Delhi District Court
State vs Akash Chauhan And 3 Ors on 23 April, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SUSHANT CHANGOTRA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)
EAST DISTRICT, DELHI
Session Case No.: 81/2017
State Vs : Akash Chauhan & Ors
FIR No. : 382/2016
U/s : 302/34 IPC & 25/27/59 of Arms Act
PS : Geeta Colony
CNR No.: DLET01-002045-2017
Date of Institution : 24.01.2017
Date of Judgment reserved on 17.04.2025
Date of Judgment : 23.04.2025
Brief Details Of The Case
Offence complained of or
proved : 302/120-B/107/34 IPC
Name of the accused :
Srl. No. Name Srl. No. Name
1 Akash Chauhan @ Bittu 2 Mohd. Kamil @ Nahid
S/o Late Sh. Shyam S/o Sh. Deen
Sunder R/o 9/5, Geeta Mohammad R/o 50,
Colony, Delhi. Sarai Bahleen, Kotwali,
Meerut, U.P.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony
State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 1 of 67
3 Mohd. Kamar S/o Sh. 4 Mohd. Nazim S/o Sh.
Mohd. Hanif R/o H. No. Munna R/o Ahmad
421, Prahlad Nagar, Nagar, Hari Ka Pull,
Lisadi Gate, Meerut, U. P. Gali no. 1, Lisadi Gate,
Meerut, U. P.
5 Dilshad S/o Mohd. Hasin 6 Farukh Mazhar S/o
R/o 166, Khureji Khas, Mohd. Mohsin R/o
School Wali Gali, Delhi- Mohalla Sabun Gram,
51. Gujri Bazar, Meerut, U.
P.
7 Bilal Tansir @ Manhar 8 Babu Waseem S/o Babu
S/o Sh. Mohd. Khan R/o 106,
Samshuddin R/o Gujri Vikaspuri Colony,
Basar, Karamali, Meerut, Meerut, UP.
UP.
9 Sumit Chauhan S/o Sh. 10 Kush Chauhan S/o Sh.
Vipin Kumar R/o 9/66, Sushil Kumar R/o
Geeta Colony, Delhi 10/91, Geeta Colony,
Delhi.
Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final order : Acquitted
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony
State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 2 of 67
JUDGMENT
1. In this case, all accused i.e. Akash Chauhan, Dilshad, Babu Waseem, Mohd. Kamil, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farookh Mazhar, Bilal Tansir @ Manhar, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan are facing trial for having committed murder of Vinod Sharma @ Veenu Pandit after entering into criminal conspiracy to kill him.
2. The brief facts of the present case are as follows:-
(a) On 23.10.2016 at about 6 PM, a PCR call was received at PS Geeta Colony and the information was recorded vide DD No. 24A. It was alleged that 3-4 boys had fired gunshots at a person in House No. 10/90, Geeta Colony. The said DD was marked to ASI Rajender Kumar. He alongwith other police officials went to the spot i.e. Office of Shri Shri Traders at 10/90 Geeta Colony and found that glass of the door and windows was broken and blood had spilled on the floor. Two pistols, few empty cartridges, and leads were also found lying on the floor. The scene of crime was preserved and the crime team was summoned. No eyewitness was found at the spot.
(b) ASI Rajender came to know that 3-4 persons had come on motorcycle and they fired several rounds of gunshots at Vinod Sharma @ Veenu Pandit. The said persons had been taken to Max Hospital. In the meantime, duty officer telephonically informed ASI Rajender Singh that Vinod Sharma had been FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 3 of 67 declared brought dead at Max Hospital. ASI Rajender went to Max Hospital, Patparganj and obtained MLC No. 5954/16 of Vinod Sharma. ASI Rajender Singh inspected the dead body of deceased Vinod Sharma. The doctor also handed over sealed clothes of the deceased, one lead and sample seal to ASI Rajender. Thereafter, on the basis of DD No. 24A and MLC, ASI Rajender Singh prepared a rukka and sent it to the police station for registration of FIR.
(c) The FIR was registered and investigation was entrusted to Insp. Pawan Kumar, i.e., SHO of PS Geeta Colony.
During the course of investigation, IO inspected the spot and prepared site plan at the instance of ASI Rajender Kumar. IO seized clothes of deceased, one lead, personal search articles of deceased and sample seal which were produced by ASI Rajender Singh. IO also seized the following exhibits from the spot i.e.:-
(i) One country-made pistol loaded with three live cartridges;
(ii) One country-made pistol loaded with five live cartridges;
(iii) Eight empty cartridges with 7.65 KF mark and two empty cartridges with 13/14 311 mark and four leads;
(iv) One live cartridge 7.65 KF and lead;
(v) Blood from sofa set, gun, table, main door handle, floor, and main entrance; &
(vi) Seat cover of sofa set.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 4 of 67
(d) In addition, IO also seized two mobile phones of the deceased from the spot and the DVR of CCTV installed at H. No. 10/6, Geeta Colony. On 24.10.2016, postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted. The doctor handed over inquest papers, dead body, viscera, recovered bullet, 3 pellets, hand wash and sample seal to the IO.
(e) Postmortem examination report bearing No. 1895/16 dated 24.10.16 was obtained, wherein the doctor opined that "All the injuries were antemortem in origin and fresh before death. Time since death was about 12 to 24 hours from the time of autopsy procedure and the cause of death was combined effect of cranio cerebral damage & haemorrhage & shock as a result of injury to vital organs consequent upon projectile fired by firearm weapon which was sufficient to cause death in an ordinary course of nature."
(f) During the course of investigation, IO recorded statement of Sh. Vicky Ghorai i.e. peon in the office of Shri Shri Traders Co. and he stated that on 23.10.2016 at about 4 PM, accused Akash Chauhan came to the office, thereafter at about 5 PM Vinod Sharma also came there. At about 5:45 PM, 3-4 persons entered the office and their faces were covered with handkerchiefs. The said 3/4 persons started firing bullets at Vinod. Akash also fired a bullet at Vinod Sharma and all of them ran away from the spot. Vinod Sharma fell on the floor and blood was oozing out from his body. Then, Deepak @ Kale and others came to the spot and took Vinod Sharma to the hospital.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 5 of 67
(g) IO also recorded statements of other witnesses namely Subhash Chandra and Rakesh Singh @ Chillen, Ms. Deepika Sharma (wife of deceased) and Ms. Nirupa Sharma (mother-in-law of deceased). In her statement u/s 161 Cr. PC, Ms. Deepika Sharma stated that her husband had given a huge amount of money to Akash Chauhan, Sumit Chauhan, Cheenu Chauhan and others on interest. Her husband had told her that the said persons were not returning the money and their behaviour had changed. She also stated that on 23.10.2016 her husband went to the office as Akash had called him to settle the matter.
After sometime, her husband called her and informed that Sumit had threatened him and then left left the office after calling some persons. She stated that her husband was scared and he asked them to come to the office. She told the said facts to her mother, who also called Vinod Sharma and he again narrated the same facts to her as well. Thereafter, they left for the Geeta Colony, but on the way, she received a call from an unknown person that her husband had been shot and was being taken to Max Hospital. They went to Max Hospital and came to know that her husband had been declared brought dead. Ms. Nirupa Sharma also gave the same statement as Ms. Deepika Sharma.
(h) Efforts were made to search accused Akash, but he was not found at his house or other hideouts and his mobile phone was also found switched off. On 26.10.2016, accused Akash was apprehended and interrogated. During interrogation, Akash confessed his involvement in the murder of Vinod FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 6 of 67 Sharma. Accused Akash disclosed that he had contacted Wasim and paid sum of Rs. 7 lakhs to him. Thereafter, according to the plan, on 23.10.2016, Wasim alongwith his associates killed Vinod. Akash Chauhan was arrested and produced before the court and he was remanded to police custody till 2.11.2016. During interrogation, accused Akash kept on giving contradictory and different versions.
