Delhi District Court
State vs Sushil Kumar Etc on 27 January, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. POOJA TALWAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)WEST
TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI
In the matter of:
STATE
Vs.
Sushil Kumar & ORS. FIR No.243/12
Police Station: Hari Nagar
JUDGMENT
1. Sl. no. of case Sessions Case No. 56731/16
2. CNR no. DLWT010003212012
3. Date of Institution 12.10.2012
4. Date of Commission of 04.07.2012 offence
5. Name of the accused 1. Sushil Kumar S/o Bhudev Singh R/o Village Nangla Mouji, PS Sahpau, District-Hathras, U.P.
2. Vipin Kumar S/o Vijay Singh R/o Village Nangla Mouji, PS Sahpau, District-Hathras, U.P.
3. Ram Kishan S/o Suraj Prashad Prajapati R/o Village Nangla Chander Bhan, POOJA PS Highway, District- Mathura, TALWAR U.P. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 1 of 72 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:44:33 +0530
4.Kushal Pal Singh @ Kushal S/o Late Mohar Singh R/o Village Mittholi, PS Nohjheel Bajna, District- Mathura, U.P.
5. Languria S/o Jawahar Singh R/o Village Nangla Mouji, PS Sahpau, District-Hathras, U.P.
6. Offence Complained of Section 120B IPC Section 396/34 IPC Section 302/34 IPC Section 201/34 IPC
7. Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
8. Date of reserving the 20.01.2026 judgment
9. Final order Acquitted 10 Date of pronouncement 27.01.2026 of judgment Case of the prosecution
1. Story of the prosecution is that complainant Vinod Kumar gave a complaint wherein he stated that he alongwith his brother Ashok, Uncle (chacha) Ramesh and cousin Lakhan and one another relative Jagvir were residing at Village Hari Nagar on rent. They were engaged in the business of supplying milk. On 04.07.2012 at 4.30 am they all went to their work and at about 7 am they returned and after breakfast they again left at 9 am to the market for collection. His brother Ashok called him at about 12:24 pm and told him that after collecting money from the market, he reached home where Vipin who was from their native village was also present. Vipin demanded money from him to which he refused. Thereafter at about 12:50 PM when his cousin POOJA TALWAR Lakhan @ Kalu reached home, he saw Ashok lying dead near the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 2 of 72 15:44:41 +0530 FIR no.243/12 fridge. The wire of fridge was wrapped around his neck and blood was also lying on the floor. When they called Vipin both his numbers were switched off. After some time their uncle Bhim Singh also reached their and called at 100 number. When they checked they found collection amount of Rs.1.5 lakh and mobile phone of Ashok were missing. They suspected Vipin as the culprit. His uncle had seen Vipin in the gali and when he called him, he ignored him.
2. On the basis of complaint, FIR under Section 302/394/397 IPC was registered.
3. During investigation it was found that there were CCTV cameras installed at Manak Vihar. The CCTV footage was viewed by the complainant and other family memebrs by visiting control room office located in the RWA, Manak Vihar. After watching the footage Vipin alongwith 4 other people was seen. Police reached at the native village of Vipin for investigation and some people from the village came to Delhi and on seeing the CCTV footage they identified other two persons as Suhsil and Languria. CCTV footage was also collected from Nagi Jewellers situated near the Tihar Village, where deceased Ashok alongwith Vipin were seen and after some time Vipin alongwith his four other associates seen going towards Manak Vihar.
4. During investigation on 17.07.2012 Sushil was arrested from his native place. On interrogation he disclosed that POOJA TALWAR he alongwith Vipin, Languria, Ram Kishan and Kushal committed murder of Ashok and they fled from there and Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:44:47 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 3 of 72 FIR no.243/12 distributed the robbed amount.
5. On 24.08.2012 accused Vipin Kumar was arrested. During interrogation at his instance his blood smeared clothes and shoes which he was wearing at the time of incident were recovered.
6. On 30.08.2012 accused Ram Kishan and on 06.09.2012 accused Kushal Pal Singh were apprehended from their native village.
Charge
7. Charge was framed against all the accused persons namely Sushil Kumar, Vipin Kumar, Khushal Pal Singh, Ram Kishan and Languria under Section 120B IPC Section 396/34 IPC Section 302/34 IPC Section 201/34 IPC vide order dated 13.09.2013.
Prosecution evidence
8. In order to prove its case prosecution examined witnesses as under :-
Material Witnesses:
(i) PW2: Mr. Bheem deposed that:
"I am dealing in milk supply at Tandoori Chowk, Manak Vihar. (On 04.07.2012, in the noon, I was coming back after milk supply and when I reached at Tandoori Chowk, I saw my nephew Ashok in company of Vipin and four other persons and POOJA TALWAR one Sushil was also sitting in the park. I do not know names of Digitally signed those four persons. In the afternoon at about between 12.00 noon by POOJA TALWAR Date:
2026.01.27 15:44:52 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 4 of 72 FIR no.243/12 to 01.00 pm, I received a call from my nephew Vinod Kumar that Ashok had been murdered. I alongwith Vinod and my wife went to house of my nephew at Manak Vihar i.e WZ-764-C, where I found Ashok dead. 1. A call was made at 100 number by Ct. Rajeev, who was on spot from my mobile phone. Police arrived at the spot. Ashok was taken to mortuary DDU hospital. I have nothing else to say. At this stage, Ld. Addl. PP seeks permission to cross examine the witness with contention that the witness is not disclosing the all facts."
(ii) PW4: Chander Pal deposed that:
"I do not remember the exact date but it was month of July and month of Sawan as per local calender, about two years ago , I had come to Delhi with Papu who is brother of Bhim Singh after about 8-10 days of murder of nephew of Bhim namely Ashok. I stayed at the house of Bhim in Delhi. I was taken to police station by Bhim. SHO obtained my signature on some documents. I did nothing else. Again said SHO had also enquired me about three boys and I told the SHO that said three boys were of my village. The said boys namely Vipin, Sushil and Languria are present today in court(correctly identified) and they are resident of my village."
(iii) PW5 Ramesh Chand deposed that:
"I am agriculturist by profession. I do not remember the exact date, but It was month of Sawan about two years ago, I had come to Delhi along with Papu ( Geetam Singh) and seven eitght other persons including Chander Pal, Jagveer, Pinki, Ravinder etc. we had come to Delhi on the asking of Papu as his nephew POOJA TALWAR had been killed in Delhi. In Delhi I stayed at the house of Bhim Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 5 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:44:58 +0530 Singh and thereafter we went to police station Hari Parbat. SHO inquired me about three persons namely Vipin, Sushil and Languria and I told him that those three persons were of my village. The said persons namely Vipin, Sushil and Laguria are present today in court(correctly identified). I did not go to any place in Delhi except the house of Bhim Singh and the police station. I do not know anything else about this case."
(iv) PW6: Sh. Jagbir Singh deposed that:
"I am Ex Pradhan of my village. I do not remember the exact date, but It was month of Sawan about two years ago, I had come to Delhi along with Papu (Geetam Singh) and seven eight other persons including Chander Pal, Ramesh Chand, Pinki, Ravinder etc. we had come to Delhi on the asking of Papu as his nephew had been killed in Delhi. In Delhi I stayed at the house of Bhim Singh and thereafter we went to police station. SHO inquired me about three persons namely Vipin, Sushil and Languria and I told him that those three persons were of my village. The said persons namely Vipin, Sushil and Laguria are present today in court(correctly identified). I did not go to any place in Delhi except the house of Bhim Singh and the police station. I do not know anything else about this case."
(v) PW7: Sh. O.P. Gulati deposed that:
"I am doing my business. I am president of resident welfare association Manak Vihar Colony in area of Hari Nagar from the last about 16 years Resident welfare association has installed CCTV cameras in said colony and also employed two POOJA security guards for the security of the residents of the colony. TALWAR The CCTV cameras have been installed 5 months prior to the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 6 of 72 Date:
2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:45:03 +0530 incident, from the main gate i.e. Tandur chowk and up to the colony. House no.C-764, first floor, Manak Vihar, Delhi, also falls in the range of the said CCTV cameras. Ashok (since deceased) was residing in Ho. No.C-764, first floor, Manak Vihar on rent. On 04.07.2012, at about 1.30pm, I heard about the murder of Ashok from the persons of the locality. At about 1.45pm Vinod brother of deceased and Bhim other family member of the deceased Ashok came to me in my office. Ashok (since deceased), Vinod and Bhim were known to me prior to the incident as they were doing the business of supply the milk in our area. (Vinod and Bhim told me about the murder of Ashok and also told they want to see the CCTV cameras footage o the area to know about the clue of the murder of Ashok) The said CCTV cameras are monitored from my office. At that time some members of the RWA were also sitting in my office. Insp Harpal Singh alongwith his staff also reached in my office. (In the presence of Insp. Harpal Singh, Bhim, Vinod and other members)mentioned above we had seen the CCTV cameras footage on screen installed in my office. Some persons were found coming and going in the footage. Out of those persons one person coming with Ashok at 12.38pm, was identified as Vipin by Vinod was who was seen and Bhim and they also told that he was resident of their native village. It was also seen in the CCTV footage that after 12.50 pm, Vipin was coming with four other persons towards the colony from the main gate of the colony. But those four persons were not identified at that time by Vinod and Bhim and they told that they will call their co-villagers to Delhi so that those four persons can be identified from the said footage.
POOJA On the direction of Insp. Harpal Singh the said footage was TALWAR saved by me in the Pen drive from the DVR.IO recorded my Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 7 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:45:09 +0530 statement on the same day.
After some days some public persons alongwith Vinod, Bhim and Insp. Harpal Singh came to my office. On their request I again shown the above mentioned CCTV footage to those persons from the system of CCTV cameras. After seeing the said footage from the screen those public persons had identified two of the Dove mentioned four persons as Sushil and Languria, IO also recorded my statement on that day.
On 08.10.2012, I handed over the DVD of the CCTV footage pertaining to the date and time mentioned on it after getting the same prepared from Sh. S.K. Dass in the presence of IO and also handed over one certificate u/s 65 B Indian Evidence Act in this regard to the IO. IO also took the photographs of the relevant persons from the CCTV footage. (The said DVD, photographs and certificate mentioned above was taken into possession by the IO in my presence. The said certificate is Ex.PW7/A and Sh. S.K. Dass signed the same at point X. The seizure memo of DVD and photographs is Ex.PW7/B bears my signature point A.) I also seen said three photographs of the CCTV footage which were seized by the IO as mentioned above in my presence and the same are mark A, B and C. IO recorded my supplementary statement in this regard on that day. I can identify the three accused persons which were identified by Bhim, Vinod and their co-villagers from CCTV footage in my presence after seeing the footage.
At this stage, DVD lying in the record and bearing endorsement 'RWA Manak Vihar' purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the laptop arranged by POOJA IO with the assistance of Mr. Lovely S/o Sh. Lokesh R/O WZ TALWAR 285, Manak Vihar, Delhi. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 8 of 72 Date:
FIR no.243/12 2026.01.27
15:45:13 +0530
After seeing the footage the witness stated that it is the same CCTV footage which was provided by him to the IO. The witness stated that two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH 05, 2012-07-04 at 12.19.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok. He further stated that accused Vipin who is walking ahead of Ashok was identified by Bhim and Vinod in my presence. He also stated that those two persons are shown in photographs mark A. (objected to).
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH 05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.48. is Vipin who is having a cloth on his face and he was identified by Bhim and Vinod in my presence as also shown in photographs mark B. (objected to) After seeing the further footage (the witness stated that two of the three persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH 05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.53. are Sushil and Laguria as identified by Bhim and Vinod in my presence as also shown in photographs mark C.) Sushil is ahead of all the three persons and Languria is in middle. (objected to)."
