pointing out memo, Ex.PW40/A, bearing his signatures at point A, allegedly, prepared at the instance of accused Vinod @ Happy on 20.11.07. He has further proved another pointing out memo, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 51 of 95 pages : 52 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Ex.PW40/B, having his signatures at point A, which was also prepared at the instance of said accused person.
126. The testimony of this witness does not help the prosecution, in as much as, the said fact was already known to the police.
127. PW41, HC Subash Chand deposed that he joined the investigation of this case on 23.04.08. That accused Sunil Kumar @ Ajay was arrested, vide memo, Ex.PW41/A, having his signatures at point A. That his disclosure statement was recorded, vide memo, Ex.PW41/B on which, he has proved his signatures.
128. PW42, Inspector Mahender Singh is the Investigating Officer, who investigated the present case. He deposed that on 15.06.07, he was posted in Police Station Najafgarh. That on that day, complainant Manveer Singh came to Police Station with the information that he was informed by ASI FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 52 of 95 pages : 53 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Subey Singh of Police Post Mandothi, Police Station Bahadurgarh, Haryana that a dead body of a lady was lying in the fields and one SIM was recovered from the pocket of the clothes on the said body.
129. This witness has further deposed that upon the said information, he called SI Mahesh Soni and narrated the above facts to him. That he made a call from the mobile phone of complainant Manveer Singh to the same number, which was attended by SHO Bahadurgarh, Haryana, who confirmed the information received as correct.
130. PW42 has further deposed that thereafter, he along with SI Mahesh Soni, SI Richpal, complainant Manveer Singh and another public person, went to Chhara, Jhajjar Road, near Canal Jharia, Haryana. That there they found body of a young lady, which was identified by complainant Manveer Singh to be that of his daughter.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 53 of 95 pages : 54 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
131. PW42 has further deposed that on 16.06.07, at about 6.00pm, complainant Manveer Singh again came to the Police Station Najafgarh and made his complaint Ex.PW3/A. That rukka was prepared, which is Ex.PW42/A and case was got registered. The FIR has already been proved by PW3 as Ex.PW3/B.
132. This witness has further deposed that on 17.06.07, he collected details of mobile phone no. 9899848081, belonging to the deceased.
133. PW42 has further deposed that on 18.06.07, MHC(M), HC Rajender Singh handed over five pulandas, sealed with the seal of 'SS', hospital seal and sample seal along with postmortem report, Ex.PW8/A and inquest papers. He has further deposed that on 19.06.07, he along with complainant Manveer Singh and staff visited PTC Jharoda Kalan. FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 54 of 95 pages
: 55 :
State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
134. This witness has further deposed that on 20.06.07, he
received an information, regarding arrest of accused Anand @ Anna, in case FIR no. 705/07, of Police Station Saraswati Vihar. That this accused is stated to have disclosed about his involvement in the present case. That from Special Staff, North West District, he got recorded the disclosure of accused Anand @ Anna @ Rohit, which is Mark PW42/A. That accused Anand was thereafter, arrested, vide memo, Ex.PW42/B. That the police remand of this accused was taken for seven days. That accused Anand is stated to have made another disclosure statement, which is Ex.PW17/C, already proved by PW17. That on his pointing out, pointing out memo, Ex.PW16/A was prepared on 21.06.07.
135. This witness has further deposed that the accused person disclosed that they had burnt the clothes of the deceased and the bag of the deceased and that along with ashes and remaining unburnt parts and buckle (of the belt) were FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 55 of 95 pages : 56 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. thrown at the back side of the house in Village Chhara, Jhajjar. The accused Anand led the police party to that spot and these articles were recovered, seized and were sealed with the seal of 'MC'. That the pointing out memo of the place and seizure memo of these articles was proved as Ex.PW15/A.
136. This witness has further deposed that on 22.06.07, accused Anand @ Anna, in pursuance to his disclosure, in the presence of the complainant, Manveer Singh, SI Mahesh Soni and HC Shishu Pal led them to his house no. RZ 263, B Block, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh and that in his house, the accused Anand opened the iron door and took them to first floor of his house in a room, where one double bed was lying. That from the box of the said double bed, he took out one polythene, containing revolver and stated that it was the same revolver by which, the deceased was shot. That on checking, two live cartridges and two empty cartridges were FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 56 of 95 pages : 57 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. found in the chamber of the said revolver. That the revolver was having mark 'made in England' and on the other side 'MARK IV39' was engraved. This revolver was foreign manufactured and seems to have been acquired by accused Anand as a smuggled weapon.