(i) On 13.11.2016 at about 11 PM, a secret information was received that persons involved in the murder of Vinod Sharma @ Veenu Pandit would come to ISBT, Anand Vihar from Meerut. Accordingly, on 14.11.2016 at around 2 AM, a raid was conducted and three persons who were identified as Mohd. Kamil @ Nahid, Mohd. Kamar and Mohd. Nazim were apprehended at the instance of secret informer.
(j) IO interrogated all the abovementioned accused persons. Mohd. Nazim confessed his involvement in the murder of Vinod Pandit and revealed that one Waseem R/o Meerut had called him and Mazhar at Dasna Jail and he asked them to contact Akash through Dilshad regarding execution of murder of one Vinod Pandit. Mazhar contacted Dilshad, who provided mobile number of Akash. Mazhar contacted Akash. About one month prior to the incident, they met Akash and made planning to kill Vinod Sharma. Akash told them that he had already given Rs. 6 lakhs to Waseem and he would pay Rs. 7 lakhs for the murder of Vinod Sharma. They also conducted recce of the streets around the office of Akash in Geeta Colony. On FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 7 of 67 22.10.2016, he (Mohd. Nazim) alongwith Mazhar, Manhar, Kamar and Kamil came to ISBT Anand Vihar. Then Akash brought them to a hotel and they stayed in the hotel.
(k) On 23.10.2016, Akash brought them to a house in Geeta Colony and provided two country-made pistols, live cartridges, one mobile phone and two motorcycles to them. Then as per their plan, they went to office of Akash and Vinod Sharma and Akash were present there. They fired bullets at Vinod Sharma and Akash also fired bullets at Vinod. Then all of them ran away from the spot. Accused Mohd. Kamar and Mohd. Kamil also disclosed the same facts in their respective disclosure statements.
(l) The aforementioned three accused persons were arrested. During investigation, all of them pointed out the place of incident i.e., office of Shri Shri Trading Co., 10/90 Ground Floor, Geeta Colony. They also pointed out hotel SS Residency, Gujarat Vihar, where they had stayed on 22.10.2016. The receptionist of the hotel also identified the accused persons.
(m) During interrogation, all three accused persons kept on giving contradictory versions. During investigation, it was revealed that suspect Waseem son of Babu was resident of Mohalla Loharpura, Vikaspuri Colony, PS Lisadi Gate, Meerut, UP and he had been arrested and was lodged in Dasna Jail in relation to FIR No. 1458/16 u/s 25 Arms Act and FIR No. 1457/16 u/s 307 of PS Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP.
(n) The place of occurrence was inspected by the Draftsman i.e. HC Sonu Kaushik, Crime Branch. Exhibits of the FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 8 of 67 case were sent to FSL Rohini for examination. The DVR was also sent to FSL Rohini. Ms. Deepika Sharma, wife of deceased Vinod Sharma filed WP (Crl) No. 3325/16 before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and then the investigation of the present case was transferred to Crime Branch and hence investigation was entrusted to IO Insp. Pankaj Singh.
(o) During the investigation, Ms. Geetanjali i.e. receptionist of Hotel SS Residency stated that on 22.10.2016, one Dilshad (who was friend of owner of the hotel namely Satish Soni) had come with 3-4 persons and he took keys of 3-4 rooms and went upstairs. However, as they did not come back she called Dilshad (who was in Room No. 304) on his mobile number 9873098428 from the landline phone number 65006656 and asked him to enter the details in the register. Dilshad responded very rudely by saying that he would make the entries soon and send the proof of ID. She was frightened due to rude response of Dilshad and did not dare to ask him again. She handed over duty to Vishal and asked him to collect the IDs of the persons staying in Room No. 304 and make the entries in the register. On the next morning, when she came on duty, Vishal told her that despite his request, Dilshad had not provided the IDs. In the meantime, she saw Dilshad and the same persons leaving the hotel. She again asked him to make the entries, to which Dilshad replied that they were not checking out and would be back soon, but they did not return. She stated that due to fear, she did not reveal these facts in her earlier statement.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 9 of 67
(p) The statement of Rajesh Kumar Rai, service boy in the hotel, was also recorded. He stated that on 22.10.2016, he was on duty and Ms. Geetanjali told him to attend to Dilshad and his guests in Room No. 304. In the evening, he went to Room No. 304 with water. The door was opened by Dilshad, whom he knew as he was a friend of the owner, Sh. Satish Soni, and visited the hotel very often. He was not allowed into the room as Dilshad took the water and closed the door. In the evening, someone brought food packets for Dilshad. He took the food packets to Room No. 304. This time also, Dilshad opened the door, took the food packets, and closed the door.
(q) CDRs of suspects and witnesses were analyzed. On the basis of the analysis of CDRs, it was revealed that there were 15 calls (incoming and outgoing) between Rakesh Chillen (9540822859) and Dilshad (9873098428) on 22.10.2016 and 23.10.2016 only. There was no other call between them during the last six months. On this, Rakesh @ Chillen was again interrogated who stated that he knows Dilshad as he comes to the office of Shri Shri Traders Co. regularly, but they never talk on mobile. However, on 22.10.2016 and 23.10.2016, Akash took his mobile several times and made calls to Dilshad and Dilshad also called at his mobile and asked him to hand over the mobile to Akash. He never had any telephonic conversation with Dilshad before or after the incident.
(r) During inspection of records and visitor registers of Dasna Jail and Meerut Jail it was revealed that Waseem was FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 10 of 67 brought to Dasna Jail on 11.09.2016 after being arrested in FIR No. 1458/16 u/s 25 Arms Act and FIR No. 1457/16 u/s 307 IPC, PS Sahibabad. His contact number was mentioned as 8430801380. The CDR of the mobile was analyzed, which revealed that mobile phone number 8430801380 was not in use since 10.09.2016 and he was in judicial custody since 11.09.2016. Further analysis revealed that there were 98 calls between 8430801380 and 9873098428 (mobile of Dilshad). During inspection of the visitor register at Dasna Jail, it was also found that one Dilshad S/o Haseen visited Dasna Jail to meet Waseem on 03.10.2016 and 06.10.2016. The location of the mobile phone of Dilshad (9873098428) was also found near Dasna Jail on these two dates. The location of Dilshad's number was also found near the SS Residency Hotel on 22.10.2016.
(s) The subscriber name of mobile number 9873098428 was Dilshad S/o Haseen, R/o H. No. 166, Ground Floor, School Wali Gali, Khureji Khas. Waseem and accused Kamil also talked twice on mobiles. The subscribers of mobile numbers 9871679401 and 9971769973 were Vishal R/o 9/14 Geeta Colony, Delhi and Vishal R/o 3653 Jain Mohalla, Gali No. 1, Dharampura, Delhi, respectively.
(t) During investigation, it was found that (i) the subscriber of mobile number 8430801380 was Arif who was resident of 28, Kheda Balrampur, Salempur, Meerut, U.P, (ii) the mobile number 7017720150 was used by Nazim and its subscriber was one Mohd Danish Ansari s/o Mohd Rafik R/o FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 11 of 67 2040, Gali No. 3, Mohammad Ali Ahmad Nagar, Meerut, U.P.
(iii) The mobile number 8476929212 was used by Kamil and its subscriber was Mrs. Huma w/o Din Mohd. R/o Sarai Bahleem, Meerut.
(u) IO made efforts, but Arif was not found at his house and was reportedly working somewhere in Hapur. The addresses of Mohd Danish Ansari and Mrs. Huma could not be traced and it was concluded by IO that the said SIMs might have been taken on fake IDs.
(v) CDR analysis memo of relevant calls was prepared and placed on file. A scaled site plan was also prepared. Accused Waseem and Dilshad were absconding. Polygraph tests of Sumit Chauhan and Kush were to be conducted at the Directorate of Forensic Science, Gandhinagar, Gujarat.