(vi) PW8: Mr. S.K. Dass deposed that:
"I am running a office at my above mentioned residence in the name and style of Cosmo Enterprises and use to install CCTV cameras, door phone, EPABX(intercom- system)in Delhi and NCR as per order/requirement from the customers/welfare associations I had also installed CCTV cameras at the shop of Nagi Jewellers situated in Manak Vihar Colony, Village-Tihar, POOJA Delhi. also used to work as service provider to CCTV cameras TALWAR Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 9 of 72 by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:18 +0530 installed by ELDORDO Company in Manak Vihar Colony, Village-Tihar, Delhi. In the month of July/August/September 2012, however, I do not remember the exact date and month, on the request of the IO/Insp. Harpal Singh, I had visited the shop of M/s Nagi Jewellers shop no.195, Gujar Market Tihar Village alongwith above mentioned IO and four five other persons. Where Where I had checked the back-up of CCTV cameras footage. All the cameras installed inside and outside of the said shop were found in working order. I took the back-up in pen drive provided to me but I can not say if the same was provided IO or any other person present there. I converted the CCTV back-up in a CD/DVD at the shop of Nagi Jewellers, same was successfully run there in the presence of IO and public persons. The family members of deceased had identified some boys from the CCTV footage. I handed over the CD/DVD to Mr. Nagi i.e. owner of the shop Nagi Jewellers and Mr. Gulati President of RWA, Manak Vihar in the presence of the IO. I did not prepare CD of any other CCTV camera.
At this stage, Id. Addl. PP has taken out a CD from the judicial record make Maxell CD-R 80 MQ on which words 'CCTV' and 'Nagi Jewellers' are written in ink, the CD is shown to the witness who identified the same as the same CD which was prepared at the shop Nagi Jewellers.
At this stage, the said CD is run on the laptop produced by the IO by the witness himself. The witness after seeing the contents of the CD said that the CD contains the same contents/footage which was taken from the CCTV back up at Nagi Jewellers. The CD is Ex P-X (objected to). POOJA TALWAR I issued certificate u/s 65 B Evidence Act regarding the preparation of CD of CCTV footage at Nagi Jewellers and the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 10 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:24 +0530 FIR no.243/12 same is already Ex.PW7/A bears my signatures at point X.
(vii) PW10: Mr. Ramesh Chand deposed that:
"I am permanent resident of Village Nangla Mauji, PS- Sahpau, District-Hathras, U.P. I am residing in Delhi at the above mentioned address on rent alongwith my nephew namely Vinod and Ashok (since deceased) from the last five-six years prior to the incident. I am doing the business of supply of Amul Milk in the surrounding areas in Delhi alongwith my nephew Vinod and Ashok(since deceased). On 04.07.2012, at about noon time, I received information from my nephew Vinod that my elder nephew Ashok had been murdered inside the said rented house. Thereafter, I immediately reached at the spot and found the dead body of my nephew Ashok lying near Fridge his legs were on the bed. One 'gumcha' (cloth piece) and old wire of fridge was found tied in the neck of deceased. I also found some buttons of his wearing shirt were broken and lying there. Blood was also lying underneath the body. On the same day, at about 15 minutes prior to receiving of information from Vinod regarding the murder of Ashok, I had seen accused Vipin going towards the spot. At that time, I was collecting the money from the customer regarding the supply of Milk. Accused Vipin is known to me as he is resident of my Village and used to visit our mentioned rented house in Delhi. When accused Vipin was going towards the spot when I saw him, as mentioned above, I called him but he left swiftly without paying any attention to me. I told this fact to Vinod after reaching at the spot. When I had seen Vipin, four-five other persons were also going in the same manner with him. At that time, I was not knowing them except POOJA Vipin. Accused Vipin is present in the court today (Correctly TALWAR Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 11 of 72 by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:29 +0530 identified) but I can not identify those other persons if any one of them is present in the court today as I did not see them properly at that time.
Thereafter on the same day, police had shown me the CCTV footage of the CCTV camera installed in the area and I had seen accused Vipin while going alone with Ashok and thereafter find coming alongwith other person and Ashok was not with them at that time. I had not joined the investigation with the police while police was searching Vipin on that day. At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bearing endorsement' RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex P-Y, purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the Laptop arranged by the IO with the assistance of Mr. Lalit @ Lovely, S/o Sh. Lokesh R/o WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi.
The witness after seeing the footage stated that two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.09.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok, it is clarified that accused Vipin is walking ahead of deceased Ashok and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12.38.54 are also their associates but he does not know their names."
(viii) PW11: Mr Lakhan @ Kalu deposed that: POOJA TALWAR "I alongwith my cousin namely Vinod and my uncle Bhim Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 12 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:34 +0530 Sain, my Chachi namely Baby and children used to reside at the above mentioned address. We used to supply poly pack milk in the area of Ashok Nagar. On 04.07.2012, at about 1:00pm I came at my above mentioned address. I found that the main gate of the house was opened. I entered inside the house and I reached at the first floor and when I entered inside the room I saw that my cousin Ashok was lying behind the Fridge, I noticed that electric wire of the Fridge was wrapped around the neck of my cousin Ashok and blood was oozing out from his mouth and blood was found scattered on the floor of the room. I informed my brother Vinod regarding the same from my mobile phone. After sometime my brother Vinod came at the spot. Vinod informed my uncle Bhim regarding the same through mobile phone. My uncle Bhim also reached at the spot and he informed the police at 100 number. After some time police officials came at the spot and they conducted their proceedings and removed the dead body from the room and had taken the same to Mortuary DDU Hospital.
CCTV cameras was installed in our locality and the main set/monitoring system of CCTV cameras was installed in the house of Mr. Gulati, who is Pradhan of our locality. We alongwith police officials visited the residence of Mr. Gulati where police officials asked Mr. Gulati to play the previous CCTV footage and accordingly it was viewed. It was shown in the CCTV footage that one person namely Vipin alongwith my cousin Ashok (since deceased) was seen coming together and thereafter Vipin left my cousin Ashok at our residence and then he left the spot and after sometime Vipin alongwith four five POOJA other person was seen coming again inside our locality. TALWAR At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bearing Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 13 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:45:39 +0530 endorsement' RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex.P-Y, purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the Laptop arranged by the IO with the assistance of Mr. Lalit @ Lovely, S/o Sh. Lokesh R/o WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi.
The witness after seeing the footage stated that two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.09.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok, it is clarified that accused Vipin is walking ahead of deceased Ashok and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that two of the three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12.38.54 are Sushil and Laguria, accused Sushil is having cap on his head and Laguria is having one cloth tied over his head.
Accused Vipin and Sushil are present today in the court. The witness has correctly identified accused Vipin but he has pointed out towards accused Laguria as Sushil.
I joined the investigation in this case after that day, however, I do not remember the said date and I accompanied the IO to Nizamudeen Railway Station and we searched for the accused Sushil but he was not traceable there and thereafter we came back on a police post situated at some distance from Nizamudeen Railway Station and from there we went to Bus Stop situated in front of said police post. One bus came from Mathura stopped at the said bus stop and from that bus accused Laguria, sorry accused Sushil got down and thereafter accused POOJA Sushil was apprehended by the IO there in my presence. Accused TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 14 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:50 +0530 Sushil is present in the court today (Correctly identified). Accused was interrogated and he was arrested by the IO. I signed the documents regarding the arrest of the accused persons at police station. Arrest of accused Sushil Kumar is Ex.PW-11/A bears my signatures at point A, personal search of the accused was also taken vide memo Ex.PW11/B bears my signatures at point A. Whatever was told by the accused regarding the present case to the IO the same was recorded."
(ix) PW12: Mukesh Kumar deposed that:
"After about 4-6 days of the present incident, exact date I do not remember. I alongwith one Pappu uncle of deceased Ashok, Jagbir Singh, Ramesh Chand, Chander Pal Singh, Ravinder Singh and Pinki etc,. came to Delhi and thereafter we went to the office of one Pradhan Ji whose name I do not remember now, however, he was the Pradhan of the locality where deceased Ashok was residing. I had seen the CCTV footage in the office of the said Pradhan Ji and I had identified three persons of my village moving in the said CCTV footage. I had identified the said three persons as Vipin, Sushil & Laguria who are resident of my village. The said three persons are present today in court (correctly identified accused Vipin, Sushil & Laguria).
At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bearing endorsement' RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex.P-Y, purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the Laptop arranged by the IO with the assistance of Mr. Lalit @ Lovely, S/O Sh. Lokesh R/o WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi.
The witness after seeing the footage stated that two POOJA TALWAR persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 15 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:54 +0530 the footage of CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.09.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok, it is clarified that accused Vipin is walking ahead of deceased Ashok and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that one of the three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12.38.54 is Laguria, Laguria is having one cloth tied over his head."
(x) PW13: Mr. Pinki Kumar @ Pinki deposed that:
"After about 5-6 days of the present incident, exact date I do not remember, I alongwith one Pappu uncle of deceased Ashok, Jagbir Singh, Ramesh Chand, Chander Pal Singh, Ravinder Singh etc,. came to Delhi and thereafter we went to the office of one Pradhan ji whose name I do not remember now, however, he was the Pradhan of the locality of Manak Vihar Delhi where deceased Ashok was residing. I had seen the CCTV footage in the office of the said Pradhan Ji and I had identified two persons of my village moving in the said CCTV footage i.e. accused Vipin and accused Laguria who are resident of my village. The said two persons are present today in court (correctly identified accused Vipin & Laguria).
At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bearing endorsement RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex.P-Y, purporte contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the Laptop arranged by the IO with the assistance of Mr. Lalit @ POOJA Lovely, S/O Sh. Lokesh R/O WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi. TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 16 of 72 Digitally signed by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:45:59 +0530 The witness after seeing the footage stated that two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.19.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok, it is clarified that accused Vipin is walking ahead of deceased Ashok and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two, persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that one of the three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12.38.54 is Laguria, Laguria is having one cloth tied over his head.
(xi) PW14: Mr. Gitam Singh @ Pappu deposed that:
"After the murder of my nephew Ashok (since deceased) I alongwith Jagbir Singh, Ramesh Chand, Chander Pal Singh, Ravinder Singh and Pinki etc,, came to Delhi after about 5-6 days of the incident and thereafter we went to the office of one Pradhan Ji whose name I do not remember now, however, he was the Pradhan of the locality where deceased Ashok was residing. I had seen the CCTV footage in the office of the said Pradhan Ji and I had identified three persons of my village moving in the said CCTV footage. I had identified the said three persons as Vipin, Sushil & Laguria who are resident of my village. The said three persons are present today in court (correctly identified accused Vipin, Sushil & Laguria). At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bea endorsement' RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex POOJA P-Y, purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony TALWAR is run on the Laptop arranged by the IO with the assistance of Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 17 of 72 15:46:07 +0530 FIR no.243/12 Mr. Lalit @ Lovely, S/o Sh. Lokesh R/O WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi.
The witness after seeing the footage stated that two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.19.03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok, it is clarified that accused Vipin is walking ahead of deceased Ashok and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12.38.47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that two of the three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12.38.54 are Sushil & Laguria, Sushil is having cap on his head while Laguria is having one cloth tied over his head.
(xii) PW16: Sh. Ravinder Singh deposed that:
"I do not remember the date, month and year but it was month of 'Savan' three years ago, I had come to Delhi after about 8-10 days of the incident regarding murder of deceased. I was shown some footage on TV in one house situated in the neighborhood of the house of Pappu. I had identified Sushil, Laguria & Vipin in the said footage they are resident of my village. All of them are present today in court (correctly identified).
At this stage, DVD lying on the record and bearing endorsement RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex.P-Y, purported to contain CCTV footage of Manak Vihar Colony is run on the laptop arranged by the IO. POOJA TALWAR The witness after seeing the footage stated that one of the Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 18 of 72 by POOJA TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:46:13 +0530 two persons entering in the locality from the main gate as shown in the footage of CH05,2012-07-04 at 12:19:03 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. It is clarified by the witness that the person moving ahead is Vipin and he is having a cloth around his neck. After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH05, 2012-07-04 at 12:38:47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. It is further stated by the witness that two of the three persons following the above mentioned two persons, are Sushil (having cap) and Laguriya (having wrapped a cloth over his head) as shown in the footage at 12:38:54."