137. This witness has further reiterated the sketch of the revolver, live cartridges and empty cartridges, Ex.PW1/B and the seizure memo, Ex.PW1/A, vide which, it was seized. These memos have already been proved by PW1.
138. PW42 has further deposed that in pursuance to the disclosure made by accused Anand, accused Anand led them to the back side of the Rai Farm House, Jhatikra Road, where he pointed out towards one Maruti Esteem of White Colour, bearing registration no. DL9C5750 and told that in the said vehicle, deceased was taken to the spot, where she was murdered. That crime team reached the spot. The aforesaid FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 57 of 95 pages : 58 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. vehicle was found locked. That with the help of steel scale, it was opened. That since it was drizzling, crime team did not find any chance prints. That the Incharge of the Crime team prepared a report and handed over the same to him.
139. This witness has further deposed that from the aforesaid vehicle, from the pocket of front left side seat, one locket, admit card of the deceased, bearing her photograph and personal diary of the deceased were recovered, which were identified by the complainant. That the same were seized vide memo, Ex.PW1/C. That the admit card of the deceased, bearing her photograph and her personal diary, which have already been proved as Ex.PW1/P1 and Ex.PW1/P2, were reiterated by this witness. That from the disclosure made by accused Anand @ Anna @ Rohit, IO came to know about the other co accused persons namely, Happy @ Vinod and Sunil, who along with accused Anand hatched a conspiracy. That as per conspiracy, accused Sunil, who had a relative at FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 58 of 95 pages : 59 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Mathura was stated to have managed the weapon, allegedly used in this case. No cogent evidence, was, however, collected and proved by this witness, on record.
140. This witness has further deposed that on 26.06.07, after the medical examination, accused was sent to JC. That accused Sheru @ Sher Singh was arrested on secret information, vide memo, Ex.PW42/C. That his personal search was conducted, vide memo, Ex.PW42/D. Both these memos bear his signatures at point A. That his disclosure statement, Ex.PW42/ E, was recorded.
141. This witness has further deposed that on 28/29.06.07 and subsequently, on 2/3/4/5.07.07, he along with SI Mahesh Soni, went to PTC Jharoda Kalan and made enquiries, where he recorded the statements of staff and other lady Constable trainees.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 59 of 95 pages : 60 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
142. This witness has further deposed that on 05.09.07, he along with draftsman HC Hardeep Singh went to Police Post Mandothi of the Police Station Bahadurgarh. That he recorded the statement of ASI Subey Singh. That on his pointing out, the said draftsman took measurements as well as rough notes regarding the spot. That on 10.09.07, he received entire record, pertaining to deceased Taruna from PTC Jharoda, vide application, Ex.PW42/F.
143. This witness has further reiterated documents, Ex.PW13/E, Ex.PW14/C, Ex.PW14/D, Ex.PW24/A and Ex.PW24/B and Ex.PW24/C, already proved by PW14 & PW24. That the ownership proof of deceased Taruna were collected, vide memo, Ex.PW42/G and Ex.PW42/H.
144. PW42 has further deposed that on 18.11.07, on receipt of secret information, accused Happy @ Vinod was arrested, vide memo, Ex.PW24/A. His personal search was conducted, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 60 of 95 pages : 61 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. vide memo, Ex.PW24/B. The disclosure statement of this accused was recorded, vide memo, Ex.PW24/C. This witness has identified his signatures at point A, on the aforesaid memos.
145. This witness has deposed that at the instance of accused Vinod, he prepared pointing out memos, Ex.PW40/A and Ex.PW40/B. That he prepared supplementary charge sheet qua accused Vinod Kumar and the same was forwarded by SHO and ACP. He has reiterated the arrest memo of accused Sunil, which is Ex.PW41/A, already proved by PW41.
146. This witness has further reiterated the documents, Ex.PW9/B, Ex.PW9/C, Ex.PW31/A, Ex.PW34/A, Ex.PW37/A and Ex.PW37/B, already proved by the other witnesses. He also identified the recovered revolver, Ex.P16 and cartridges as Ex.P17 to Ex.P20. The locket with maala, which was recovered at the instance of accused Anand, has been proved FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 61 of 95 pages : 62 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. as Ex.P15. That the pulandas, containing ashes of burnt clothes, bag and buckle were collectively identified as Ex.PX. One piece of seat cover, which allegedly was lifted from the car in question and was lifted by FSL expert has been proved by this witness as Ex.PY. That the Esteem Car has been proved as Ex.PZ. This witness was extensively cross examined by the defence.