(w) On 06.02.2017, Mrs. Nirupa Sharma produced a CD of footage near the place of incident, which was sent to FSL. Photographs of the footage were taken. She also produced a diary in which Vinod Sharma used to note down his financial transactions. The CD and diary were taken into possession.
3. The court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offences. After completion of necessary legal formalities u/s 209 Cr.P.C, the case file was committed to the Court of Sessions. Pursuant to order of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, East, the matter was fixed for hearing on point of charge. Vide order dated 11.05.2018, charge u/s 120-B IPC & 107 IPC read with section 302 IPC was framed against all accused persons FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 12 of 67 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In addition, charge u/s 302 IPC r/w section 120-B IPC & in the alternative charge u/s 302/34 IPC was framed against accused persons namely Akash Chauhan, Dilshad, Mohd. Kamil @ Nahid, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farookh Mazhar and Bilal Tansir was also framed and all accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to establish its case, prosecution examined 38 witnesses. A brief account of the depositions made by the prosecution witnesses is reproduced herein below:-
Evidence of Eye-Witnesses:
5. PW-1 Vickey Ghorai did not support the case of prosecution and deposed that in the year 2016, he was working as an office boy in the office of Shri Trading Company, 10/90, Geeta Colony, Delhi belonging to accused Akash Chauhan. On 23.10.2016 at 11 am accused Akash Chauhan came to the aforesaid office and left the said office at about 2:30 pm. At about 5 PM Vinu Pandit came to the aforesaid office and after about 10 minutes Sh. Rakesh Chhillan also came there.
Thereafter he alongwith Rakesh Chhillan went outside for having tea. When they were taking tea he saw that public persons had gathered near the aforesaid office. He alongwith Rakesh went there and saw that glass of office was broken/ damaged and Vinu Pandit was lying in injured condition on the floor in a pool of blood. The neighbor namely Subhash @ FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 13 of 67 Kharoti called police at 100 number and public persons took injured Vinu Pandit to the hospital.
The witness further deposed that he went to the house of accused Akash Chauhan, but he was not found present there. He returned back to the office and the body of Vinu Pandit had already been taken to the hospital in a car by public persons. Police came to the spot and interrogated him. Thereafter, he was taken to police station. Police officials pressurized him to take the name of Akash and to state that Akash had fired in the aforesaid office and killed Vinu Pandit. He was detained in PS Geeta Colony for three days. He was beaten and pressurized by the police officials.
6. PW-2 Rakesh Singh @ Chillan also did not support the case of prosecution. He deposed that on 23.10.2016 at about 5 PM, he went to the office of accused Akash Chauhan situated at 10/90, Geeta Colony, Delhi and met Vickey outside the office who used to work there. He entered in the office and saw that Binu Pandit @ Vinod Sharma was sitting alone in the office. Thereafter, he alongwith Vickey went to nearby tea stall situated behind the gali. After about half an hour they returned to the office and saw that public persons had gathered at the office. He went inside and saw that Binu Pandit @ Vinod Sharma was lying dead on the floor in a pool of blood. He checked pulse of Binu Pandit and found that there was no palpitation. He shifted Binu Pandit to the Max Hospital in a four wheeler with the help FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 14 of 67 of one Kaale. In the hospital, doctor declared Binu Pandit as brought dead. Police interrogated him and he was taken to PS Geeta Colony.
The witness further deposed that on 21.10.2016 he alongwith his friend Bantu went to find a room on rent and they went to the shop of property dealer namely Dilshad. The said Dilshad told them to come on the next day and they exchanged their mobile numbers with each other. After about 2-3 days, Dilshad called him on mobile phone and asked him to come on 23.10.2016 in the morning for taking room on rent. He alongwith Bantu went to Khureji in the morning at about 7 AM, but till 12 noon they did not find any room. Dilshad told them to come in the evening for finalizing the room on rent. Thereafter, he went to the house of accused Sumit, but he was not there. Thereafter, at about 4:45/5:00 PM, he came to the office at Geeta Colony. Police did not record his statement and took his signatures on blank papers and he was detained in police station for about three days.
Evidence of Public Witnesses-
7. PW-3 Subhash Chand deposed that on 23.10.2016 he was present at his office situated at 10/90, Geeta Colony and office of accused Akash Chauhan was adjacent to his office. At about 3/3:30 p.m he went to his home for having lunch and at about 5:30/5:45 pm when he returned back to his office he saw that glass of the office of accused Akash Chauhan was broken FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 15 of 67 and blood was lying there. Vicky told him that 5-7 persons had fired upon Veenu Pandit. Thereafter, he called police at 100 number from his mobile having number 9718947770.
8. PW-4 Gaurav Mandal deposed that he was running a gold workshop situated at 10/6, Geeta Colony, Delhi and in the month of October, 2016 police officials visited his workshop and seized the DVR of CCTV (marked as PW4/Article 1) installed at his workshop vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A.
9. PW-5 Ms. Geetanjali Tandon deposed that in November, 2016 she was working in S. S. Residency Guest House, Preet Vihar, Delhi as receptionist. Mr. Satish Soni and Amandeep Singh were the owners of said hotel. In November, 2016 some police officials came to the hotel and inquired from her about some visitors. As per register, one Mr. Rizwan had stayed in room no. 304. Police officials seized the said entry register vide seizure memo PW5/A. She also identified said register in the court i.e. Ex. PW5/Article 1. She also stated that as per record Rizwan stayed in the hotel on 22.10.2016 and he checked in at about 11:20 a.m and checked out on the same day at about 1:30 p.m. She obtained copy of Adhar card of Rizwan bearing no. 329982603303.
10. PW-6 Ms. Deepika Sharma i.e. wife of deceased Vinod Sharma also did not totally support the case of prosecution. She deposed that her husband used to deal in finance and he was having his office at Geeta Colony, Delhi.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 16 of 67
On 23.10.2016 at about 5:30 PM someone called at her mobile and said that her husband had been shot and sustained bullet injuries and he was being taken to Max Hospital, Patparganj. Thereafter, she alongwith her mother Ms. Nirupa Sharma and brother Deepak Sharma immediately went to Max Hospital and learnt that her husband had died. She also deposed that accused Akash Chauhan and Sumit were the business partners of her husband and her husband used to tell her that he had given lot of money to accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit, Vishal and Honey.
11. PW-7 Deepak Sharma i.e. brother in law of deceased Vinod Sharma deposed that on 23.10.2016 at about 5/5:30 PM he received a call on his mobile no. 8860897133 from his mother Ms. Nirupa Sharma and sister Ms. Deepika Sharma and he went to house of his sister. Then all of them sat in the case and his sister received a call that someone had shot Vinod Sharma and he was being taken to Max Hospital. They went to Max Hospital and came to know that Vinod Sharma had died. After three days he visited mortuary of Sabzi Mandi and dead body of his brother in law was handed over to them after postmortem examination. He identified dead body of his brother in law Vinod Sharma and identification memo Ex. PW7/A was prepared. Police officials also showed a diary containing some monetary transaction details to them and then police officials seized the same vide memo Ex.PW7/B. FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 17 of 67
12. PW-8 Ms. Nirupa Sharma i.e. mother in law of deceased also did not support the prosecution's version. She only deposed that on 23.10.2016 she alongwith her daughter were present at Flat no. S-3, Plot no. 15, Budh Bazar Road, Gate no. 8, Shalimar Garden and at about 4/4:30 PM her son in law Vinod Sharma left the said flat for his office i.e. Sri Sri Associates at 10th Block, Geeta Colony, Delhi. At about 5:45 P. M. her daughter received a call from an unknown person that Vinod Sharma had sustained gun shot injury. She immediately informed her son Deepak Sharma who also came there. While they were on the way to office of Vinod Sharma, her daughter received a call that Vinod Sharma was being taken to Max Hospital. Thereafter, they went to Max Hospital and came to know that Vinod Sharma had died. She stated that accused Akash Chauhan and Sumit were partners of Vinod Sharma and accused Kush was younger cousin of Akash Chauhan and Dilshad used to visit office of Vinod Sharma.