(xiii) PW19: Vinod deposed that:
"I have been doing business of milk supply in the area of Ashok Nagar, Fatey Nagar and village-Tihar alongwith my deceased brother Ashok, uncle Bhim Sain, my another uncle Ramesh and my cousin brother Lakhan. On 04.07.2013, we all had gone for the supply of the Milk at around 4:00am and returned to our house at around 7:00am. After taking the break- fast at around 9:00am we again left our house for the collection of money in the above area.
On 04.07.2013, at around 1:00pm, I received a telephonic call made by me cousin brother Lakhan who informed me that someone had killed my brother Ashok at our house. I asked him that Vipin was with Ashok, then who has killed him. On this Lakhan told me that Vipin was not present at our house. At around 12:00 noon- 12:15pm my brother Ashok had called me and that Vipin had come and was demanding money. I asked POOJA Ashok to tell Vipin that he was not having money. Vipin had TALWAR also demanded money from me on some earlier occasions, I had Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 19 of 72 by POOJA TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:46:17 +0530 given him money and there was a quarrel/dispute over the same. After that incident Ashok had instructed me to not to give money again to Vipin.
After receiving the telephonic call of Lakhan, I reached at our house at around 1:00-1:15pm. At that time my cousin brother Lakhan and Cheema were present and body of Ashok was lying in the room situated back portion of the said house. After seeing the body of Ashok I made call to my uncle Bhim Singh and another uncle Ramesh. My both uncles came there and my uncle Bhim Singh made call at no. 100. Police officials reached there. My uncle Rames i told us that he had seen Vipin in the back gali of our house while he was taking payment from one shop. He further told that he called the Vipin after seeing him but he ignored him and went away. After that my statement Ex.PW19/A bearing my signatures at point A was recorded by the police (running into 4 pages) and got lodged the FIR against the accused Vipin now present in the court (correctly identified).
I alongwith police officials and my other family members i.e. Jakhan, Cheema, Bhim Singh and Ramesh visited the office of the Mr. Gulati President of our resident association, where we had seer the CCTV footage. On seeing the CCTV footage it was found that accused Vipin was seen coming towards our house with my brother Ashok. It was further seen in the CCTV footage that accused Vipin was leaving our house alone. Further it was there in the CCTV footage that after sometime accused Vipin was seen coming towards our house along with four other boys. I could identify the accused Vipin, Languria & Sushil in the said footage but I could not identify the other two persons at that POOJA time. Accused Languria and Sushil are also present in the court TALWAR today (correctly identified). The remaining two accused persons Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 20 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date:
2026.01.27 15:46:23 +0530 whom I could not identify by names at the time of seeing the CCTV footage are also present today in court (the witness has pointed out towards accused Ram Kishan and Kushal Pal). (At this stage, one DVD lying on the record bearing endorsement 'RWA Manak Vihar' already Ex.PY, purported to be contained CCTV footage of Manak Vihar colony is run on the laptop arranged by the IO with assistance of Mr. Lalit @ Lovely S/o Sh. Lokesh r/o WZ-285, Manak Vihar, Delhi).
The witness after seeing the footage that two persons entering in the locality from main gate as shown in the footage of CH-05, 2012-07-04 at 12:19:03 are accused Vipin and deceased Ashok. It is clarified that accused Vipin is walking just ahead of Ashok (since deceased) and having a cloth on his head and around his neck.
After seeing the further footage the witness stated that one of the two persons entering in the locality as shown in the footage CH-05, 2012-07-04 at 12:38:47 is Vipin but he does not know the other person. Further that two of three persons following above mentioned two persons as shown in the footage at 12:38:54 are Languria and Sushil, it is clarified that the person having cap his head is Sushil and the person having a cloth on his head is Languira but he does not know the third person.On the day of the incident dead body of deceased Ashok was shifted to DDU hospital. Police officials took out the piece of the floor of our house and seized. Police also seized wire of the fridge after cutting it, one 'gamcha' and collection copy which was maintained by deceased Ashok.
Next day of the incident i.e. 05.07.2013, dead body of the POOJA deceased Ashok was given to us by the police. Doctor had given TALWAR the clothes of my deceased brother Ashok to the police. We took Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 21 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:46:30 +0530 the dead body of Ashok to our village. After cremation of the dead body, we stayed for one day in our village, thereafter, we returned to Delhi.
After 15-20 days, accused Sushil was arrested by the police from the Ashram in Delli, at that time thy cousin brother Lakhan was present there. I do not remember the exact date of the arrest of accused Sushil. I do not remember the date, I was told by the police that accused Ram Kishan and Kushal were arrested. Thereafter, accused Vipin was arrested. I identified the accused Ram Kishan and Kushal in the police station. My signatures obtained. I do not remember the date, accused Vipin vere was taken to my village where at the pointing out by accused Vipin we went to Mandir situated outside the village from where one T-shirt, pant and shoes of accused Vipin were recovered from behind the wall of Ashram/Mandir. Police seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/B bearing my signatures at point A. Thereafter, we returned to Delhi.
I do not remember the date, police officials came to my house for making the site plan and they prepared the site plan at my instance. Thereafter, what happened I do not remember."
Formal Witnesses:
(i) PW27: Ms. Seema Nain, Assistant Director, Biology, FSL Rohini deposed that on 03.08.2012 8 sealed parcels with sample seal were received in their laboratory for examination in connection with case FIR no.243/12 PS Hari Nagar and the same were marked to her for examination. She tallied the seal present in the parcel with the sample seal and found them intact and POOJA correct. She examined the said parcel and thereafter prepared her TALWAR detailed report dated 25.06.2013 Ex.PW27/A bearing her Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 22 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date:
2026.01.27 15:46:36 +0530 signatures at point A. Thereafter the said parcels were sent to physics division and DNA for further examination.
On 19.12.2012 six sealed parcels were also received in their laboratory which were marked to her for examination. She examined the said parcels and prepared her detailed report dated 28.06.2013 Ex.PW27/B bearing her signatures at point A. Thereafter the said parcels were sent to DNA for further examination. At that time she was also expert in DNA examination and the said parcels i.e. parcels of report Ex.PW27/A and Ex.PW27/B were again marked to her for DNA examination. She examined the said parcels and prepared detailed DNA report dated 02.03.2015 Ex.PW27/C bearing her signatures at point A. After the DNA examination she sent the parcels to concerned police station with the reports.
(ii) PW25: Dr. B.N. Sharma deposed that on 05.07.2012 he conducted the postmortem examination on body of deceased Ashok S/o Sh. Bijdender Singh, male, 25 years. During the postmortem examination, he observed multiple injuries in the form of abrasions/bruises alongwith ligature mark present on the neck. After completion of autopsy, he opined that the cause of death was due to 'asphyxia caused by manual throttling and strangulation'. On the basis of distribution and nature of injury it was inferable that the throttling was done firstly before strangulation with in short time interval and combined attribution on the part of his death can not be ruled out. Both injury no.2 & 3 were sufficient individually to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All injuries are ante mortem in nature and of same POOJA duration. The manner of death was homicide. Time since death of TALWAR deceased was approx one day prior to postmortem examination. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 23 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:46:41 +0530 His detailed report is Ex.PW25/A (running into five pages) bearing his signature at point A on each page.
Witnesses of Investigation:
(i) PW1: ASI Baljeet Singh, deposed that on 04.07.2012 at about 4.25 PM, he received rukka from Const. Rajender sent by Inspector Harpal and on the basis of which he got recorded FIR through computer operator. Copy of the same is Ex.PW1/A bearing his signatures at point A. He made endorsement on the rukka Ex.PW1/B, which also bearing his signatures at point A. After registration of FIR, he handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to Const. Rajender for handing over the same to Inspector Harpal for investigation. He issued a certificate u/s 65-
B Evidence Act Ex.PW1/C, bearing his signatures at point A. On the same day, he also recorded DD No.22A at about 1.25 PM on the message received from wireless operator regarding murder of a person at house No.C-764, 1st Floor, Manak Vihar, Near Tihar Gaon, Tandoor Chowk. He handed over the same to Const. Rajender to hand over the same to SI Ajay Kumar for making inquiry. Copy of DD Ex.PW1/D, bearing his signatures at point A.
(ii) PW3: Inspr. Mahesh Kumar deposed that on 15.09.2012 at the request of Inspr. Harpal Singh, he reached at P.S. Hari Nagar and from there he alongwith Inspr. Harpal Singh visited the place of incident i.e first Floor H.No. C-764, Manak Vihar, Tihar, Delhi. Where at the instance of IO, he took rough notes and measurements of the spot. On the basis of those documents, he POOJA prepared scaled site plan Ex.PW3/A bearing his signatures at TALWAR point A. Rough notes were destroyed after preparation of scaled Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 24 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:46:46 +0530 site plan.
(iii) PW9: HC Sunil Kumar deposed that on 04.07.2012, he was on emergency duty alongwith SI Ajay Kumar Gupta from 8:00am to 8:00pm and they were present in the area of police station. At about 1:30Pm Ct. Rajender met them at Tandoor Chowk, Tihar Village and he handed over the copy of the DD no.22A regarding murder. Thereafter, he alongwith Ajay Kumar Gupta and Ct. Rajender reached at the spot i.e. first floor in Manak Vihar Colony Delhi. They found crowd of people present there. After entering inside the room of the said flat they found a dead body of a male person aged about 25 years lying near Fridge. One Vinod was also present there and he told them that he is brother of deceased namely Ashok and he also told that one Vipin who is resident of his village committed the murder of his brother Ashok, whose dead body was lying there as mentioned above. He also told him that accused Vipin took away the cash amount which was collection regarding supply of Milk by Ashok. IO recorded the statement of Vinod and prepared rukka on the same and the same was sent to Police station Hari Nagar through Ct. Rajender for the registration of the case. Thereafter. Insp. Harpal Singh, the then Insp. of investigation, the then SHO and other senior officers of the police also reached at the spot. Mobile Crime Team also reached at the spot who inspected the place of occurrence, the crime team photographer took photographs of the dead body and the spot from different angles. IO lifted Exhibits from the spot. Dead body of deceased was removed to mortuary DDU hospital by him as per the directions of the IO and the same POOJA was preserved there. IO also handed over one sealed parcel TALWAR containing the electric cord and he handed over the said seal Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 25 of 72 by POOJA TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:46:52 +0530 parcel to the staff posted at mortuary, alongwith the dead body of the deceased.
On 05.07.2012, postmortem of the body of deceased was conducted and thereafter the dead body of deceased was handed over to the family members of the deceased by the IO. After giving opinion on sealed parcel containing electric cord was handed over to the IO by the doctor and the same was taken into possession by the IO by preparing seizure memo. So, long the case property and dead body remained in his possession, the same was not tempered with.
(iv) PW15: HC Arun Kumar deposed that on 17.07.2012 he joined the investigation alongwith SI Ajay Gupta and Ct. Narender upon receiving the secret information that one of the accused Sushil Kumar would come from Mathura to Delhi. They went to C-764 Manak Vihar where SI Ajay Gupta made request to one Lakhan to join the proceeding. After that they went to Ashram Chowm where they started keeping watch on the persons/passengers who were getting down from the bushes. At around 9.30 pm 4-5 persons alighted from one bus. Witness Lakhan pointed out the one person as Sushil. They apprehended him. SI Ajay Gupta made inquiry from the accused Sushil and after that he was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW11/A bearing his signatures at point A and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW11/B bearing his signatures at point B. His disclosure statement was recorded by SI Ajay Gupta vide Ex.PW15/A bearing his signatures at point A. Accused Sushil signed the same at point X. They brought the accused Sushil to POOJA PS. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 26 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:46:58 +0530
(v) PW17: Ct. Rajesh Kumar deposed that on 04.07.2012 under the direction of IO/Inspector Harpal Singh he handed over the copy of FIR to Ld. MM, Joint CP/SWR and Addl. CP West District.
(vi) PW18: Ct. Narender Kumar joined investigation with SI Ajay Gupta and witness to arrest of accused Sushil Kumar, Ram Kishan and Kushal Pal.
(vii) PW20: Ct. Rajeev joined the investigation with SI Ajay Gupta.