147. In cross examination, he admitted that ASI Subey Singh prepared some documents but he could not pay any attention to the same as to which particular document, he was preparing at that time. He did not tell the name of service provider of the mobile phone of Taruna. He admitted that the mobile number of Taruna was kept on surveillance by SI Mahesh Soni but he failed to tell its duration. He admitted that he did not collect any record, regarding surveillance of the said mobile number.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 62 of 95 pages : 63 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
148. This witness has further admitted that he did not prepare any seizure memo, regarding DD entry no. 38A. He has further deposed that he did not know whether parents of deceased Taruna received any confusing message on 13.06.07.
149. PW42 has admitted that Kiran was also police trainee at the time of incident but he failed to tell the mobile number of Kiran. He further told that he interrogated Kiran at PTC Jharoda Kalan on four dates between 18.06.07 to 05.07.07. He further admitted that he did not record any statement of complainant on 15.06.07 after coming from Chhara, Haryana. That he had no intimation about suspicion, raised by complainant against accused Anand prior to registration of the FIR, in this case. That he had not seen the contents of DD entry no. 38A on 13.06.07 to 15.06.07 and that he did not know, who had recorded the said DD entry. That no document was attached to the said DD.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 63 of 95 pages : 64 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
150. This witness could not tell what enquiry was conducted by SI Mahesh Soni on 15.06.07 and 16.06.07.
151. This witness has deposed that Kiran was charge sheeted and her name was kept in column no. 2 of the charge sheet. That he did not record the statement of Kiran as complainant had suspicion about Kiran in the crime. He admitted that he did not seize the phone of Kiran though he seized the attendance register, missing report, list of platoon and the resignation letter of Taruna from PTC Jharoda Kalan on 10.09.07.
152. This witness has deposed that accused Vinod was the owner of the mobile phone, which was used by accused Anand but he has collected no evidence or the details, in this regard. He admitted that he recorded the statement of Inspector Mahender Singh, RI of PTC Jharoda Kalan on 10.09.07 only. That he recorded the statement of SI Mahesh Soni on 20.06.07. That accused Anand was taken to Village Churani, Haryana and reached there at about 12.30pm. He admitted FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 64 of 95 pages : 65 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. that he had not given any explanation, regarding the SIM recovered from the clothes of the deceased nor he asked SI Subey Singh of Haryana Police to send the said SIM for obtaining finger prints by sending it to FSL Department. He has further admitted that he could not tell the name of the person on whose name, the alleged SIM was.
153. In cross examination, he has admitted that he never asked SI Mahesh Soni anything about the mobile number of the deceased except on 17.06.07. That he did not probe it further. That the SIM, recovered in this case by him was never tested nor played either by him or by others. That he did not collect any data, regarding the said SIM or when the same was activated. That he did not obtain record of any service provider of the mobile phone of the complainant, Manveer Singh. That he did not ask SI Mahesh Soni as to what steps, he had taken in respect of DD entry no. 38A. That he joined Kiran Dagar in investigation on 18.06.07 and 19.06.07, after the FIR was lodged.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 65 of 95 pages : 66 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
154. This witness has further deposed that the resignation letter of the deceased was taken by him in possession only on 10.09.07, without any explanation on his part for this extraordinary delay. He admitted that no document, regarding seizure was prepared in this regard. He admitted that father of Kiran, who was arrayed in column no. 2 of the charge sheet, is working in Delhi Police below the rank of Inspector. He admitted that he had met the father of Kiran but he had not recorded his statement. He further admitted that he did not show the buckle of the belt, allegedly, recovered from Churani Village, to any witness to confirm that it was used/worn by the deceased.
155. PW42 has further admitted that he put no question to Kiran Dagar, regarding alleged threats given by accused Anand to the deceased. He admitted that he made no attempt and did not collect any evidence to ascertain as to how the deceased could have escaped the PTC premises.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 66 of 95 pages : 67 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
156. This witness has further admitted that he came to know that the deceased was got introduced to accused Anand by Kiran Dagar. That he obtained call details of the mobile phone used by Kiran Dagar, whose number was 9212109897 but with oblique motive he did not file the same on record. He admitted that he obtained call details of one Rachna, who was also undergoing training with the deceased in PTC Jharoda Kalan but he has made her as a witness.