She further deposed that at about 5:09 PM she had called Vinod Sharma from mobile no. 9811742599. On 20.01.2017 she visited the office of Crime Branch, Shakarpur, Delhi. On 20.01.2017, she handed over one diary of Vinod Sharma to the IO i.e. the day when she saw the footage. She identified her signatures on the seizure memos Ex. PW7/B & Ex. PW7/C. On 16.02.2018, she again visited office of Crime Branch, Shakarpur and IO Insp. Arun Chauhan showed a FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 18 of 67 footage by playing a CD, but she failed to identify the aforesaid diary and CCTV footage in the court.
13. PW-9 Deepak Kumar @ Kale, PW10 Mohd.
Aslam, PW-11 Vishal and PW-12 Amit Kumar also did not support the case of prosecution.
PW-9 Deepak Kumar @ Kale deposed that he met deceased Vinod Sharma for the first time when he was lodged in Tihar Jail as Vinod Sharma was also lodged in the same jail. He was acquainted with accused Akash Chauhan and accused Sumit Chauhan prior to this case as accused Akash Chauhan was residents of her locality.
PW-10 Mohd. Aslam @ Guddu deposed that he was acquainted with the deceased Vinod Sharma @ Veenu Pandit as he had met him through a common friend.
PW-11 Vishal deposed that accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit and Kush were his brothers. He was having mobile phone number 9871679401 and 9971769973 which were issued on his ID.
PW-12 Amit Kumar identified accused Akash Chauhan and accused Sumit Chauhan in the court and deposed that he used to work for both of them as Driver. In October, 2016 at the time of murder of Vinod Sharma he was working with accused Akash Chauhan as Driver.
14. PW-13 Satish Soni was yet another witness who did not support the case of prosecution as per statement recorded u/s FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 19 of 67 161 Cr. PC. He deposed that in the year 2016 he was running a hotel in the name and style of 'SS' Residency at H. No. 4, Gujrat Vihar, Preet Vihar, Delhi. In November, 2016 police officials came to aforesaid hotel and inquired about Geetanjali who was Manager at his hotel. Accused Dilshad was the property dealer and his office was situated at Khureji, Delhi. He met accused Dilshad for finding a suitable property. In the year 2016, he had another manager namely Vishal. He was having mobile phone no. 9911093202. He stated that on 22.10.2016 Ms. Geetanjali was on duty and Vishal was on night duty as Manager. On the next day, he attended his duty in the hotel.
15. PW-14 Rajesh Kumar deposed that in the year 2016 he was working as Hotel Attendant at 'SS' Residency Swasthya Vihar, Delhi and Mr. Satish Soni was the owner of said hotel. In the year 2016 two police officials came to the hotel and he handed over his ID to them. He also stated that one Geetanjali was the Manager at the hotel.
16. PW-33 Shyam Sharma deposed that police officials of PS Geeta Calony called him in PS and enquired from him. He told police that Ram Kumar was his elder brother who had died in the year 2014. His brother was an auto rikshaw driver and Chillan was his friend. Police officials had shown CAF of mobile no. 9540822859 to him and he told the police that his brother Ram Kumar had purchased the said sim and then given it to Rakesh @ Chillan.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 20 of 67
17. PW-35 Puneet Gupta also did not fully support the prosecution's case. He deposed that on 23.10.2016 at 2/2:30 PM, he met Deepak @ Kale outside Shayamlal College and then he alongwith Deepak went to his factory in Gandhi Nagar. On 26.10.2016 / 27.10.2016 he went to the office of crime branch at Shakarpur as he was called there. Police officials enquired from him about the murder of some person.
Nodal Officials-
18. PW-17 Pawan Singh, Nodal Officer, Vodafone Idea Ltd. proved following documents: CAF and CDR of mobile phone number 8476929212 for the period from 01.07.2016 to 06.01.2017 i.e. Ex. PW17/B and Ex. PW17/C respectively. He also stated that the said number was issued in the name of Huma C/o Deen Mohd.
CAF and CDR of mobile phone number 9540822859 for the above-said period i.e. Ex. PW17/D and Ex. PW17/E respectively and stated that the said number was issued in the name of Rakesh S/o Charan Singh.
CAF and CDR of mobile phone number 9911224004 for the period from 01.07.2016 to 23.01.2017 i.e. Ex. PW17/F and Ex. PW17/G respectively. The said number was issued in the name of Gurmeet Singh S/o Preetam Singh. He proved a certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act issued by him as Ex. PW17/A. He tendered all ID chart with regard to above-mentioned mobile numbers i.e. Ex. PW17/H. In addition, he also proved CDRs of mobile number 9953663289, FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 21 of 67 8447387799, 8586864080, 9873042145, 8860720801 and 7290936145 for the period from 01.04.2016 to 19.01.2017 i.e. Ex. PW17/I to Ex. PW17/N respectively. He proved Cell ID card Ex.PW17/O and certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act with respect to above-mentioned record Ex. PW17/P. The witness also proved CAF of mobile number 9873042145 i.e. Ex. PW17/S. He also stated that physical record of CAF of mobile numbers 9953663289, 8586864080, 8860720801 and 7290936145 had been destroyed and he proved certificate Ex. PW17/R. He further deposed that CAF of mobile numbers 8447387799 was not traceable in the record due to merger and he proved report Ex. PW17/T.
19. PW-19 Amit Kumar Sharma i.e. Nodal Officer of Reliance Communications Ltd. proved CDR of mobile number 8430801380 for the period from 01.04.2016 to 20.01.2017 Ex. PW19/A. In this regard, he issued certificate Ex. PW19/B. He also proved copy of customer application form of mobile no. 8430801380 ex. PW19/C. He also stated that original CAF of said number had been destroyed as per guidelines issued by DOT Communication. He proved the letter Ex. PW19/D in that regard.
20. PW-20 Surender Kumar i.e. Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel proved CDR and CAF of mobile no. 9760342468 Ex. PW20/A and Ex. PW20/C respectively. He also proved certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW20/B in this regard.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 22 of 67
21. PW-36 Parvesh Khatri i.e. Junior Assistant, Sub Registrar-VIII proved copy of GPA dated 20.02.2014 of property bearing no. 9/71, Plot no. 71, Block no. 9 i.e. Ex. PW36/A. Medical Evidence-
22. PW-25 Dr. Asitesh Singh Bajwa deposed that on 25.10.2016 he conducted postmortem examination on dead body of Vinod Sharma S/o Sh. Brij Mohan Sharma and he prepared his detailed prepared postmortem examination report Ex.PW25/A. On 24.10.2016 inquest papers were submitted and dead body was sent for X-ray examination to AAAGH, Radiology department. After postmortem examination he sealed the exhibits i.e. (i) blood in gauze piece, (ii) blood and viscera, (iii) 4 bullets, (iv) 3 pieces of pellets recovered from body, (v) hand wash, (vi) sealed clothes and inquest papers and handed over the same to the IO. Police Witnesses-
23. PW-15 HC Satya Narayan i.e. Photographer, Crime Team deposed that on 23.10.2016 on receipt of DD No. 24A he alongwith Incharge Crime Team and SI Sanjay Saxena went to 10/90 Geeta Colony, Delhi and they found that glass of main gate was broken. One pistol, empty cartridge, one lead and blood were also found there. On the instruction of SI Sanjay Saxena, he took 15 photographs of the place of incident. Thereafter, he alongwith SI Sanjay Saxena went to MAX Hospital, Patparganj, Delhi and he also took photographs of the dead body of Vinod.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 23 of 67
He proved 37 photographs Ex. PW15/A1 to PW15/A37 and negatives Ex. PW15/B1 to Ex. PW15/B37.