(viii) PW21: SI Ajay Kumar Gupta deposed that:
" On 04.07.2012 I was posted at PS Hari Nagar. On that day I was on emergency duty from 8 AM to 8 PM. At around 12.45 PM, 1 received DD No.22A, again said 1.25 PM I received DD No.22A. Upon receiving the said DD I alongwith HC Sunil reached at C-764, 1 floor Manak Vihar, Delhi. I went to the first floor of the said house and saw that one dead body was lying in the second room of the said house where Bhim Singh and one Vinod met us. Meanwhile Ct. Rajinder and Ct. Rajiv also came there. I made enquiry from the Vinod. Meanwhile Inspector Harpal Singh and SHO/ Inspector Jagjit Sangwan along with other police officials came there. Crime team was called at the spot. Inspector Harpal recorded the statement of Vinod Kumar. Crime team also arrived. there and inspected the spot and took the photographs. Inspector Harpal Singh prepared the rukka and gave the same to Ct. Rajinder for registration of the case.
Inspector Harpal Singh prepared the rukka and gave the POOJA TALWAR same to Ct. Rajinder for registration of the case. Ct. Rajinder Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 27 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:47:03 +0530 went away to the PS with rukka. Inspector Harpal seized the electric cord which were in two part, one part in small was with the plug and another part was attached with the fridge lying adjacent the dead body. Longer part of the electric cord, which was attached with the fridge, was wrapped around the neck of the dead body. Length of the small part of the electric cord was around 2 ft. and length of the longer part of the electric cord was approx. 7.5 ft. The electric cord wrapped around the neck was cut/detached from the fridge and small part was taken out from the plug. Pullanda of the both electric cord was made by the Inspector Harpal Singh and sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/C bearing my signature at Point B. Dead body was identified by the Vinod Kumar and Bhim Singh as the body of Ashok Kumar. The dead body alongwith the pullanda of the electric cord was sent to DDU hospital Mortuary through HC Sunil. Inspector Harpal Singh lifted the blood scattered on the floor of the room near the dead body with the help of the cotton, the said cotton was kept in a plastic container. The plastic container was wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/G bearing my signature at Point B. The blood stained piece of the floor was taken out with the help of hammer and 'chheni' and kept in a plastic container and another piece of the floor without blood stains was taken out with the help of the hammer and chheni and kept in a separate plastic container. Both plastic container were wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS, the same were taken into possession vide seizure memos already POOJA Ex.PW19/E Ex.PW19/F respectively both bears my signature at TALWAR Point B. There was white colour blood stained 'gamcha' near the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 28 of 72 15:47:10 +0530 FIR no.243/12 head of the dead body of the Ashok. IO seized the same by keeping in a white polythene bag which was wrapped in a white colour clothe and sealing it with the seal of HPS, vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/D bearing my signature at Point B. There was five shirt buttons, two buttons on the bed kept in the said room, one button near the small wooden temple kept in the said room, fourth button was lying on the floor near the left side of the dead body and fifth button was lying on the floor near the gate of the bathroom attached with the said room.
Four buttons were similar and matched with the button of the shirt of the deceased and fifth button was different from the other four. IO kept the said button kept in white colour small container, it was wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS, the same was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/G1 bearing my Signature at Point B. IO seized the one account book (doodh ki bahi) lying on the bed kept in the room vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/G2 bearing my signature at Point B. After using the seal. Inspector Harpal Singh handed over the same to me. Ct.Rajinder came to the spot with copy of the FIR and rukka and handed over the same to Inspector Harpal. We made local enquiry and came to know that CCTV were installed in Manak Vihar area and control room of the said CCTV cameras was with the president of RWA, Manak Vihar namely Sh. O.P.Gulati. We alongwith Vinod Kumar, Bhim Singh and other relative of the deceased went to the office of the RWA. CCTV footage were shown to the Vinod Kumar, Bhim Singh and other relative of the deceased, they identified one of the person namely Vipin who was resident of their village. Four other persons were also seen in the CCTV footage along with Vipin POOJA but they could not identify those persons. We made search of those TALWAR accused persons at the Sarai Kalen Kha Bus Terminal, Ashram Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 29 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 15:47:18 +0530 FIR no.243/12 Chowk and other places but they could not be traced.
On 05.07.2012, I again joined the investigation alongwith IO Insp. Harpal Singh. I went to the mortuary of DDU hospital, Hari Nagar, where dead body of deceased namely Ashok was identified by his brother Vinod and his uncle Bhim Singh. After necessary formalities, IO got postmortem of the dead body. After the postmortem, the dead body was handed over to his brother Vinod. Doctor had given three sealed pullandas sealed with the seal of DFMT DDU HOSPITAL containing the blood on gauze piece, clothes of the deceased and electric cord with sample seal. IO seized the pullanda of the blood on gauze piece vide seizure memo Ex PW 21/A bearing my signature at point A. IO also seized the pullanda of the clothes of the deceased vide seizure memo already Ex PW 19/G4 bearing my signature at point B. IO also seized the pullanda of the electric cord vide seizure memo Ex PW 21/B bearing my signature at point A. We returned to the police station with the case property and case properties were deposited in the malkhana.
On 17.07.2012, I again joined the investigation on the directions of the IO/Insp. M.L. Meena formed a team consisting myself. HC Arun & HC Narender on the directions of the IO. On that day, I received a secret information that wanted accused of the present case namely Sushil would come at Ashram Chowk. After receiving the such information, we went to the house of the complainant, where cousin brother of the complainant namely Lakhan met us. On our asking, he joined us. After that, we alongwith Lakhan went to the Ashram Chowk. We made search of the accused Sushil. After some time, one bus of U.P. road ways came there, from that bus accused Sushil Kumar was getting down, on the pointing out POOJA of Lakhan, we apprehended the accused Sushil. Accused Sushil is TALWAR present today in the court (correctly identified). I interrogated the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 30 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:47:25 +0530 accused Sushil Kumar. He confessed about his guilt/involvement in the present case. I arrested the accused Sushil Kumar vide arrest memo already Ex.PW11/A bearing my signature at point C and I also conducted his personal search vide personal search memo already Ex.PW11/B bearing my signature at point D. I recorded his disclosure statement vide disclosure statement already Ex.PW15/A bearing my signature at point B. From the Ashram Chowk, we alongwith accused Sushil went to DDU hospital, where medical examination of the accused was got conducted. Thereafter, we took the accused to PS Tilak Nagar and put him in the lock up of PS Tilak Nagar.
On 18.07.2012, I again joined the investigation in the present case alongwith IO Insp. Harpal Singh. On that day, we went to the PS Tilak Nagar, where IO took out the accused Sushil from the lock up. IO interrogated the accused Sushil and recorded his supplementary disclosure statement, the same is now Ex.PW21/C bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, accused Sushil Kumar led us at the first floor of H. No.C-764, Manak Vihar, village Tihar and pointed out the place of occurrence, IO prepared the pointing out memo. same is now Ex.PW21/D bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, accused Sushil Kumar was produced before the concerned court and his seven days PC remand was obtained by the IO.
On 19.07.2012, I again joined the investigation alongwith IO and other police officials. On that day. 1 alongwith HC Parveen, Ct. Narender, IO & Ct. Rajender took the accused Sushil to his native village namely Mauji ka nagla in U.P. We made search of the associates of the accused Sushil namely Vipin & Languriya resident POOJA of that village but they could not be traced. Thereafter, we left the TALWAR village Mauji ka nagla and went to village Chanderbhan ka nagla in Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 31 of 72 15:47:32 +0530 FIR no.243/12 U.P. where accused Sushil pointed out the house of accused Ram Kishan but he was not found there. Thereafter, we returned to Delhi after making search of the associates of the accused Sushil at several other places.
On 03.08.2012, on the directions of the IO, I alongwith Ct. Narender took the case property i.e. eight exhibits from the Malkhana to FSL Rohini but I do not remember the RC number.
On 24.08.2012, accused Vipin, present today in court (correctly identified), surrendered before the IO in my presence. IO arrested the accused Vipin and conducted his personal search. IO interrogated the accused Vipin Kumar and recorded his disclosure statement. Accused Vipin was further interrogated by the IO on that day and recorded his supplementary disclosure statement, the same is now Ex.PW21/E bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, accused Vipin led us at the first floor of H. No.C-764, Manak Vihar, village Tihar and he pointed out the place of occurrence, IO prepared the pointing out memo, the same is now Ex PW 21/F bearing my signature at point A. After the necessary formalities, accused Vipin was put behind the bar in the lock-up of PS Tilak Nagar.
On 26.08.2012, I again joined the investigation. On that day, I alongwith IO, HC Shashi, Ct. Shailender, Ct. Rajeev took the accused Vipin at Agra. On his pointing out, we went to the rented room of the accused in the area of Sepla Jat near Agar Camp, where we made search of the room of the accused. Thereafter, we went to the village of accused Vipin i.e. Mauji ka nagla, where accused Vipin led us at the back wall of one Ashram/mandir and accused took out one polythene carry bag containing his shoes of white colour make fitness, one blue colour jeans, one black colour T-shirt & one brown POOJA colour shirt. Accused disclosed that he had worn the said clothes and TALWAR shoes at the time of the incident. There were blood stains on the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 32 of 72 2026.01.27 15:47:39 +0530 FIR no.243/12 shoes. The clothes/shoes were seized by the IO. We made search of the associates of the accused Vipin at several places but they could not be found. Thereafter, we returned to Delhi with accused Vipin and case property. IO deposited the case property in the malkhana of PS Hari Nagar.
I can identify the case property if shown to me.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 8, sealed with the seal of court, having case particulars of the present case, same is opened and found containing one empty envelope having the seal impression of FSL S.Nn, one cut cloth pullanda bearing case particulars of this case, another cut cloth pullanda bearing particulars of this case and seal impression of DDU hospital. one small paper wrapping containing three very small pieces of electric wire and two pieces of the electric black colour wire out of which one is having three pin top, same are shown to the witness and the witness states that long piece of the electric wire was found wrapped in the neck of the deceased Ashok. The two pieces of the electric wires are already collectively Ex P-1.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 5, sealed with the seal of court, having case particulars of the present case, same is opened and found containing one empty envelope having seal impression of FSL S.Nn and one unsealed plastic container having seal impression of HPS containing five slips bearing details of exhibits and five buttons, out of which four buttons are of one pattern while the fifth button is of different pattern/size, same are shown to the witness and the witness has identified the same as those buttons were found at the spot. The buttons are already collectively Ex P-2. POOJA TALWAR At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 4, sealed with the seal of court, having case Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 33 of 72 15:47:44 +0530 FIR no.243/12 particulars of the present case, same is opened and found containing one empty envelope having seal impression of FSL S.Nn, one cut cloth pullanda having seal impression of HPS and one gumchha of whitish grey colour having some stains, same is shown to the witness and the witness has identified the same having been recovered from the spot near the dead body of deceased Ashok. The gumchha is Ex P-3.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one account book (dairy) in unsealed condition, same is shown to the witness and the witness identified the same as having been recovered from the spot. The account book (dairy) is already Ex P-4.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel sealed with the seal of court, having case particulars of the present case, same is opened and found containing one cut cloth pullanda having seal impression of HPS, one polythene of Jain cloth house, Saran market, Ballabhgarh, (Faridabad) bearing the case particulars of the present case, one pair of shoes of white colour make Fitness, one jeans pant of sky blue colour having some cuts and stains, one T-shirt/vest of black colour having some cuts and one chex shirt having some cuts and stains. The same are shown to the witness and the witness has identified the same as having been recovered at the instance of the accused Vipin from near the wall of the temple in his village. The articles are already collectively Ex P-6.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 1, sealed with the seal of SNn FSL DELHI court, having case particulars of the present case, same is opened and found containing one plastic container containing cotton wool swab having dark brown stains. The same is shown to the witness and the witness POOJA has identified the same as the same cotton swab on which the blood TALWAR scattered at the spot was lifted. The cotton wool is Ex P-7. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 34 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:47:50 +0530 At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 2, sealed with the seal of SNn FSL DELHI court, having case particulars of the present case. same is opened and found containing one plastic container having stone pieces. The same are shown to the witness and the witness has identified the same as the same stone pieces which were lifted from the spot. The same stone pieces are is Ex P-8.
