Punjab-Haryana High Court
Devender @ Chuja & Anr vs State Of Haryana on 25 May, 2015
CRM No.35993 of 2014 in
CRA No.D-525-DB of 2013 -1-
Devender @ Chuja & Anr. v. State of Haryana
Present: Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate with
Mr.Pratham Sethi, Advocate
for the applicant-appellant No.1.
Mr. Naveen Kaushik, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
***
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This is the third application filed by applicant- appellant No.1 Devender @ Chuja seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment, during pendency of the appeal.
The earlier applications for suspension of sentence were dismissed on 27.09.2013 and 09.05.2014 by this Court.
In the FIR that has been registered on the
statement of complainant Jogender Singh PW-1, the
applicant-appellant is not named in the FIR and it is stated by the complainant that he and his brother Virender @ Sonu was working as a property dealer. The complainant received a call on his mobile and some police official had disclosed to the complainant Jogender Singh that Virender @ Sonu (deceased in the case) the brother of the complainant, had been shot at and killed by some unknown persons at Bharat Hospital, Sonipat. The complainant along with his mother Smt. Saraswati Devi (PW-5) reached Bharat Hospital, Sonipat, where they found that Virender @ Sonu (deceased) had suffered gunshot injuries on his head, chest and left arm. He SHARMA YOGESH 2015.05.26 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM No.35993 of 2014 in CRA No.D-525-DB of 2013 -2- had died. The video recording was shown to him. After seeing the same, he found that the person who had fired at Virender @ Sonu (deceased), was Devender 'Nai' (applicant-appellant No.1) resident of Jatheri. At the time, when the brother of the complainant was killed, Raj Kumar son of Bhalle Ram resident of Hasanpur was also present along with his brother. It is alleged by the complainant that his brother Virender @ Sonu and applicant-appellant No.1 Devender had a dispute regarding money transaction, therefore, Devender (applicant- appellant No.1) had killed his brother by causing fire arm injuries.
In terms of the affidavit dated 10.12.2014 of Sh. Rattan Singh, Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala, the applicant-appellant has undergone actual sentence of imprisonment of five years, seven months and eighteen days as on 10.12.2014. With remissions he has undergone sentence of imprisonment of six years and eleven days. He was involved in another case for the offences under Sections 323, 324 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, Karnal in which he was acquitted on 18.03.2014.
According to the learned counsel for the applicant- appellant, the FSL report does not give any definite opinion regarding the fired bullets picked up from the place of occurrence and retrieved from the dead body of Virender being related to the pistol fired by Davinder. In fact, the pistol SHARMA YOGESH 2015.05.26 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM No.35993 of 2014 in CRA No.D-525-DB of 2013 -3- even is not recovered from Devender (applicant-appellant No.1). Besides, the hard disk in which the CCTV video footage were recorded, had been misplaced.
Ashutosh Goyal, Manager Zicom Electronics Security System Limited (PW-26) stated that CCTV cameras were installed in the hospital. It is stated that some police officials had met him and informed him that they had brought DVR and hard disk of CCTV from Sonipat and got prepared CD therefrom. The police official stated that the CDs had been misplaced and requested him whether from the hard disk that they had with them, a duplicate CD could be prepared or not. It was asserted that once the hard disk was separated from the DVR, it was impossible to prepare CD again of the contents recorded in the DVR/hard disk. The FSL report is that the hard disk could not be accessed to obtain CCTV footage details.
Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the FSL report is to the effect that on examination of CCTV video footage present in all the CDs, no sign of tampering/editing could be detected.
The case is based on circumstantial evidence including the value of the CCTV footage, which would require consideration at the time of the final hearing of the appeal.
The applicant-appellant has undergone more than 6 years imprisonment as on date. Keeping in view the period of imprisonment undergone by the applicant/appellant and also SHARMA YOGESH 2015.05.26 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM No.35993 of 2014 in CRA No.D-525-DB of 2013 -4- the fact that the appeal is not likely to mature for hearing in the near future, it would be just and expedient to suspend the sentence of imprisonment of applicant-appellant No.1 Devender @ Chuja, during pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of applicant- appellant No.1 Devender @ Chuja shall, during pendency of the appeal, remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonipat.
( S.S. SARON )
JUDGE
25.05.2015 ( RAMENDRA JAIN )
'yogesh' JUDGE
SHARMA YOGESH
2015.05.26 12:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document