24. PW-16 SI Sanjay Saxena i.e. Incharge Crime Team deposed that on 23.10.2016 on receipt of information from control room he alongwith Ct. Satya Narayan, Photographer and Ct. Ashok, Finger Print Proficient went to the office i.e. 10/90, Geeta Colony and found blood, pieces of glass, empty cartridges, one pistol, wooden leads etc. He inspected the spot and photographer took photographs of the spot. He came to know that injured had already been taken to Max Hospital and then they reached MAX Hospital and also took photographs of dead body of deceased. He prepared his detailed report Ex. PW16/A.
25. PW-18 Ct. Vineet Kumar deposed that on 23.10.2016 he alongwith HC Subhash and Ct. Vineet were present in their beat area. HC Subhash received a call regarding the incident of firing at 10/90 Geeta Colony. They immediately went to the spot and noticed that glass of main gate was already broken. He also noticed that blood was lying in the office and some empty cartridges were also lying over there. ASI Rajender Singh and Ct. Sheesh Pal were also present at the spot. Thereafter, he along with ASI Rajender Singh and Ct. Sheesh Pal went to Max Hospital, Patparganj, Delhi and they came to know that one Vinod Sharma had died due to the above said incident of firing. He also deposed that doctor handed over some pulandas to ASI Rajender Singh which were seized by IO vide seizure memo FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 24 of 67 Ex. PW 18/A. ASI Rajender Singh prepared ruqqa and got the FIR registered through him. He returned back to the spot and handed over copy of FIR along with original ruqqa to IO.
26. PW-21 ASI Sonu Kaushik i.e. Draftsman deposed that on 29.11.2016 he alongwith ASI Rajender reached the spot i.e. Shree Shree Traders, 10/90, Geeta Colony, Delhi and inspected the crime scene at the instance of PW Vicky and Insp. Pawan Kumar. He took measurements and rough notes on the basis of which he prepared site plan Ex. PW21/A.
27. PW-22 SI Murlidhar deposed that on 19.01.2017 on the instruction of IO he alongwith ASI Tehjib Haider went to Dasna Jail Ghaziabad and collected copy of UT register and visitor register through seizure memo Ex. PW22/A. The above- said UT register contains records regarding visit of accused Dilshad with accused Wasim on 03.10.2016 and 06.10.2016. He also proved attested copy of said UT register as Ex.PW22/B and attested copy of visitor register as Ex. PW22/C.
28. PW-22 SI Murlidhar deposed that on 03.02.2017 accused Bilal, Mazhar and Dilshad pointed out the place of incident and the place where they had parked motorcycle. All the said accused also pointed out the hotel namely S. S. Residency. On 07.04.2017 on the instructions of IO, he deposited a parcel (sealed with the seal of PS alongwith FSL Form) in FSL Rohini vide RC No.31/21/17 and he handed over the receipt to MHC FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 25 of 67 (M). He also stated that the exhibits were not tampered with while they remained in his possession.
29. PW-23 ASI Subhash Chand deposed that on 23.10.2016 he alongwith Ct. Vinit (No.3267/E) and Ct. Vinit (No.772/E) went to the spot i.e. ground floor, 10/90 Geeta Colony and met Insp. Pawan Kumar, SHO PS Geeta colony, ASI Rajender and Ct. Shishpal. ASI Rajender Singh, Ct. Shishpal and Ct. Vinit (No. 3267) left for Max Hospital and he along with Ct. Vinit (no.772/E) remained at the spot to safeguard the spot. Insp. Pawan Kumar came to the spot and inspected the spot and took photographs. Ct. Vinit (No. 3267/E) handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to Insp. Pawan Kumar. ASI Rajender returned back to the spot and handed over parcels containing clothes of deceased to the IO. IO recorded statements of witnesses namely Vicky and Rakesh Singh and prepared site plan at the instance of ASI Rajender Singh. Mobile crime team of FSL had handed over two pistols recovered from the spot to the IO. The magazine of one pistol was opened and it contained three live cartridges. IO prepared sketch of pistol and three live cartridges and kept the same in plastic container which was sealed with the seal of 'GC- 01 PS GEETA COLONY EAST DISTT DELHI' and it was given serial no.1. Another pistol was a country made pistol which contained five live cartridges. IO prepared sketch of the pistol and cartridges and seized the same in plastic container which was sealed with the same seal. Crime team officials also lifted empty cartridge case and lead etc from the spot and handed over the FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 26 of 67 same to IO. IO prepared sketch and seized the same in a plastic container which was sealed with the same seal and it was marked as mark 3. FSL team also handed over a live cartridge which was also seized by the IO. Lead pieces were given mark MP1 to MP6 and were also seized and the parcel was marked as mark 4. FSL team also took seat cover having bullet mark and handed over the same to the IO which was seized in parcel no.5. IO also seized bullet wash and earth control from the spot. The parcel of the same was given mark 6. IO seized blood from the different places and parcel of the same was given mark 7. IO filled FSL Form and sealed the same with the same seal. Seal after use was handed over to ASI Rajender Singh.
The witness further deposed that on 27.10.2016, IO interrogated accused Akash Chauhan in PS Geeta Colony and arrested him in this case. IO recorded disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan. He signed arrest memo and disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan. On 17.11.2016, he alongwith ASI Rajender, Ct. Arvind and Ct. Pradeep took accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil to Muradnagar, Gangnahar, UP and all of them pointed out the place where they had left motorcycle (used in commission of offence) vide memo Ex.PW23/A. However, the said motorcycle could not be found. On 18.11.2016 he alongwith ASI Rajender, Ct. Arvind and Ct. Pradeep took accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil to Meerut, UP. Family members of said accused had handed over respective mobile phones of accused persons to ASI Rajender Singh near FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 27 of 67 police station Lisari Gate. Family members of above-said accused persons had given their mobile phones to accused persons and then accused persons handed over their mobile phones to ASI Rajender Singh. ASI Rajender Kumar seized the above-said mobile phones vide seizure memos Ex.PW23/B to Ex.PW23/D respectively. He identified accused Nazim and Kamil in the court. He also identified case properties i.e. one pistol and three cartridges (one live and two used) as Ex. P1 to P4 respectively. He identified other pistol and five cartridges (two live and three used) as Ex. P5 to P10 respectively. The witness further identified case properties i.e. ten empty cartridges Ex. P11 to Ex. P20, four lead Ex. P21 to Ex. P24 and three pieces of lead Ex. P25 to Ex. P27. He also identified one used cartridges and six metallic lead pieces Ex. P28 and Ex. P29 to Ex. P34 respectively.
30. PW-24 HC Vineet Tyagi i.e. Special Messenger deposed that on 23.10.2016 duty officer handed over copies of FIR to him and he delivered the same to concerned MM, Joint CP, DCP and ACP Gandhi Nagar.
31. PW-26 ASI Naveen Kumar deposed that on 23.12.2016 on the direction of IO he collected viscera, sample seal and FSL Form vide RC no. 168/21/16 from MHC (M) and deposited the same in Chemical Division, FSL Rohini vide receipt no. 1472/16. After depositing the above-said articles he handed over copy of RC and acknowledgment to MHC (M). He FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 28 of 67 also stated that exhibits were not tampered with while they remained in his possession.