157. PW42 could not tell as to when he recorded the statements of HC Balwan Singh and HC Ranvir Singh. He admitted that he was not aware as to on which number, the entry of the pulanda received from Haryana Police, was made in maalkhana register.
158. This witness has further admitted that he did not find out the owner of phone no. 9811289119, allegedly, connected with accused Anand. He has deposed that he did not remember FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 67 of 95 pages : 68 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. that whether he seized affidavit Ex.PW42/DA. He has further admitted that he did not record statement of accused Sunil although document Ex.PW42/DA is alleged to have been executed by one Sunil.
159. PW43, Ms. Meenu Chaudhary deposed that on 07.04.08, she accorded sanction, under section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959 for the prosecution of accused Anand. The sanction order is Ex.PW43/A, having her signatures at point A. The prosecution failed to examine her earlier. It was only after the final arguments were advanced that the prosecution woke up to call and examine her under section 311 Cr.P.C.
160. Constable Kiran Dagar was examined as CW1. She was summoned for 10.05.2011 but she did not depose on that date. The circumstances, on record, indicate that she intentionally did not depose on 10.05.2011. Her examination on subsequent date indicates that she has made evasive FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 68 of 95 pages : 69 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. replies/statement.
161. The stand of Constable Kiran Dagar stood contradicted when she was confronted with copy of the calender, Ex.CW1/P1, by the State, wherein it was indicated that it was not a holiday on 13.06.07 and that no permission could have been granted on 13.06.07 for leave to the trainees as it was working day. This indicates that CW1 Kiran Dagar was all out not giving the true version.
162. On behalf of the State, telephone no. 9211210182 (of the father of CW1) was confronted to Constable Kiran Dagar as the mobile phone number used by her, indicating that this telephone number was in the knowledge of the police. It is surprising and shocking that the police did not carry out investigation in respect of this mobile phone number. It is the case of the police that this number was the mobile number of her father, who works in police and was used by FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 69 of 95 pages : 70 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Constable Kiran Dagar while in PTC. Still IO afforded to deliberately avoid investigation in this regard, despite the fact that involvement in the crime of Kiran Dagar was strongly echoed by the parents of the deceased.
163. It appears that Kiran Dagar was deliberately not connected by the IO and no cogent evidence was collected as against her. It appears that for the reason that she is the daughter of Delhi Police official, she was favoured by the IO and the then ACP supervising the IO. She might have been involved in the occurrence of this case, in as much as, material has come on record that she was the vital link between the deceased Taruna and Anand. She belongs to the same village to which, accused Anand belongs to.
164. It appears that the IO in order to favour her, deliberately did not collect any evidence against her and provided her safe escape route by simply putting her in column no. 2. A full fledged investigation was required involving Constable Kiran FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 70 of 95 pages : 71 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Dagar, as per law. Had the case been properly investigated, it could have resulted into systematic, valuable and cogent evidence through Constable Kiran Dagar, in this case. A serious lapse, perhaps deliberately, has been committed by the IO, to sabotage and fail the case of the prosecution regarding criminal conspiracy, abduction and murder, alleged in this case.
165. This case relates to heinous crime of the murder of a woman that too of a Constable trainee of Delhi, who was undergoing training in the Police Training College, Jharoda Kalan. She was allegedly abducted and murdered. The manner in which the investigation has been carried out by the police is a matter of shame to the whole of the department.
166. According to the prosecution, the accused persons hatched a conspiracy and in pursuance to the same, they, in furtherance of their common intention, kidnapped Taruna, FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 71 of 95 pages : 72 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. the deceased, murdered her and thereafter, abandoned her body in the fields of a village in Haryana. There are allegations of destruction, subsequently, of the evidence by them.
167. It is also the case of the prosecution that accused Anand got recovered a pistol of mark 'Webley, made in England' from his house and which was found to contain two used and two live cartridges. He also got recovered an abandoned car from which belongings of the deceased and some blood stains on the seat covers were found out. Accused Anand also led to the discovery of fact and recovery of articles regarding the clothes (worn at the time of alleged offences) which were burnt up and abandoned by him after the occurrence in this case.