At this stage, MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar has produced one sealed parcel no. 3, sealed with the seal of SNn FSL DELHI court, having case particulars of the present case. same is opened and found containing plastic container having stone pieces having some brownish spots. The same are shown to the witness and the witness has identified the same as the same stone pieces which were lifted from the spot. The same stone pieces are is Ex P-9.
(ix) PW22: Ct. Satya Pal deposed that on 04.07.2012 after receiving information from the district control room, he alongwith ASI Azad Sigh In-charge and ASI Dharambir Singh finger print expert reached at the spot i.e. C-764, First floor Manak Vihar, Village Tihar, Hari Nagar, Delhi. They inspected the place of occurrence and he took 13 photographs of the spot as well as of dead body from different angles on the instructions given by the incharge of the crime team and IO of the of those present case. He produced 13 negatives photographs and the same are Ex.PW22/A-1 to A-13. The photographs on the judicial file are Ex.PW22/B-1 to B-13. IO recorded his statement in this case.
POOJA
(x) PW23: SI Azad deposed that on 04.07.2012, after receiving TALWAR information from the District control room, he alongwith ASI Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 35 of 72 15:47:55 +0530 FIR no.243/12 Dharambir finger print expert, Ct. Satpal photographer and his other staff reached at the spot i.e.C-764, First floor Manak Vihar, Village Tihar, Delhi. He inspected the place of occurrence as well as the dead body. Crime team photographer Ct. Satpal took photographs of the spot ad the dead body. Finger print expert ASI Dharambir Singh lift three finger prints from the refrigerator.
Thereafter, he prepared detailed crime team report Ex.PW23/A bearing his signatures at point A, at the spot and handed over to Insp. Harpal Singh.
(xi) PW24 Inspector Harpal Singh deposed that :
On 07.04.2012, again said, on 04.07.2012, I was posted as Inspector investigation in police station Hari Nagar. On that day, I was present in the area of police station Hari Nagar, I received wireless message that one murder has taken place at C-764, first floor, Manak Vihar. Upon receiving the said information, I reached at the spot, where SI Ajay Gupta, SHO and other police officials were present there. In this regard, DD No. 22A dt. 04.07.2012 was lodged and the same was assigned to Si Ajay Gupta, who received the said DD in 'akab' through Ct. Rajinder.
After confirmation of the murder, the said DD was assigned to me by the senior officers. I informed the crime team and dog squad at the spot. I inspected the spot and found that one dead body was lying in the inner room of the two room flat on first floor. The head of the dead body was towards north side near the fridge and legs of the dead body were towards south side and they extended below the bed. Blood was present near the head of the dead body and blood had oozed out from the nose and mouth. A wire was found wrapped around the Veck the dead body and POOJA TALWAR one end of the same was attached with the fridge. Another small Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 36 of 72 by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:48:01 +0530 part of the said wire was hanging with socket. One blood stained white colour 'gumchha' was also lying near the dead body. Four buttons of the wearing shirt of the deceased were missing/broken. During the search, one such button was found lying near the temple kept in the same room and another three buttons were found on the bed lying in the same room. One account book/bahi was also found on the bed. The bed sheet was disturbed (ast vyast) and looked that there deceased was and the scuffle/struggle between the assailant/assailants. The dead body was identified by the brother of deceased namely Vinod as that of his brother Ashok. Vinod told us that money collected by the deceased Ashok was also not there. Crime team reached there.
Crime team reached at the spot. Crime team in-charge ASI Azad Singh inspected the spot and photographer of the crime team took the photographs on my instructions as well as the instruction of ASI Azad Singh. Finger print expert also lifted the chance prints from the spot but it could not be established during the examination of the experts. Four buttons of the wearing shirt were found in the room, where the dead body was found. One button of different description was also found in the said room. I kept the said five buttons in a plastic container. I recorded the statement of Vinod Kumar, younger brother of the deceased namely Ashok, the same is already Ex.PW19/A bearing my signature at point B. I made an endorsement from portion C to Con Ex.PW19/A bearing my signature at point B and gave the same to Ct. Rajender for the registration of the FIR. Ct. Rajender went to the police station with the rukka. I sealed the plastic container with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/G-1 which bears my signature at point POOJA TALWAR C. I lifted the blood lying on the floor near the head of the dead Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 37 of 72 by POOJA TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:48:07 +0530 bod with the help of the cotton, the said cotton was kept in a plastic container, The plastic container was wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/G bearing my signature at point C. The blood stained piece of the floor was taken out with the help of the hammer and chenni and kept in a plastic container, the said plastic container was wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/E bearing my signature at point C. The another piece of the floor without blood stains was taken out with the help of the hammer and chenni and kept in a plastic container, the said plastic container was wrapped with the doctor tape and sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/F bearing my signature at point C. Prior to it, I took out the electric cord which were in two part, one part is small was with the plug and another part was attached with the fridge lying adjacent to dead body. I kept the both wires in a plastic polythene bag and prepared the pullanda of the same and R NO. 243/12 sealed with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex PW 19/C bearing my signature at point C. I also prepared the pullanda of the blood stains gumcha lying on the floor near the head of the dead body and sealed it with the seal of HPS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex PW 19/D bearing my signature at point C. In the meantime. Ct. Rajender came there with the copy of the FIR & original rukka. I mentioned the case particulars on the pullandas prepared earlier. I also seized the dairy/bahi' vide seizure memo already Ex.PW19/G-2 bearing my signature at point C. I inspected the POOJA TALWAR dead body and filled up the inquest form по. 25.35 (1) (B), the Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 38 of 72 by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:48:12 +0530 same is now Ex.PW24/A bearing my signature at point A. I made request for the postmortem of the dead body vide letter Ex.PW24/B bearing my signature at point A. I got sent the dead body of deceased Ashok through HC Sunil to mortuary of DDU hospital. I also got sent the inquest papers with the request letter. pullanda of the 'gumcha' & electric cord through HC Sunil to mortuary of DDU hospital. Crime team in-charge had given his report already Ex.PW23/A. I prepared the site plan Ex.PW24/C bearing my signature at point A. Complainant Vinod Kumar and his uncle Bhim Singh told me that CCTV camera has been installed in the area and the control of the said CCTV camera is in the house of Sh. O.P. Gulati, president RWA of the colony, Manak Vihar. Thereafter, I alongwith Vinod Kumar, Bhim Singh & other family members of deceased went to the house of Sh. O.P. Gulati, where we had seen the CCTV footage installed in the area and accused Vipin was seen with the deceased. Thereafter, after some time, accused Vipin was again seen alongwith other four persons. The family members including the Vinod Kumar and Bhim Singh identified the accused Vipin as the residence of their village. But they could not identified the other four persons who were seen in the CCTV footage alongwith accused Vipin. The complainant Vinod Kumar and his family members told me that they have to call the other villagers from their village, they may identify the other four persons seen in the CCTV footage. I recorded the statement of witnesses. I made search of the accused persons but they could not be found. Thereafter, I alongwith SI Ajay Gupta & other police officials returned to the PS with the case property. I deposited the case POOJA property in the malkhana. I recorded the statement of the police TALWAR officials in the police station. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 39 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:48:18 +0530 On 05.07.2012, I alongwith SI Ajay Gupta and another police officials went to the mortuary of DDU hospital, where dead body of deceased namely Ashok was identified by his brother Vinod and his uncle Bhim Singh. I recorded their statement already Ex.PW19/G-3 & Ex.PW2/A respectively both bears my signature at point B. I got conducted the postmortem. After the postmortem, I handed over the dead body to his brother Vinod and uncle Bhim Singh. After the postmortem, doctor had given the three sealed pullandas sealed with the seal of DFMT DDU hospital containing the blood on gauze piece of deceased, wearing clothes of the deceased & electric cord. I seized the aforesaid three pullandas vide separate memo already Ex.PW21/A, 19/G-4 & 21/B respectively all bears my signatures at point C. I recorded the statement of the witnesses. I made search for the accused persons on that day but they could not be traced. I returned to the PS with the case property. Case property were deposited in the malkhana. After 05.07.2012, I made search of the accused persons in Delhi. On the directions of the senior officers, raiding party team under supervision of Insp. M.L. Meena, Addl. SHO PS Hari Nagar was formed. Insp. M.L. Meena alongwith other police officials went to the village Mauzi ka Nangla, District-Hathras, U.P. where they made search of the accused persons but could not be found.
On 11.07.2012, I alongwith Ct. Rajiv were present in the village Tihar, in search of the accused persons. Complainant Vinod met me and informed that some villagers came Delhi with him, they can identify the other associates of Vipin, who were POOJA seen in the CCTV footage. Complainant Vinod called the TALWAR villagers there. Thereafter, I alongwith Vinod, Ct. Rajiv & Digitally signed by POOJA villagers namely Jagvir Singh, Sukhbir Singh, Pinki Kumar & TALWAR Date:
2026.01.27 15:48:24 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 40 of 72 FIR no.243/12 others went to the office of Sh. O.P. Gulati, president of the RWA, Manak Vihar. We met Mr. O.P. Gulati, where we had seen the CCTV footage with the aforesaid villagers. Jagbir, Sukbir Singh, Pinki Kumar & other villagers identified S/o Jawahar Singh, after Sushil 5/o Bhudev Singh, Languria seeing the CCTV footage, whereas they failed to identify the other two persons seen in the CCTV footage. They told me that accused Vipin, Sushil & Languria are resident of their village. I recorded their statements and they were discharged from the investigation.
On 17.07.2012, I received secret information that accused Sushil would come Delhi from Mathura. On that day, I was looking the charge of the SHO. On my directions, Insp. Madan Lal Meena, SI Ajay Gupta, HC Arun & Ct. Narender went to Ashram Chowk, Mathura road. They returned at around 10:00- 10:30pm and produced the accused Sushil Kumar before me. Sl Ajay Gupta had already arrested the accused Sushil Kumar. I had given the case file to SI Ajay Gupta while he was leaving the police station for Ashram Chowk. SI Ajay Gupta also returned the case file, when he produced accused Sushil Kumar.
On 18.07.2012, accused Sushil Kumar was produced before the court. I got seven days PC remand of the accused Sushil Kumar.
On 19.07.2012, I alongwith Ct. Narender, Ct. Rajender & other police officials took the accused to Mathura, where we made search of the other accused persons but they could not be traced. However, we came to know the address of the accused Ram Kishan & Kushal whose names were disclosed by the accused Sushil. Thereafter, we went to the village of accused Ram Kishan l.e. village Nangla Chander Bhan, where we met POOJA with the father of the accused Ram Kishan. Father of the accused TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 41 of 72 Digitally signed by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:48:41 +0530 Ram Kishan namely Suraj Prasad Prajapati had shown the photographs of the accused Ram Kishan. We identified the accused Ram Kishan, as the person who was seen in the CCTV footage. We made search of the accused Ram Kishan but he could not be found. Thereafter, we returned to Delhi and accused Sushil was produced before the Ld. MM on 24.07.2012 i.e. one day before expiry of PC remand granted.
On 03.08.2012, I got sent the exhibits to FSL Rohini through SI Ajay Gupta and Ct. Narender. I recorded their statement in this regard. During investigation, I got issued NBW of the accused Vipin, Ram Kishan & Languria. Thereafter, we started searching them. I got issued process u/s 82 Cr.P.C. against them.