32. PW-27 HC Shispal deposed that on 23.10.2016 at about 6 PM ASI Rajendra Rana received DD no. 24A. Then he alongwith ASI Rajendra Rana went to the spot i.e Sri Sri Trading Company, 10/90 Geeta Colony and they noticed that mirror of door of the said office was broken. They also noticed that one pistol and used cartridges were lying at the spot and blood had spilled there. They came to know that 5/4 persons had shot Vinod Sharma. They also came to know that Vinod Sharma had already been shifted to Max Hospital, Parparganj. He alongwith ASI Rajendra Rana went to Max Hospital, Parparganj and they came to know that Vinod Sharma had been declared brought dead. ASI Rajendra Rana collected MLC of deceased, blood samples and clothes of deceased which were seized by the IO vide memo Ex. PW18/A. As per the directions of ASI Rajendra Rana, dead body of Vinod Sharma was preserved in Sabzi Mandi mortuary. On the next day postmortem examination was conducted. After postmortem examination, dead body was handed over to Sh. Rajesh Sharma i.e. brother of deceased. He collected viscera, blood sample, clothes etc from the mortuary and handed over the same to IO Insp. Pawan.
33. PW-29 Retd. SI Rajender Singh deposed that on 23.10.2016 at about 6.00-6.15 pm, on receipt of DD No. 24-A he alongwith Ct. Sheeshpal went to office i.e. Shri Shri Trading Company, 10/90, Geeta Colony and noticed that toughened glass FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 29 of 67 of main gate of said office was broken, one pistol and few empty cartridges were also lying on the floor. He came to know that 3-4 persons came on a motorcycle and they shot one person. In the meanwhile, SHO Insp. Pawan Kumar, HC Subhash, Ct. Vinit Kumar as well as another police official namely Ct. Vinit Kumar also came at the spot. He received DD no. 43-B and it was informed that Vinod Kumar had been declared as 'brought dead' in Max Hospital, Patparganj. He alongwith Ct. Sheeshpal and Ct. Vinit Kumar left for Max Hospital, Patparganj and remaining police officials remained at the spot. He obtained MLC of deceased i.e. MLC no. 5954/16 Ex. P1. He noticed bullet injuries on the dead body of deceased Vinod Sharma. The concerned doctor handed over one pullanda containing lead and another pulanda containing clothes of deceased duly sealed with the seal of Max Hospital. He seized the above-said articles vide memo Ex. PW18/A. Thereafter, he prepared Tehrir on DD No. 24-A Ex. PW29/A. He handed over tehrir to Ct. Vinit and sent him for registration of FIR. Thereafter he alongwith Ct. Sheeshpal returned back to the spot. Crime team had already arrived at the spot. Crime team took photographs of the spot. He alongwith crime team and photographer reached Max Hospital and they also took photographs of dead body. Dead body was preserved in mortuary of Sabzi Mandi through Ct. Sheeshpal. He returned back to the spot and crime team also came to spot. Insp. Pawan Kumar prepared site plan Ex. PW29/B at his instance. FSL and crime team recovered a pistol from the spot and it was found FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 30 of 67 containing three live cartridges. IO prepared sketch of pistol and three cartridges i.e. Ex. PW29/C and kept the same in plastic container and sealed it with the seal of GC-01. IO prepared seizure memo of the same Ex. PW29/D. FSL/ crime team handed over other pistol to Insp. Pawan Kumar which was found containing five live cartridges. IO prepared sketch of the same Ex. PW29/E and also seized the same vide memo Ex. PW29/F. FSL / crime team also handed over empty cartridges and lead to Insp. Pawan Kumar. IO prepared sketch i.e. Ex. PW29/G and seized the same vide memo Ex. PW29/H. FSL/ crime team further handed over one live cartridge to Insp. Pawan Kumar and IO prepared the sketch of said cartridge i.e. Ex. PW29/I and seized the same vide memo Ex. PW29/J. FSL/ crime team also handed over blood samples (which were collected from the spot) to IO Insp. Pawan Kumar. IO prepared seizure memo of said samples i.e. Ex. PW29/K. He further deposed that on 26.10.2016 at about 8:00 pm accused Akash Chauhan was apprehended from Anand Vihar Bus Stand and was brought to PS Geeta Colony. On 27.10.2016 at about 8:00 am, IO arrested accused Akash Chauhan vide memo Ex.PW29/N and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW29/O. IO also recorded disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan vide memo Ex.PW29/P. During personal search Rs.1200/- was recovered from the possession of said accused. Thereafter, accused Akash Chauhan was produced before the court and he was remanded to police custody for one FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 31 of 67 week. On 29.10.2016 he, IO ASI Subhash, Ct. Pradeep and Ct. Arvind alongwith accused Akash Chauhan went to Meerut in search of accused persons, however, no accused was found there on that day. Thereafter, they all returned back to PS Geeta Colony. In the evening, they alongwith accused Akash Chauhan and two other persons went to Hasanpur Depot and they tried to search the mobile phone at the instance of accused Akash Chauhan. IO prepared pointing out memo of said place Ex.PW29/Q. On 30.10.2016 on the direction of SHO, he went to H.No.10/06, Geeta Colony and met Gaurav Mandal and checked the CCTV footage of CCTV camera installed at H.No. 10/06. In the said footage three boys were seen going towards the spot on motorcycle. He obtained DVR of the above-said CCTV footage and sealed the same with the seal of GC-08, PS Geeta Colony, East Delhi and also seized it vide memo Ex.PW4/A. He handed over the said DVR and seizure memo to the IO. On 02.11.2016, IO recorded supplementary disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan i.e. Ex.PW29/R and thereafter accused Akash Chauhan was produced before the court. On 13.11.2016 at about 11:00 pm, he alongwith Ct. Arvind, Ct. Vineet and IO were present at Safeda Jhuggi area and one secret informer met IO and informed that the accused persons in the present case were about to come to Anand Vihar Bus Stand from Meerut. Thereafter all of them went to Anand Vihar Bus Stand alongwith secret informer and they went to road in between Anand Vihar Railway Station and Anand Vihar Bus FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 32 of 67 Stand at about 12:00 midnight. At about 2:00 am, three boys came from the side of Anand Vihar Bus Stand and they were going towards Anand Vihar Railway Station. At the pointing out of secret informer they apprehended all the three said boys. The said three persons disclosed their names as Kamar, Nazim and Kamil. They all alongwith accused persons came to PS Geeta Colony. After interrogation, IO arrested accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil vide memos Ex.PW29/S, Ex.PW29/T and Ex.PW29/U respectively and also conducted their respective personal search vide memos Ex.PW29/V, Ex.PW29/W and Ex.PW29/X respectively. IO also recorded disclosure statement of above-said three accused persons i.e. Ex.PW29/Y, Ex.PW29/Z and Ex.PW29/AA respectively.