168. The present case hinges on circumstantial evidence.
169. Regarding the cases based upon circumstantial evidence, it FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 72 of 95 pages : 73 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. is well settled by catena of decisions of the Supreme Court that "for proving guilt of commission of an offence, under section 302 IPC, the prosecution must lead evidence to connect all links in the chain so as to clearly point the guilt of the accused alone and of nobody else" (reliance is placed upon Sunny Kapoor vs. State (2006) 5 SCALE 467).
170. It has further been held in Gagan Kanojia vs. State, 2007 (2) Supreme 23 that "the approach of the court should be an integrated one and not truncated or isolated. The court should use the yardstick of probability and appreciate the intrinsic value of the evidence brought on record and analyze and assess the same objectively."
171. It has been consistently laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that "where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 73 of 95 pages : 74 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person" (reliance is placed upon Gurpreet Singh vs. State (2002) 8 SCC 18).
172. It has further been held in Bodhraj vs. State (2002) 8 SCC45 that "the circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances. It was laid down that where the case depends upon the conclusion drawn from the circumstances, the cumulative effect of the circumstances must be such as to negative the innocence of the accused and bring home the offences beyond any reasonable doubt."
173. In the present case, there is no cogent evidence, proved on record by the prosecution, regarding criminal conspiracy, having been hatched by the accused persons. No cogent FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 74 of 95 pages : 75 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. evidence has either appeared, on record, on the part of the prosecution, to prove abduction of the deceased by the accused persons from PTC Jharoda Kalan.
174. The prosecution has also miserably failed to establish chain of events and circumstances, so as to cumulatively constitute the links to form a complete chain of circumstances, to establish that the accused persons can be held guilty of the offences of abduction and murder of the deceased. The weapon recovered has also not been proved to have been deployed to commit the murder in this case.
175. The prosecution, however, could establish, on record, that accused Anand @ Annu @ Rohit could have a motive to eliminate Taruna since he was having an affair and intimacy with the deceased, Taruna, in as much as, both the parents of the deceased have consistently deposed that accused Anand even visited their house and sought to marry the deceased, Taruna. That when it was revealed that FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 75 of 95 pages : 76 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. accused Anand was already married and was having two children, the parents of the deceased, who were examined as PW1 and PW2, in this case, declined and asked the accused to disassociate himself from deceased Taruna.
176. The friendship between the deceased Taruna and accused Anand has further been confirmed by PW25Woman Constable Rajbala and PW26Woman Constable Rachna. It has also come on record that the affair between accused Anand and the deceased was got arranged by Constable Kiran Dagar, another trainee inmate with the deceased in PTC, Jharoda Kalan.
177. It is further reflected in the cross examination of PW2 that when in response to the question in cross examination of defence, she deposed that it is correct that the deceased also was ready to marry accused Anand (Voltd. Only before she came to know that he was already married). The defence, therefore, endorsed the aforesaid view of the prosecution by FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 76 of 95 pages : 77 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. putting such a suggestion.
178. The prosecution, however, could not prove by any cogent evidence, that the deceased Taruna was abducted from PTC Jharoda Kalan by the accused persons. In fact, the IO as well as PW17 SI Mahesh Soni, seems to have been totally hostile perhaps deliberately or as a gross dereliction of their duty to collect, during the period the investigation remained with them, the requisite, prescribed and desired minimum evidence.
179. It was as back as on 13.06.07 that a report was lodged with Police Station Najafgarh in the form of DD entry no. 38A that a lady Constable Taruna was missing from PTC Jharoda Kalan. This DD entry was entrusted to PW17SI Mahesh Soni. He seems to have aborted the whole case in the beginning itself as, he almost did no investigation, in this matter, after having received DD entry no. 38A.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 77 of 95 pages : 78 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
180. The matter of abduction of a woman trainee that too from a Police Training Center, which was in full session on 13.06.07, was very serious. It related to absence of a woman trainee Constable from the police training school all of a sudden, where discipline and order is supposed to be the first thing to be observed. The escape of a candidate from the premises could not have been possible without the active aid and support of the other inmates and the staff on duty there. Had PW17 SI Mahesh Soni been active, alert, diligent and dutiful, the murder in this case could either be averted or the offenders could have been chased/nabbed at the earliest perhaps red handed.