On 24.08.2012, I received secret information that accused Vipin would come to Delhi from Mathura side by bus. After receiving the said information, I alongwith Ct. Anup went to the Ashram Chowk, Mathura road. I started checking the passengers, who were coming from Mathura side by bus. Ar around 7:00pm, one boy got down from the U.P roadways bus at Ashram Chowk. On the pointing out of the secret informer, we apprehended the said boy. On the inquiry, the name of the said boy was revealed as Vipin Kumar S/o Vijay. I took the accused Vipin Kumar to PS. I called the complainant Vinod Kumar to police station. Complainant Vinod Kumar came to the PS and identified the accused Vipin Kumar as the person named in the FIR. I arrested the accused Vipin Kumar vide arrest memo already Ex.PW19/G-6 bearing my signature at point B. I conducted his personal search vide personal search memo already POOJA Ex.PW19/G-7 bearing my signature at point B. I interrogated the TALWAR accused Vipin Kumar and recorded his disclosure statement Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 42 of 72 Date: FIR no.243/12 2026.01.27 15:48:47 +0530 already Ex.PW19/G-5 bearing my signature at point B. Thereafter, accused Vipin led us at the first floor of H.No. C-764, Manak Vihar, Delhi and pointed out the place of occurrence, I prepared the pointing out memo, the same is already Ex.PW21/F bearing my signature at point B. I again interrogated the accused Vipin and recorded his supplementary disclosure statement already Ex.PW21/E bearing my signature at point B. Accused Vipin disclosed that the wearing clothes & Shoes on the day of the incident were hide near the Ashram situated in his village. Next day i.e. 25.08.2012, I produced the accused before the court and got four days PC remand.
On 26.08.2012, I alongwith Ct. Narender, Ct. Rajender, complainant Vinod Kumar and other police officials took the accused Vipin at his village Mauzi ka Nangla. Where we made search of the accused Languria but he could not be traced. Thereafter accused Vipin led us to Ashram/mandir situated outside his village. Accused further led us outside the wall of the said Ashram, from there accused Vipin took out a polythene, wherein one pair of shoes make fitness, one jeans pant, one T- shirt of black colour & one shirt of brown colour were found. He disclosed that he had worn the said clothes & shoes at the time of the murder of deceased Ashok. I kept the aforesaid clothes and shoes in the said polythene and prepared the pullanda of the said polythene and sealed with the seal of HPS, the same was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW 19/B bearing my signature at point C. Thereafter, we went to the village of accused Ram Kishan for his search but he could not be found. From where, we returned to Delhi. Case property was deposited POOJA in the malkhana of PS. Accused Vipin was produced before the TALWAR concerned MM and he was remanded in judicial custody by the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 43 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:48:52 +0530 Ld. MM.
On 03.09.2012, I received the secret information that accused Ram Kishan is in the area of PS Hari Nagar in Delhi. After receiving the said information. I alongwith Ct Ashok Kumar went to Ghantaghar, Hari Nagar. I called the complainant Vinod Kumar there. At around 5:00pm, on the pointing out of the secret informer, we apprehended the accused Ram Kishan. I interrogated him and arrested vide arrest memo already Ex.PW19/G-8 bearing my signature at point B. I also conducted his personal search vide personal search memo already Ex.PW19/G-9 bearing my signature at point B. I interrogated the accused Ram Kishan and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW24/D bearing my signature at point A and signature of accused Ram Kishan at point B. Thereafter, accused Ram Kishan led us at the house no. C-764, first floor, Manak Vihar, Delhi at pointing out the place at the place of murder of deceased Ashok. I prepared the pointing out memo already Ex.PW19/G-9 bearing my signature at point B. Next day, accused Ram Kishan was produced before the court. I got PC remand of the accused Ram Kishan for three days. We took the accused Ram Kishan to Mathura, where we came to know about the fifth accused namely Kushal Pal Singh @ Kushal, R/o village Mitholi.
Thereafter, we went to village Mitholi and came to know that accused Kushal Pal was residing with his brother in law (Jeeja) at Sadabad, District-Hathras. Thereafter, we went to Sadabad, where we made inquiry about the accused Kushal Pal and came to know that presently he was working in the Faridabad. Thereafter, we came to Faridabad and apprehended POOJA the accused Kushal Pal Kushal from Badar Pur. Bordar. 1 TALWAR interrogated the accused Kushal Pal and took him in the police Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 44 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:48:58 +0530 station. Complainant Vinod Kumar also came there. I arrested the accused Kushal Pal vide arrest memo already Ex.PW18/A bearing my signature at point C and I conducted his personal search vide memo already Ex.PW18/B bearing my signature at point B. I interrogated him and recorded his disclosure statement vide already Ex.PW18/C bearing my signature at point C. Thereafter, accused Kushal Pal led us at the first floor of the house No.C-764, Manak Vihar, Delhi and where he pointed the place of murder of deceased Ashok. I prepared the pointing out memo already Ex.PW18/D bearing my signature at point C. Next day, accused Kushal Pal and accused Ram Kishan were produced before the court and they were remanded in judicial custody by the Ld. мм.
On 01.10.2012, accused Languria was produced by Sh. Subhash Chand before me in the police station. I interrogated and arrested him vide arrest memo already Ex.PW18/E bearing my signature at point C. I conducted his personal search vide personal search memo already Ex.PW18/F bearing my signature at point C. I interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement already Ex.PW18/G bearing my signature at point C. Thereafter, accused Languria led us at the first floor of H. No. 764, Manak Vihar, Delhi. Accused pointed the said place as the place of incident, I prepared the pointing out memo already Ex PW 18/H bearing my signature at point C. Next day, accused was produced before the court and he was remanded in judicial custody by the Ld. MM. All the five accused persons are present in the court today (correctly identified).
(At this stage, further examination is deferred due to POOJA During the course of investigation, I had also collected the TALWAR CCTV footage i.e. CD and photo from the owner of Cosmo Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 45 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:49:07 +0530 Enterprises i.e. Sh. S.K. Dass alongwith certificate u/s 6513 of Indian Evidence Act. The perusal of said CCTV reveals that two persons were entering in the locality from main gate as shown in the footage of C11-05, 2012-07-04 at 12:19:03 hours i.c. accused Vipin and Ashok (since deceased) and accused Vipin was walking just ahead of Ashok (since deceased) and having a cloth on his head and around in neck. The perusal of said CCTV further reveals that one of the two persons were also entering in the locality at 12:38:47 hours was Vipin and the second person seen in the CCTV footage is accused Ram Kishan. Perusal of said CCTV also reveals that at about 12:38:54 hours, accused Kushal Pal, Languria and Sushil were also entering in the said locality and accused Kushal Pal was moving ahead of the other two accused persons.
During investigation, I had recorded the statement of Sh S.K. Dass. During investigation, I had also seized the CCTV footage of Manak Vihar, Tihar Gali from Sh. O.P Gulati, ie. RWA President alongwith the certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act. Perusal of said CCTV footage revealed that accused Languria, Ram Kishan, Kushal Pal, Sushil and Vipin entering in the Manak Vihar locality. During the course of investigation, I had sent the exhibits at FSI. through SI Ajay Gupta. During the course of investigation, I had also sent the chance prints and finger prints of all the accused persons to Finger Print Bureau During investigation, I had also got prepared scaled site plan through draftsman. I had also recorded statements of witnesses. Upon the completion of investigation, I POOJA had prepared charge-sheet and after the arrest of accused TALWAR Languria, I had prepared supplementary charge-sheet. Digitally signed by POOJA I can identify the case property if shown to me. TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:49:43 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 46 of 72 FIR no.243/12 It is observed that case property i,e, two pieces of electric wires are already Ex.P1, five buttons are already Ex.P2, one gamchha is already Ex.P3, one account book (Diary) is already Ex.P4, one pair of shoes, one jeans pant, one 1-shirt/waist and one check shirt is already Ex.P6 (colly), cotton wool swab is already Ex.P7, stone pieces are already Ex. P8, stone pieces having brownish spots are already Ex.P9. "
(xii) PW26: ASI Rajender Kumar joined the investigation with SI Ajay Gupta.
9. Accused persons in their statement under Section 294 CrPC stated that they did not dispute the genuineness of FSL report dated 08.05.2013 prepared by Sh. S. S. Badwal, Sr. Scientific Officer Physics.
10. Statement of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 CrP.C where they stated that it is a false case against them because of previous animosity in their native village.
Defence Evidence:
(i) DW1: Sh. Bhuri Singh deposed that he is an agriculturist in the Nangla Mauji village. He is brother of previous Pradhan of the village and accused Sushil is brother of present Pradhan.
Vipin, Sushil and Languria are residing in the same village. The house of Vipin is at the distance of 400 meters from his house and the house of Sushil is at the adjacent his house and the house POOJA of Languria is at the distance of approximately 400 meters from TALWAR his house. Sushil is farmer by profession. Languria is also a Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 47 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:49:55 +0530 farmer by profession and Vipin is also farmer by profession. All the 03 accused persons meet him everyday in fields. They do not go anywhere outside the village.
(ii) DW-2: Smt. Preeti deposed that she was residing at Sanjay Gandhi Colony, Koil, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh-202001 since 2010. Her marriage was solemnized in the year of 2008. She had three children out of them two are girls and one is boy. Her husband Kushal Pal is working in Aligarh since 2010 till date. Her children are studying in Aligarh itself.
Arguments on behalf of the State
11. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that there is ample evidence on record against accused persons in the testimony of brother, uncle, cousin and other prosecution witnesses. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that brother of deceased PW19 Vinod received a phone call from him specifically naming accused Vipin to be present with him and asking for money. All the accused persons are seen in the CCTV footage entering the colony where the house of the deceased was located. All the accused persons have been identified by the prosecution witnesses. There is ample evidence to connect the accused persons with the death of the deceased Ashok. Accused persons deserve to be convicted.
Arguments on behalf of accused
12. Ld. defence counsel for accused Vipin, Ram Kishan POOJA and Languria, per contra argued that prosecution has solely based TALWAR its case on circumstantial evidence. CCTV footage is the most Digitally signed by POOJA crucial evidence relied upon by the prosecution, however on TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:50:02 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 48 of 72 FIR no.243/12 observing the same it would reveal that the accused persons are not visible in the same. Prosecution witnesses admitted that they were enquired by the IO about three persons i.e. Vipin, Sushil and Languria and they informed that they belonged to their village. Witness O.P. Gulati PW7 categorically conceded to the fact that the place of murder is not covered by CCTV cameras.
13. PW8 S.K. Dass too admitted that the boys are not visible in the CD. The last seen theory of accused Vipin with the deceased too is an after thought as the said fact was not stated by PW2 Bheem in his statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Even PW10 Ramesh did not mention the fact that he saw accused Vipin going towards the spot 15 minutes prior to receiving the information of murder of Ashok in his statement under Section 161 CrPC. In so far as accused Ram Kishan and Kaushal are concerned, witness Vinod PW19 admitted that he was informed by the IO that these two persons were arrested and he identified them in the police station. In his examination in chief he had earlier admitted that he could not identify these two persons in the footage. There is no forensic evidence available on record against the accused persons except alleged recovery from accused Vipin which too does not fall within the ambit of Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act.
14. It is argued on behalf of accused Sushil and Kaushal that the last seen theory about presence of Sushil in the park with deceased Ashok and other accused persons has been concocted. None of the witness could identify accused Kaushal Pal as the POOJA TALWAR person visible in the CCTV footage. He has solely been Digitally signed by apprehended and implicated in the present case on the disclosure POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:50:08 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 49 of 72 FIR no.243/12 of co-accused which cannot be read in evidence.
15. Prosecution miserably failed to complete the chain of sequence of events to connect of accused persons with the offence, accordingly accused persons deserve to be acquitted.
Analysis of Law:
16. Murder is defined under Section 300 IPC and punishment for murder is provided under Section 302 IPC.
(a) Section 302 of the IPC provides punishment for the grave crime of murder. Murder is an act done to cause death or dangerous injury to some person, and body harm which it is known ought in all probability to cause death, or which by reckless disregard of human life would in all probability cause death. The keyword in this section is "intent" to cause death, direct or indirect.
i) Intention to Cause Death: The pre- requisite for a criminal offense to be classified under Section 302 IPC is that the perpetrator should have an intention to kill the victim.
ii) Knowledge regarding the Possibility of Death: Although death was not intended to happen, if on the part of the perpetrator knowledge of the possibility that his act might lead to death could be proved, then the offense would come within the scope of murder.
iii) Extreme Rashness: When the act has been done with such rashness that it would cause death almost certainly, then it would be murder as per Section 302.
(iv) Sentence: The law under Section 302 provides for capital POOJA punishment or life imprisonment in cases of murder. In addition TALWAR to the sentence, the fine may also be imposed based on the case at Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 50 of 72 15:50:16 +0530 FIR no.243/12 hand.