The witness further deposed that on 24.10.2016, mobile crime team handed over pieces of leather of the chair. IO sealed the leather pieces and seat cover vide memo Ex. PW29/L. IO also seized two mobile phones of make Blackberry and I-Paky (Apple) from the spot vide memo Ex. PW9/M. On 16.11.2016, he alongwith Insp. Pawan, ASI Subhash, Ct. Arvind, Ct. Pradeep, accused Nazim, Kamil and Kamar went to 9/71 Geeta Colony and said accused pointed towards the place where they had stayed before going for commission of offence. IO prepared pointing out memo of above-said place and the place of incident at the instance of above-said three accused i.e. Ex. PW29/AB. They went to the hotel where accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil had stayed for one day i.e. before the incident and IO prepared FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 33 of 67 the pointing out memo Ex. PW29/AC. Thereafter on the direction of IO/SHO he alongwith ASI Subhash, Ct. Arvind and accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil went to Muradnagar Nehar, Rawali Road and said accused pointed out the place where they had left the motorcycle. He prepared pointing out memo at their instance Ex. PW23/A. On 17.11.2016, he alongwith Insp. Pawan, ASI Subhash, Ct. Pradeep, Ct. Arvind and accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil went to S S Residency Hotel, Gujrat Vihar, Preet Vihar, Delhi. They met Ms. Geetanjali i.e. manager of said hotel and IO sealed the visitor register and prepared seizure memo Ex.PW5/A. On 18.11.2016, IO recorded supplementary disclosure statements of accused Nazim, Kamil and Kamar i.e. Ex.PW29/AD, Ex.PW29/AE and Ex.PW29/AF respectively. They alongwith accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil went to Tihar Jail and met accused Akash Chauhan there. Accused Akash Chauhan was confronted with accused Kamar, Nazim and Kamil and IO recorded interrogation report i.e. Ex.PW29/AG. On the direction of IO, he alongwith ASI Subhash, Ct. Pradeep, Ct. Arvind and accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil went to Lisari Gate, PS Meerut and relatives of said accused persons were called at PS alongwith relevant mobile phones. IO seized mobile phone of make Nokia belonging to accused Kamar vide memo Ex. PW23/B. IO seized the mobile phone of make Samsung belonging to accused Nazim vide memo Ex.PW23/C and also seized another Samsung mobile phone belonging to accused Kamil vide memo Ex.PW23/D. FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 34 of 67 The witness correctly identified accused Nazim and Kamil in the court. He also identified case properties i.e. one desi pistol Ex. P1, one live cartridge Ex. P2, two used cartridges Ex. P3 and two lead pieces Ex. P4. He also identified case properties i.e. one desi pistol Ex. P5, two live cartridges Ex. P6 & Ex. P7, three used cartridges Ex. Ex. P8 to Ex. P10. He also identified ten empty cartridges Ex. P11 to Ex. P20, four lead pieces Ex. P21 and three pieces of lead Ex. P25 to Ex. P27. He further identified one empty/used cartridge Ex. P28, six metallic pieces of lead Ex. P29 to Ex. P34, seat cover pieces Ex.PW29/P1, blood in gauze Ex.PW29/P2 and DVR of make HIKVISION Ex.PW4/Article-1. The witness identified one blackberry mobile and I-Paky (Apple) Ex.PW29/P2, one Nokia mobile Ex.PW29/P3, one Samsung 4G Duos mobile Ex.PW29/P4 and one Samsung Duos (Black colour) Ex.PW29/P5. He also identified the visit register of S. S. Residency Ex. PW5/Article-1. He also stated that on 29.11.2016, he went to the spot alongwith ASI Sonu Kaushik/Draftsman who took measurement and prepared rough notes at his instance.
34. PW-30 Retd. SI Jagdish deposed that on 20.01.2017 he collected the documents i.e. attendance register of accused persons from Meerut Jail. It was discovered that accused Wasim had been released on bail from the said Jail. He obtained photocopies of said register and the bail order of accused from the jail authorities. He prepared seizure memo of above-said documents i.e. PW30/A. He handed over the said documents and FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 35 of 67 seizure memo to IO Insp. Pankaj Singh. On 23.01.2017, he went to village Balrampur Kheda for verification of mobile phone which was in the name of one Arif. He met sister in law of Arif who informed that Arif is doing the work of POP at some place in Hapur. On the same day, he went to Meerut for verification of mobile phone of one person namely Danish, but the said address which contained only house number i.e. 340 could not be traced. He also went for verification of mobile phone of one lady i.e. wife of Deen Mohammad, but the address was found to be incorrect.
35. PW-31 Retd. ACP Pankaj Singh deposed that in the year 2016, investigation of this case was transferred to crime branch on the direction of Hon'ble High Court and the same was marked to him for investigation. During investigation, he analyzed CDRs of witnesses including Rakesh Chhilan. During analysis of CDR mobile number of accused Dilshad came into light and further the address of Hotel S.S Residency, Preet Vihar also came into light as accused Dilshad had made call to the landline number of Hotel SS Residency, Preet Vihar. He went to said hotel and conducted investigation and interrogated the receptionist and service boy of the hotel. They stated that accused Dilshad used to visit the hotel and he had visited the hotel on 22.10.2016 alongwith 3-4 boys. He recorded statement of aforesaid staff of Hotel SS Residency. During investigation he came to know that accused Waseem was lodged in Dasna Jail. He visited Dasna Jail and obtained the record of Dasna FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 36 of 67 Jail/visitor register. In the visitor register, entry of accused Dilshad was found as a visitor for Waseem on 03.10.2016 and 06.10.2016. He also analyzed the mobile number of accused Waseem which was mentioned in the record of Dasna Jail and it was found that two calls were made from the said mobile number to mobile number of accused Dilshad. He also analyzed CDR of accused Dilshad and Rakesh Chhilan. During analysis it was found that 15 calls were made on 22nd and 23rd October 2016 between Dilshad and Rakesh Chhilan. It was also found that prior to these dates there was no telephonic communication between two of them. He recorded the statement of Rakesh Chillan who disclosed that said mobile phone of Rakesh Chillan was taken by accused Akash on 22 and 23rd October 2016. On 19.01.2017, he prepared CDR analysis memo of Akash Chauhan and Rakesh Chhilan for mobile numbers of 9871679401 (Akash), 9540822859 (Rakesh Chhilan) and 9873098428 (Dilshad) i.e. Ex.PW31/A. On 19.01.2017, he also prepared CDR analysis memo of Dilshad and Waseem for mobile numbers of 9873098428 (Dilshad) and 8430801380 (Waseem) i.e. Ex.PW31/C. On 19.01.2017, he further prepared CDR analysis memo of Kamil and Waseem for mobile numbers of 8476929212 (Kamil) and 8430801380 (Waseem) i.e. Ex.PW31/B. He further deposed that on 01.02.2017, he arrested accused Dilshad, Fahruq Mazhar and Bilal Tansir @ Manhar from Surajmal Park vide memo Ex.PW31/D, Ex.PW31/E and Ex.PW31/F respectively and conducted their personal search vide FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 37 of 67 memos Ex.PW/G, Ex.PW31/H and Ex.PW31/I respectively. He also recorded disclosure statement of accused Dilshad, Bilal Tansir and Fahruq Mazhar i.e. Ex.PW31/J, Ex.PW31/K and Ex.PW31/L respectively. On 03.02.2012 he alongwith accused Dilshad, Bilal Tansir and Fahruq Mazhar went to the place of incident and prepared pointing out memo at the instance of said accused i.e. Ex.PW31/M and Ex.PW31/N respectively. Accused Bilal Tansir and accused Fahruq Mazhar also took them to H.No. 9/71 First Floor, Geeta Colony and pointed out towards the room where they had stayed. He prepared pointing out memo of said house at the instance of accused Bilal Tansir and accused Fahruq Mazhar i.e. Ex.PW31/O and Ex.PW31/P. Thereafter they went to Hotel SS Residency, Gujrat Vihar and accused Dilshad, Bilal Tansir and Fahruq Mazhar pointed out the hotel. He prepared pointing out memo of the said hotel at their instance i.e. Ex.PW31/Q, Ex.PW31/R and Ex.PW31/S. The said witness further deposed that on 02.02.2017 he also filed an application for TIP of accused Bilal Tansir and Fahruq Mazhar i.e. Ex.PW31/T, however, they refused to participate in TIP proceedings i.e. mark PW31/U. During investigation on 09.02.2017 he also analyzed CDR/location of mobile number of Fahruq Mazhar and prepared CDR/location analysis observation memo of Fahruq Mazhar for mobile numbers of 9528137080 i.e. Ex.PW31/V. On 25.04.2017 he also analyzed CDR/location of mobile number of Fahruq Mazhar and prepared CDR/location analysis observation memo for mobile FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 38 of 67 numbers of 9528137080 i.e. Ex.PW31/W. On 18.04.2017 he arrested accused Babu Waseem vide memo Ex.PW31/X and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW31/Y. He also recorded his disclosure statement i.e. Ex.PW31/Z. He identified accused Dilshad, Bilal Tansir, Fahruq Mazhar and Babu Waseem in the court.