181. Once, deceased Taruna was reported absent from PTC Jharoda Kalan, the police was required to flash a message in the neighbouring areas/States and everywhere to sound the entire law enforcement agencies. This inaction on the part of PW17SI Mahesh Soni, is highly condemnable and requires to be viewed seriously.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 78 of 95 pages : 79 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
182. Subsequently, after the body of the deceased was found and the case was registered and the investigation was entrusted to PW42Inspector Mahender Singh, he has only added insult to injury by investigating the case in the most casual, lethargic and deliberately in grossly negligent manner. He has not tried to collect the required evidence. Further, by putting Constable Kiran Dagar in column no. 2, in the charge sheet and without conducting her sustained interrogation in the matter, he provided safe and secured cushion to Constable Kiran Dagar, who was instrumental, allegedly, in making relationship between the deceased Taruna and accused Anand and was perhaps in the know of the entire design of accused Anand to eliminate Taruana, the deceased. She could have been the important link in the commission of the crime in this case. It requires thorough probe, even now, by the police.
183. It has come on record that it was well within the knowledge FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 79 of 95 pages : 80 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. of PW42, Inspector Mahender Singh that Kiran Dagar, another trainee lady Constable with the deceased was from the same barrack, belonged to the Village Issapur, to which accused Anand belonged to and that father of Kiran Dagar was working in Delhi Police. The IO also had the telephone number of the father of Kiran Dagar, which according to the prosecution was being used by Kiran Dagar in PTC, Jharoda Kalan. Inspector Mahender Singh (PW42) took no pains to get the call details of that phone number or seize that phone or interrogate the father of Kiran Dagar to get important vital clues to show the possible and alleged nexus of Kiran Dagar with the commission of the crimes in this case as well as to track the entire episode of the escape of the deceased, Taruna from PTC Jharoda Kalan, which is having guards at the gate all the time. The escape of Taruna from the PTC Jharoda Kalan could not have been possible during morning hours after PT classes, without the active aid and support from within the PTC Jharoda Kalan.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 80 of 95 pages : 81 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
184. SI Mahesh Soni and Inspector Mahender Singh and others, therefore, have delivered a severe blow to ruin the case of the prosecution during the investigation in the very beginning, itself, and ensured that the case in every likelihood should fail later as against the actual offenders. They derelicted grossly their duties successfully in collusion with the then supervising ACP and father of Kiran Dagar, an official of Delhi Police.
185. Further, PW42 Inspector Mahender Singh did not collect the documents and samples through required document/ memos from the police of Haryana. He did not collect the documents, pertaining to ownership of the White Esteem Car, which was recovered in this case, in pursuance to the disclosure made by accused Anand, perhaps, because he never wanted to collect the linking evidences to constitute the complete chain of circumstances which could nail down the accused persons in this case. He has, thus, tried his best to dig holes during the investigation only to ruin and subvert FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 81 of 95 pages : 82 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. the case of the prosecution.
186. It was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case law reported as Mustkeem @ Sirajudeen vs. State of Rajasthan, 2011 IV AD (CRI.) (S.C.) 41 that : "Where the case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other personburden lies on the prosecution to establish a close link between discovery of the material objects and its use in the commission of the offence."
187. In the case law reported as Esher Singh vs. State of A.P. {2004(11) SCC 585}, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that: " A few bits here and a few bits there on which the prosecution relies cannot be FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 82 of 95 pages : 83 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. held to be adequate for connecting the accused with the commission of the crime of criminal conspiracy. It has to be shown that all means adopted and illegal acts done were in furtherance of the object of conspiracy hatched. The circumstances relied for the purposes of drawing an inference should be prior in point of time than the actual commission of the offence in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy."
188. The prosecution, therefore, miserably failed in proving the chain of circumstances to bring home the guilt of th accused persons, under section 120B IPC, under section 364 IPC read with section 34 IPC and under section 302 IPC read with section 34 IPC.
189. Against accused Anand @ Annu @ Rohit, there are, however, cogent evidences on record, which show that he can be held guilty of destruction of evidence, in this case and he can also be FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 83 of 95 pages : 84 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. held guilty of the offences punishable, under section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act.
190. In pursuance to the disclosure made by accused Anand, a revolver of make 'Webley, made in England' along with live and fired cartridges, was recovered at his instance from his house which was concealed by him in his bed. This recovery was effected in the presence of a public witness PW1 and others, and, therefore, cannot be doubted. Ld. counsel for defence has contended that this recovery cannot be held admissible as against him as the alleged disclosure was made by the accused on 20.06.07 where as, the recovery of this pistol was effected on 22.06.07. I do not find his contention having any merit.