17. Section 120A: Definition of criminal conspiracy.-- When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done,-- (1) an illegal act, or (2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy:
Section 120B. Punishment of criminal conspiracy.--(1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, 1[imprisonment for life] or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence.
(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both.
Robbery is defined under Section 390 punishment for which is defined under Section 392 IPC. Section 390 IPC is reproduced herein under:
390. Robbery.--In all robbery there is either theft or extortion. 1.
Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, s. 117 and the Sch., for "transportation for life" (w.e.f. 1-1-1956). 98 When theft is robbery.--Theft is "robbery" if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry POOJA away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end TALWAR voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or Digitally signed hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:50:23 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 51 of 72 FIR no.243/12 hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
397. Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt.--If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any
1. Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, s. 117 and the Sch., for "transportation for life" (w.e.f. 1-1-1956). 99 person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.
18. I have heard the arguments advanced by all concerned and have perused the records including documents relied upon by the prosecution carefully.
Observation of the Court:
19. The story of the prosecution commenced with recording of statement of Vinod Ex.PW19/A, informing about murder of his brother Ashok. He also named one Vipin to be with his brother before the incident as informed to him by his deceased brother telephonically. Alongwith his statement, statement of PW2 Bheem and PW10 Ramesh would also be relevant who saw accused Vipin alongwith other accused persons sitting in the park with deceased Ashok. Investigation commenced after the accused persons were identified by few prosecution witnesses in the CCTV footage.
20. Admittedly there is no eye witness to the incident POOJA hence the prosecution had to prove its case against the accused TALWAR persons through circumstantial evidence. It has been held in Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 52 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:50:34 +0530 Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra 1984 AIR 1622 The Hon'ble Court has introduced the Panchsheel Test for the relevance and evaluation of circumstantial evidence in cases where direct evidence is not available. The five principles of the Panchsheel Test are:
1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn must be fully established.
2. The facts established should be consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused.
3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved.
5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that within all human consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused.
21. In State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, (1992 Crl.LJ 1104), it was pointed out that great care must be taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence and if the evidence relied on is reasonably capable of two inferences, the one in favour of the accused must be accepted. It was also pointed out that the circumstances relied upon must be found to have been fully established and the cumulative effect of all the facts so established must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt.
22. The chain of circumstances should be complete in POOJA all respects and should conclusively establish the guilt of TALWAR accused. No room for suspicion or doubt should be left which Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 53 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:50:39 +0530 point towards the innocence of the accused.
23. Undoubtedly conviction can be based solely on circumstantial evidence but the same should pass the test of stringent law relating to circumstantial evidence laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in numerous judgments.
24. In Hanumant Govind Nargundkar & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1952 SC 343) wherein it is held that:
"It is well to remember that in cases where the evidence in of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should in the first instance be fully established, and all the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and pendency and they should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused."
25. The prosecution has relied upon below stated evidence to complete the chain of circumstances which according to it point towards the guilt of the accused persons.
(a) Statement of PW19 Vinod
POOJA
(b) PW2 Bheem TALWAR
(c) PW10 Ramesh Chandra
Digitally signed
(d) PW11 Lakhan. by POOJA
TALWAR
Date: 2026.01.27
15:50:45 +0530
SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 54 of 72
FIR no.243/12
(e) Statements of witnesses from village PW5 Ramesh Chand, PW6 Jagbir Singh, PW12 Mukesh, PW13 Pinki Kumar, PW14 Gitam, PW16 Ravinder Singh.
(f) Statement of O.P. Gulati PW7,
(g) Statement of S.K. Dass PW8
(h) Recovery of clothes and shoes of accused Vipin
(i) CCTV Footage.
26. Keeping the aforesaid evidence in mind I shall proceed to decide whether prosecution succeeded in proving the circumstances leading to guilt of accused persons.
27. Prosecution through the testimony of PW25 Dr. B.N. Mishra who conducted the postmortem of the body of deceased Ashok, proved on record that death was homicidal. He opined that the cause of death was due to "asphyxia" caused by manual throttling and strangulation. Both injury no.2 and 3 in his report Ex.PW25/A were sufficient individually to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
28. Prosecution then tried to prove the motive to kill the deceased. As per the prosecution story accused Vipin went to the house of deceased Ashok and demanded money from him however he refused to give the same and also informed his brother Vinod not to lend any money to Vipin. Vipin alongwith other four co-accused again visited the house of deceased Ashok, on his refusal to give money he was strangulated with the wire of POOJA the fridge and ultimately succumbed to his injuries. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 55 of 72 15:50:50 +0530 FIR no.243/12
29. PW19 deposed that "At around 12 to 12:15 pm my brother Ashok had called me and that Vipin had come and was demanding money. Vipin had also demanding money from me on some earlier occasion, I had given him money and there was a quarrel/dispute over the same. After that incident Ashok had instructed me not to give money again to Vipin." Besides this statement and recognizing accused Vipin in the footage nothing more was stated by PW19.
30. However in his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP PW19 Vinod admitted that "It is further correct that we checked our house and found that Rs.1.5 lakhs collected by my brother Ashok and his mobile phone were missing."
31. Except for the oral testimony of PW19 Vinod no other witness i.e. PW2 Bheem, PW10 Ramesh, PW11 Lakhan testified about collection of Rs.1.5 lakh on the day of incident as all of them were in the same business and collection by one was well within the knowledge of the other.
32. It would also be pertinent to mention here that no recovery of Rs.1.5 lakh was affected from the accused persons nor the mobile phone which was allegedly used by the deceased at the relevant time could be recovered.
33. Though the prosecution through testimony of PW19 has laid the foundation of motive to kill deceased Ashok by accused Vipin but only on the basis of his solitary statement POOJA TALWAR without other corroborative, evidence the motive as alleged Digitally signed cannot be said to be proved on record, more so when the witness by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:50:55 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 56 of 72 FIR no.243/12 conceded to the fact of money being taken away by the accused persons in the cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP.
34. Prosecution further tried to connect the accused persons with the offence through recovery of clothes and shoes of accused Vipin which he was allegedly wearing at the time of incident and were blood stained.
35. As per the prosecution story on 24.08.2012 accused Vipin surrendered before the IO. He was arrested and on 26.08.2012 he took the investigating team to his village i.e. Mauji Ka Nagla, led them to the back wall of the Ashram/Mandir, took out one polythene containing his shoes, one blue jeans, one black t-shirt and one brown shirt. The shoes were blood stained.
36. Upon being examined by the FSL expert PW27 Ms. Seema Nain vide her report Ex.PW27/C, the blood on jeans and shoes of accused Vipin matched with the blood of deceased Ashok.
37. As per PW21 SI Ajay Kumar Gupta who accompanied the IO PW24 Inspector Harpal Singh at the time of recovery of aforesaid clothes and shoes of accused Vipin stated that "There were blood stains on the shoes." This witness did not mention that even the blue jeans of accused had blood stains.
38. Now PW24 Inspector Harpal Singh only deposed about recovery of clothes and shoes at the instance of accused POOJA TALWAR Vipin but did not mention that the same were blood stained.
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 57 of 72 2026.01.27 15:51:01 +0530 FIR no.243/12
39. Even PW21 Ct. Rajeev who too was part of the team at the time of recovery of clothes and shoes of accused Vipin at his instance. Even in his testimony the fact of the clothes and shoes being smeared with blood is not mentioned.
40. As aforesaid alleged recovery of clothes and shoes worn by accused Vipin at the time of commission of offence was affected at his instance in presence of PW20 Ct. Rajeev,PW21 SI Ajay Kumar and PW24 Inspector Harpal Singh so the fact of clothes and shoes of accused Vipin to be smeared with blood should have been mentioned in the statement of each of them.
41. In the testimony of PW19 Vinod he was shown the articles Ex.P6 allegedly recovered at the instance of accused Vipin and he identified the same. However in case his testimony is completely discerned it would reveal that he did not state that he was present at the time of alleged recovery.
42. Relevant portion of his testimony is being reproduced herein under:
"IO recorded the disclosure statement of accused Vipin and the same is Ex.PW19/G5 bearing my signatures at point A. It is correct that IO arrested accused Vipin vide arrest memo Ex.PW19/G6 bearing my signatures at point A. It is correct that personal search of accused Vipin is conducted vide memo Ex.PW19/G7 bearing my signatures at point A. It is correct that on 27.08.2012 at the time of recovery at the instance of accused Vipin one Jagbir was also present." POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:07 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 58 of 72 FIR no.243/12
43. From the above, it cannot be concluded that PW19 Vinod was present at the time of alleged recovery. Moreover this Jagbir who is stated to be present was never examined during trial.
44. Hence prosecution failed to prove that alleged recovery was affected in the presence of public witness.
45. It is argued by Ld Defence counsel that non joining of public witnesses is fatal to the case of prosecution and cannot be relied upon. In so far as their argument is concerned, non joining of public witnesses during investigation is owing to the fact that no public persons wish to associate themselves with the police investigation. Moreover, it is now well settled through various judgments of higher courts that testimony of police witness is in no way on lesser footing then that of public witness.
46. Reliance in this regard is placed in the judgment of Naresh @ Satya vs. State 2024 5AD Delhi 391 wherein it is held that:
21. Conviction can be recorded on the sole testimony of police officials without corroboration from a public witness, if it inspires confidence. In this regard reliance can be placed upon Tahir Vs. State (1996) 3 SCC 338, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
"no infirmity attaches to the testimony of police officials, merely because they belong to the police force and there is no rule of law or evidence which lays down that conviction cannot be recorded on the evidence of the police officials, if found POOJA TALWAR reliable, unless corroborated by some independent evidence. The Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 59 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:13 +0530 Rule of Prudence however, only requires a more careful scrutiny of their evidence, since they can be said to be interested in the result of the case projected by them. Where the evidence of the police officials, after careful scrutiny, inspires confidence and is found to be trustworthy and reliable, it can form basis of conviction and the absence of some independent witness of the locality to lend corroboration to their evidence does not in any way affect the creditworthiness of the prosecution case."
47. Hence, non joining of public witness would be of no resort to the accused persons to challenge the veracity of police officials on this aspect.
48. Having dealt with the issue of non joining of witnesses it would also be pertinent to delve upon the fact whether recovery of blood stained clothes and shoes fell in the ambit of Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act.
49. PW21 ASI Ajay Kumar deposed that " Thereafter we went to the village of Vipin i.e. Mauji ka Nagla where accused Vipin led us at the back wall of one Ashram/Mandir and accused took out one polythene carry bag containing his shoes of white colour make fitness, one blue colour jeans, one black colour t-shirt and one brown colour shirt ".
50. His testimony on this aspect is corroborated with the testimony of PW20 Ct. Rajeev and PW24 IO Inspector Harpal POOJA Singh. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:19 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 60 of 72 FIR no.243/12
51. As per the prosecution story blood smeared clothes and shoes were recovered at the instance of accused Vipin from the wall of one Ashram/Mandir. In order to use the alleged recovery to bring it under the ambit of Section 27 Indian Evidence Act, the recovery should have been shown from a place which was exclusively within the knowledge of the accused.
52. Moreover there is difference in the testimony of recovery witnesses with respect to clothes and shoes being stained with blood.
53. Not only the place of recovery is not covered under the ambit of Section 27 of Evidence Act but the discrepancies in testimonies of recovery witnesses about the clothes and shoes being smeared with blood appear to be suspicious.
54. There is no denial of fact that the blood on the alleged recovered jeans and shoes of accused matched with that of the deceased, as per the FSL report Ex.PW27/C. But unless recovery itself is proved beyond reasonable doubt, the report alone would be inconsequential and in this case the clothes being smeared with the blood of deceased too is doubtful.
55. Recovery of blood stained clothes of accused Vipin is alleged to be affected from the back wall of the Ashram/Mandir. Again this place cannot be said within the exclusive knowledge of the accused and would not fall within the POOJA ambit of Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act to use the same TALWAR against the accused. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:26 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 61 of 72 FIR no.243/12
56. As has already been discussed that regardless of the fact that the FSL report is positive qua accused Vipin with respect to clothes and shoes recovered at his instance but the same would only be of resort to the prosecution once the recovery is proved from a place which is exclusively within the knowledge of accused.