191. The revolver made in England and two live and two used cartridges were recovered in this case at the instance of accused Anand, in pursuance to his disclosure, from the room on the first floor of his residence, at his instance when his mother and wife were present and in the presence of the FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 84 of 95 pages : 85 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. complainant Manveer Singh and others. There were other recoveries also made, after his disclosure was recorded, from Haryana, including the ash of burnt clothes (which he allegedly burnt after the alleged occurrence), at his instance. Some articles belonging to the deceased besides blood stains on the seat cover from the abandoned car, were also recovered, at his instance, in pursuance to the disclosure made by him. All these evidences are clearly admissible, under section 27 of the Evidence Act, as against accused Anand. The recoveries, at his instance, were made from two States. There is nothing on record to suggest that the same could have been planted by the police.
192. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Praveen Kumar vs. State of Karnatka, 2003(4) Crimes 358 (SC) held as under : "So long as recovery is pursuant to the statement made by accused, the said statement would be admissible in view of section 27 of the Evidence Act."
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 85 of 95 pages : 86 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. There is no restriction that recovery should be made immediately after the statement is made.
193. Further, it has been held by the apex court that : "If one witness is used to prove many discoveries, he cannot be disbelieved, he cannot be disbelieved merely on that ground"(Khujji vs. State of MP AIR 1991 SC, 1853.)
194. Under the circumstances operating in this case, it cannot be said that the revolver and cartridges, recovered in this case, could have been planted upon accused Anand. The revolver was recovered, vide seizure memo, Ex.PW1/A. The said revolver is of make Webley and is made in England. The burden shifted on to the accused to show as to how from where and what for, he acquired an uncommon and not easily available foreign made weapon i.e. revolver along with FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 86 of 95 pages : 87 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. cartridges. There is no indication, on the part of this accused, to explain all this. Besides, the weapon was not recovered from an open place, accessible to all. It was recovered in the presence of a public witness, which cannot be doubted. Two of the cartridges recovered were used. This shows that the weapon was used by him alone as he rendered no explanation as to who else used it and as to how it came to be possessed by him. The accused had no license to import, hold and acquire the said weapon.
195. In view of the aforesaid cited judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the recovery of unlicensed revolver and live and used cartridges can be held as admissible and cogent evidence as against accused Anand. Since, two of the used cartridges were recovered at his instance and there is no explanation on the part of the accused either in the cross examination of the prosecution witnesses or in his statement, under section 313 Cr.P.C as to who used these cartridges and when. It can, therefore, safely be taken that the said revolver was used by FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 87 of 95 pages : 88 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. him alone.
196. The forensic expert report as discussed above, has proved that the revolver is a 'Fire Arms' within the meaning of Arms Act. The circumstances proved on record clearly establish that it was used also. Accused Anand, therefore, can be safely convicted for the offences punishable, under section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act.
197. Now, I come to the alleged offence, committed under section 201 IPC.
198. At the instance of accused Anand and in pursuance to his disclosure statement, an Esteem Car, was recovered, which was found abandoned by him.
199. From the said car, the personal diary of the deceased, one locket belonging to her, her admit card and blood stains were FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 88 of 95 pages : 89 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. found on the seat covers of the said car. Those blood stains were of the same group 'A', as per forensic experts report, Ex.PW9/A and Ex.PW9/B proved on record. The blood group 'A' matched with the blood group of the blood on the teeth/bone of the deceased, which was seized by the doctor, who conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased. The same blood group 'A' was detected by the forensic expert in the blood stains on the seat covers of the car recovered at the instance of the accused. This blood group was of the deceased.
200. Besides this, at the instance of accused Anand, a fact was discovered that after the alleged occurrence of murder of the deceased Taruna, he burnt the clothes. Ash and other articles were recovered at his instance from a village in Haryana as discussed herein above, where the same were abandoned. These discoveries of facts and recoveries can be used against accused Anand, being made at his instance and in pursuance to his disclosure statement, under section 27 of the Evidence FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 89 of 95 pages : 90 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. Act.
201. These recoveries at the instance of accused Anand clearly indicate that after the murder of deceased Taruna was committed, in order to screen himself, from the punishment, he has destroyed these vital evidences. The Maruti Esteem Car, having incriminating articles and blood stains was abandoned by him and the Webley revolver and cartridges (used and unused), were concealed by him in his bed in his room. The deceased, admittedly, died due to gunshot injuries.