57. Argument of defence counsel that the clothes and shoes were falsely planted after smearing the same with the blood of deceased holds strength and cannot be discarded altogether.
58. In order to complete the chain of sequence of events as per the prosecution story it was also pertinent to prove the presence of accused persons at the place of incident.
59. As per the prosecution story accused Vipin is seen with the deceased Ashok entering the locality from the main gate around 12:19 pm. He is again seen entering the locality at 12:38 pm alongwith other accused persons.
60. As per PW19 Vinod around 12 to 12:15 pm his deceased brother Ashok called him and informed him that accused Vipin had come and was demanding money. He asked his brother Ashok to tell Vipin that he did not have money. Thereafter around 1-1.15 pm he was informed by his brother Lakhan PW11 that his brother Ashok was murdered. When he reached his house he was informed by his uncle Ramesh PW10 that he has seen accused Vipin in the back gali from his house POOJA while he was taking payment from one shop and that when he TALWAR called Vipin, he ignored him and went away. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 62 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:31 +0530 FIR no.243/12
61. Further PW2 Bheem who is uncle of deceased deposed that on 04.07.2012 in the noon while he was coming back after milk supply he saw Ashok in the company of accused Vipin and four other persons and one Sushil was also sitting in the park.
62. In order to connect Vipin with the offence it was suggested to PW19 Vinod that he was using mobile no.9958547435 at the relevant time and the same was in the name of his uncle Ramesh. His brother Ashok was using mobile number 8802738780 which was in the name of his aunt Smt. Baby.
63. Neither PW10 Ramesh deposed that PW19 Vinod was using the number issued in his name nor his aunt Baby was brought in the witness box to depose that deceased Ashok was using the phone number issued in her name.
64. Further no CAF or CDR of the aforesaid numbers have been brought on record to prove the fact of conversation at the relevant time between PW19 Vinod and deceased Ashok.
65. Further the last seen theory brought in the testimony of PW2 Bheem appears to be an after thought as the said fact was not mentioned in his statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC.
66. In case his testimony is discerned it would reveal that initially he specifically named accused Sushil to be present POOJA in park alongwith accused Vipin, his associates and deceased TALWAR Ashok but when the CCTV footage is played he stated that he Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 63 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:51:38 +0530 was not aware about the names of the three accused persons except Vipin when he had seen the CD during investigation. Meaning thereby he could not identify accused Sushil at that time.
67. In case he did not know accused Sushil prior to incident then how he mentioned his name alongwith accused Vipin and deceased Ashok to be sitting in the park before the incident.
68. From the aforesaid it is clear that this last seen theory has been incorporated later in order to complete the chain of circumstances.
69. It is stated by PW19 Vinod that he was informed by his uncle Ramesh PW10 that he had seen accused Vipin going from the back of the gali of their house and upon being called he did not respond. PW10 Ramesh Chand deposed that 15 minutes prior to receiving of information from Vinod regarding the murder of Ashok he had seen accused Vipin going towards the spot. But he did not inform the constable about the same when he reached the place of incident.
70. Prosecution has strongly relied upon the CCTV footage where allegedly accused Vipin is first seen at around 12:19 pm alongwith deceased Ashok and later around 12:38 pm with the other accused persons.
71. As per the prosecution story the CCTV cameras POOJA TALWAR were installed in the locality and the same were checked from the Digitally signed SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 64 of 72 by POOJA FIR no.243/12 TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:51:48 +0530 office of PW7 O.P. Gulati who was the President of the RWA where deceased Ashok was residing.
72. As per PW7 O.P. Gulati he was requested by the family members of deceased Ashok to see the CCTV footage he identified deceased Ashok in the footage and the family members of Ashok identified one Vipin firstly going with deceased Ashok and thereafter entering the locality with other persons. Accused Vipin was identified by Vinod and Bheem when the CCTV footage was run in his office. He also identified accused Sushil and Languria in the footage as informed to him by Vinod and Bheem.
73. He admitted that the footage played in the court was provided by him to the IO. He further stated that " It is correct that the place of murder is not covered by concerned CCTV Cameras. (Vol. There are two houses/buildings of about 20ft width each, between the concerned house and the nearest camera. The concerned house can be accessed from another way from the backside other than the way coming from the main gate shown in the CCTV footage."
74. PW8 S.K. Dass took the footage from the cameras installed outside M/s. Nagi Jewellers as well as from the cameras installed inside Manak Vihara Colony in the pendrive and converted them into DVDs.
75. This witness issued certificate under Section 65 B of POOJA Evidence Act regarding the preparation of the DVD from the TALWAR CCTV footage. He also deposed with respect to cameras working Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 65 of 72 15:51:54 +0530 FIR no.243/12 in the proper order at the time of inspection. He admitted in the cross-examination that prior to the present incident he had never checked the cameras and footage at Manak Vihar Colony at any point of time.
76. In case the authenticity of the footage in the DVD is to be taken as substantive evidence then the same has to pass the strict test of being taken by an expert from the cameras which throughout have been in a proper working condition and were under regular maintenance.
77. The aforesaid witness has categorically stated that he had never checked the cameras prior to the incident. Testimony of such a witness cannot be relied upon to prove that the cameras throughout i.e. prior, at the time of incident and at the time when the footage was taken into a pendrive was in proper working condition. Moreover he conceded to the fact that the boys who were identified by the public persons are not visible in the CD Ex.P-X.
78. In case testimony of these aforesaid two witnesses PW7 O.P. Gulati and PW8 S.K. Dass is discerned it can best be held that accused Vipin is seen with deceased Ashok at some point of time on the relevant day but it cannot be taken as far as that he went inside the house with Ashok as well. It is admitted by O.P. Gulati PW7 that house of deceased Ashok is not covered within the range of camera. It is not seen in the footage that accused Vipin is entering inside the house with deceased Ashok. POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 66 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 FIR no.243/12 15:51:59 +0530
79. In case the second footage is taken as the sole basis for conviction of accused persons since they are seen entering one gate together will be a far fetched imagination that the murder of deceased Ashok was committed by them.
80. So far as accused Ram Kishan and Kaushal Pal Singh are concerned none of the witness has identified them in the footage. They have been implicated only on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused which cannot be read in evidence against them.
81. With respect to accused Sushil, Vipin and Languria, though few witnesses have identified them as the persons seen in the footage however only on the basis of their entering the gate of the locality where the deceased was residing (though the place of incident seen in the footage is not identified specifically by any of the witnesses) will not be sufficient to hold them guilty.
82. Prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused persons have tried to bring forth the following sequence of events:
(i) Deceased Ashok is seen with accused Vipin entering the colony where the house of deceased was located.
(ii) Accused Vipin asks for some money from deceased Ashok who refuses to give the same.
(iii) Deceased Ashok called his brother Vinod PW19 that accused POOJA Vipin is present with him in the house and asking him for money. TALWAR
(iv) Accused Vipin then leaves the colony of the deceased and Digitally signed by POOJA SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 67 of 72 TALWAR FIR no.243/12 Date: 2026.01.27 15:52:28 +0530 returned back with his associates i.e. accused Sushil, Ram Kishan, Kaushal Pal and Languria.
(v) They all enter the house of the deceased and demand money, upon his refusal kill him.
(vi) Accused Sushil, Vipin and Languria are identified by the releatives of deceased in the footage and the other two accused Ram Kishan and Kaushal Pal are apprehended on disclosure of their co-accused.
(vii) At instance of accused Vipin his blood stained pant and shoes are recovered which matched with the blood of the deceased in FSL.
83. It has been discussed in detail in the preceding paragraphs that prosecution failed to prove that a call was received by Vinod PW19 from his deceased brother Ashok informing him that accused Vipin was at his residence and was demanding money. The numbers allegedly used by PW19 Vinod and deceased Ashok were not in their names and the respective persons in whose names the numbers were issued were not examined.
84. The CCTV footage would also be of no resort to the prosecution as firstly the same has been collected by PW8 S.K. Dass who has admitted that he is not an expert to examine CCTV camera and footage as he does not possess any degree or diploma in this regard. Moreover he had never earlier checked the cameras installed in the locality. Further more he himself admitted that the suspected boys identified by the relatives of the POOJA TALWAR deceased are not visible in the footage.
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 68 of 72 15:52:38 +0530 FIR no.243/12
85. The witnesses who were called from the village of the deceased gave different versions and few of them simply deposed that they were shown the accused persons by the IO in the police station and were got identified. Only three accused persons i.e. Vipin, Sushil and Languria were identified in the footage by some of the witnesses. Identities of those witnesses and their source of information about the accused persons have not been proved by IO during investigation. Hence only for the fact that some unknown persons are produced in the witness box to identify the accused in the footage cannot be taken as an evidence against them to prove the guilt.
86. It would also be pertinent to mention here that when the DVD was played in the court, the faces of persons entering the gate were not clearly visible. Only one DVD i.e. the one which covered Manak Vihar locality could be played and the other which covered Nagi Jewellers could not be played.
87. In order to use the aforesaid evidence against the accused persons this court had to be itself convinced that the persons visible in the footage were none other than the accused persons, however from the footage or the photographs brought on record it cannot be held that the persons visible in the footage were the accused persons only.
88. Moreover, only for the fact that the accused persons were seen entering the locality, they cannot be held guilty for POOJA committing the murder of deceased Ashok.
TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:52:43 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 69 of 72 FIR no.243/12
89. In so far as recovery of clothes and shoes at the instance of accused Vipin is concerned it has already been discussed in detail in the preceding paragraphs that the same is not covered under the ambit of Section 27 of Evidence Act.
90. There is no denial of fact that a life has been lost but only in the quest to search the perpetrator any person connected with the deceased in some manner cannot be held guilty.
91. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Jose Vs. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Koyilandy & Ors. Crl. Appeal no.919/2013 decided on 03.10.2016 that: It is a trite proposition of law, that suspicion however grave, it cannot take the place of proof and that the prosecution in order to succeed on a criminal charge cannot afford to lodge its case in the realm of "may be true" but has to essentially elevate it to Lonk the grade of "must be true". In a criminal prosecution, the court has a duty to ensure that mere conjectures or suspicion do not take the place of legal proof and in a situation where a reasonable doubt is entertained in the backdrop of the evidence available, to prevent miscarriage of justice, benefit of doubt is to be extended to the accused. Such a doubt essentially has to be reasonable and not imaginary, fanciful, intangible or non- existent but as entertainable by an impartial, prudent and analytical mind, judged on the touch stone of reason and common sense. It is also a primary postulation in criminal jurisprudence that if two views are possible on the evidence available, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the one favourable POOJA to the accused ought to be adopted." TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 70 of 72 Date: 2026.01.27 15:52:48 +0530 FIR no.243/12
92. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has not been able to establish the relevant factors of circumstantial evidence i.e. :
(1) The circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established; (2) Those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; (3) The circumstances, taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and (4) The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.
93. The prosecution has not been able to prove that all the facts so established are consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. The prosecution has not been able to establish a chain of evidence so complete so as to establish that it was only the accused persons and nobody else who could have murdered the victim. In view of the aforesaid discussion, prosecution failed to prove the offence with which the accused persons have been charged. Accordingly accused persons deserve to be acquitted under Section 120B IPC, Section 396 IPC, 302 IPC, 201 and 34 IPC.
POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.01.27 15:52:54 +0530 SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 71 of 72 FIR no.243/12
94. In view of aforesaid findings, prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons. Accordingly accused Sushil Kumar, Vipin Kumar, Khushal Pal Singh, Ram Kishan and Languria are acquitted from commission of offence under Section 120B IPC Section 396/34 IPC Section 302/34 IPC Section 201/34 IPC.
POOJA
Announced in the open court (POOJA TALWAR) TALWAR
on 27.01.2026 ASJ-01(FTC) West District,
Tis Hazari Court, Delhi Digitally signed
by POOJA
TALWAR
Date: 2026.01.27
15:53:00 +0530
SC No. 56731/16 State. Vs. Sushil Kumar & ORS. Page : 72 of 72
FIR no.243/12