202. Accused Anand can also, therefore, be squarely held guilty for the offence, punishable under section 201 IPC. There is, however, no admissible evidence, under section 201 IPC, on record, against the other accused persons.
203. In view of the above discussion, under the circumstances obtaining on record, all the accused persons are acquitted of FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 90 of 95 pages : 91 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. the offences punishable, under section 120B IPC, 364 read with section 34 IPC and 302 read with section 34 IPC where as accused Anand @ Annu @ Rohit is convicted for the offences punishable, under section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and under section 201 IPC.
204. Bail bonds of accused persons namely, Vinod @ Happy, Sher Singh and Sunil stand discharged.
205. A copy of the judgment be sent to the Commissioner of Police to hold enquiry, prosecute and take action against all the delinquent police officials/officers, who have tried to subvert the rule of law, as per law, under intimation to this court.
206. Let the convict Anand @ Annu @ Rohit be heard on the point of sentence on 24.08.2011.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT On 17.08.2011 (N. K. KAUSHIK) ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE - 02 DWARKA DISTRICT COURTS DELHI/17.08.2011 FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 91 of 95 pages : 92 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. IN THE COURT OF SH. N. K. KAUSHIK ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE - 02 DISTRICT COURTS DWARKA ; NEW DELHI S. C. No. 17/08 Date of Institution: 24.01.08 Date on which Judgment Pronounced: 17.08.2011 FIR No.566/07 P.S. Najafgarh U/s. 120B IPC, 364 read with section 34 IPC, 302 read with section 34 IPC and 201 read with section 34 IPC & under section 25 & 27 of Arms Act In the matter of: STATE Vs. Anand @ Annu @ Rohit, S/o Sh. Omkar Singh, R/o RZB263, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh, New Delhi.
..... Convict ORDER ON THE POINT OF SENTENCE
1. By this order, I shall dispose off the contentions of the parties on the point of sentence.
2. In this case, the convict Anand @ Annu @ Rohit has been held guilty of the offences, punishable under section 201 IPC FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 92 of 95 pages : 93 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. and punishable under section 25 & 27 of Arms Act.
3. It is contended on the part of the defence that the convict is aged about 31 years. That he is married, having two small children. That his father is classIV employee. That he is the sole bread earner for his family. That although cases were pending against him but he is not a previous convict, so far.
4. On behalf of the State, it has been pointed out that the convict was alleged to have committed an offence under section 302 IPC, in this case. That this case relates to a serious crime of abduction and murder of a trainee woman Constable from Police Training College, Jharoda. That the convict has since been held guilty of elimination of important evidence, relating to commission of heinous crime, and of possessing and using the foreign made 'Fire Arms', he is required to be punished severely.
5. It is, therefore, stated that the convict be awarded harshest prescribed sentence, under the law.
FIR No. 566/07
P.S. Najafgarh Page 93 of 95 pages : 94 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc.
6. I have gone through the rival contentions and have gone through the relevant material, available on record.
7. Under the circumstances, operating in this case, where the convict has been held guilty of disappearance of the evidence of the offence, attracting capital punishment, as one of the punishment, I am of the considered opinion that sentence of seven years of RI with fine of Rs.5,000/, in default, two months SI will meet the ends of justice. I, accordingly, award him the said punishment for the offence, punishable under section 201 IPC.
8. For the offence, punishable under section 25 of the Arms Act, the convict is sentenced to RI for three years and fine of Rs.1,000/, in default, 15 days SI.
9. For the offence, punishable under section 27 of the Arms Act, the convict is awarded sentence of RI for five years. He shall also suffer sentence of fine of Rs.2,000/, in addition. In FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 94 of 95 pages : 95 : State vs. Vinod @ Happy etc. default, he shall undergo SI for a period of one month.
10.The convict is sentenced, accordingly.
11.All the sentences shall run concurrently.
12.Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C shall be accorded to the convict.
13.A copy of the order of judgment and order on sentence be given to the convict free of cost.
14.File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT On 29.08.2011 (N. K. KAUSHIK) ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE - 02 DWARKA DISTRICT COURTS DELHI/29.08.2011 FIR No. 566/07 P.S. Najafgarh Page 95 of 95 pages