36. PW-32 ACP Arun Chauhan deposed that on 16.12.2017, he collected FSL Ballistic and FSL Bio Report from MHC (R) and prepared supplementary chargesheet and submitted the same before the concerned court. On 04.01.2018 accused Sumit and Kush came to office of crime branch and he arrested them vide memos Ex. PW32/A and Ex. PW32/B and also conducted their personal search vide memo Ex.PW32/C and Ex.PW32/D. He also recorded disclosure statements of accused Sumit and Kush i.e. Ex.PW32/E and Ex.PW32/F. On 06.01.2018 during PC remand accused Sumit handed over photocopies of documents i.e. GPA etc. of H.No.9/71, Geeta Colony to him where all accused had stayed prior to commission of offence. He seized the same vide memo Ex.PW32/G. Accused persons had used Duster car which was seized at the instance of accused Sumit from his house. He prepared seizure memo Ex.PW32/H. He also identified accused Sumit and Kush in the court. He also identified four photographs of car bearing no. DL9CAU8500 Ex.PZ (Colly).
37. PW-34 Insp. Pawan Yadav deposed that on 04.01.2018 accused Sumit Kumar and Kush Chauhan were called FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 39 of 67 in the office of crime branch. IO arrested both the said accused vide memos Ex.PW32/A and Ex.PW32/B and conducted their personal search vide memos Ex.PW32/C and Ex.PW32/D. IO recorded disclosure statements of accused Sumit Kumar and Kush i.e. Ex.PW32/E and Ex.PW32/F. On 06.01.2018, they took accused Sumit Chauhan to H.No.9/71, Geeta Colony and accused Sumit Chauhan got recovered a Duster car bearing no. DL9CAU8500. IO seized the same vide memo Ex.PW32/H. Aaccused Sumit also handed over documents relating to ownership of H.No. 9/71, Geeta Colony and IO seized the same vide memo Ex.PW32/G. He identified accused Sumit and Kush in the court. He also identified photographs of above-said car Ex PZ (colly).
38. PW-38 Insp. Surender Kumar deposed that on 17.03.2018 investigation of this was assigned to him. He recorded statement of one witness namely Amit. He had also recorded statements of other witnesses as well. Thereafter, he presented the supplementary chargesheet in the court. Evidence of Investigating Officers-
39. PW-37 ACP Pawan Kumar deposed that on 23.10.2016 on receipt of information regarding firing at 10/90, Geeta Colony marked to ASI Rajender Singh, he went to the spot i.e. office of Shree Shree Traders and noticed that blood was scattered there. He also found one pistol and 8-9 empty cartridges. He came to know that injured had already been taken to hospital. After sometime another information was FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 40 of 67 received that injured had been declared brought dead in Max Hospital, Patpargunj. ASI Rajender prepared rukka and sent it to PS through Ct. Vineet. Thereafter ASI Rajender left for Max Hospital, Patpargunj. He remained at the spot and crime team was called at the spot. The crime team inspected the spot and took photographs and In-charge of crime team prepared his report Ex.PW16/A. After sometime crime team of FSL, Rohini also came to the spot and thoroughly inspected the spot. They lifted the samples from the spot with the assistance of crime team of FSL, Rohini. In the meanwhile, ASI Rajender also came back to the spot. He prepared site plan at the instance of ASI Rajender i.e. Ex.PW29/B. FSL team also found another pistol which was lying behind a sofa inside the office. One of the pistols recovered at the spot had three live cartridges and the other pistol had five live cartridges in it. Both the above-said pistols were separately seized vide memos Ex. PW29/D and Ex. PW29/F. He also prepared sketch of both pistols i.e. Ex.PW29/C and Ex.PW29/E. He prepared sketch of empty cartridges and lead recovered from the spot i.e. Ex.PW29/G and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW29/H. One more live cartridge was recovered from the spot. He also prepared sketch of said live cartridge i.e. Ex.PW29/I and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW29/J. With the assistance of FSL team he lifted the blood samples from the spot from different places with the help of cotton gauze. The same were kept in separate FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 41 of 67 envelopes which were then kept in one big envelope which was sealed with the seal of GC 1. He prepared seizure memo of the same i.e. Ex.PW29/K. FSL team handed over wash of seat on which bullet was lodged and a part of chair to him. The FSL team also handed over wash taken from the handle of main door. He seized the above-mentioned articles and sealed the same with the seal of GC01 PS Geeta Colony and prepared seizure memo Ex.PW29/L. He also seized mobile phone of make Blackberry and another mobile phone from the spot. He prepared seizure memos of said phones i.e. Ex.PW29/M. He came to know the name of deceased as Vinod Sharma @ Binu and the place of incident was office of accused Akash Chauhan. He moved application Ex.PW37/C for postmortem examination of deceased. The postmortem was conducted on 25.10.2016 and dead body was handed over to brother and brother in law of deceased vide memos i.e. Ex.PW37/A. He also prepared identification memos i.e. Ex.PW37/B before postmortem examination.
He further deposed that on 26.10.2016 they received information that accused Akash Chauhan would come near Anand Vihar. On the basis of said information, he constituted a raiding party consisting of himself, ASI Rajender Singh and other police officials. They apprehended accused Akash Chauhan from Anand Vihar, Bus Stand. He interrogated accused Akash Chauhan and arrested him on 27.10.2016. He FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 42 of 67 prepared arrest memo Ex.PW29/N and conducted personal search of accused Akash Chauhan vide memo Ex.PW29/O. He recorded disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan Ex.PW29/P. Accused Akash Chauhan was remanded to police custody. Accused Akash Chauhan pointed out the place where he had had thrown his mobile phone and he prepared the pointing out memo Ex. PW29/Q. He recorded detailed supplementary disclosure statement of accused Akash Chauhan i.e. Ex.PW29/R. On 13.11.2016, he received secret information that other criminals hired for commission of offence would also come near Anand Vihar, Bus Stand and they can be apprehended. He constituted a raiding party consisting of ASI Rajender Singh and other police officials. The said police officials apprehended accused Nazim, Kamil and Kamar and brought all of them to police station. On 14.11.2016, he arrested accused Nazim, Kamar and Kamil vide arrest memos i.e. Ex.PW29/S to Ex.PW29/U respectively and conducted their personal search vide memos Ex.PW29/V to Ex. PW29/X. He also recorded disclosure statements of said accused persons i.e. Ex.PW29/Y, Ex. PW29/Z and Ex.PW29/AA. Accused Nazim, Kamil and Kamar also pointed out the place of incident vide memos Ex.PW29/AB. All the accused also pointed out the hotel where they had stayed before commission of offence and memo Ex. PW29/C was prepared.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 43 of 67
The witness further deposed that he enquired from Ms. Geetanjali i.e. manager of said hotel and he seized the register of the hotel vide memo Ex.PW5/A. He prepared pullanda of said register and sealed the same with the seal of GC01 PS Geeta Colony. All abovesaid three accused persons disclosed that they had dropped the motorcycle used in commission of offence in Murad Nagar, U.P. He recorded their supplementary disclosure statements i.e. Ex.PW29/AD, Ex. PW29/AE and Ex.PW29/AF. He sent ASI Rajender Singh and team of police officials alongwith above-mentioned three accused persons to Murad Nagar, but nothing was recovered from there. ASI Rajender Singh handed over the pointing out memo prepared by him. Mobile phones were got recovered from the houses of above-said three accused persons and he handed over the said mobile phones to him. The said phones were in open condition and they were kept for analyzing the call detail record. The mobile phones which were in open condition were deposited in malkhana of PS after sealing the same and by making endorsement on the seizure memos i.e. Ex.PW37/E, Ex.PW37/F, Ex.PW37/G and Ex.PW37/H. The doctors who had conducted postmortem examination had handed over viscera samples to Ct. Sheeshpal. The said samples were further handed over to him by Ct. Sheeshpal on 25.10.2016. He prepared seizure memo Ex.PW37/D and deposited the same in malkhana of PS. During PC remand, he interrogated accused Nazim, FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 44 of 67 Kamar and Kamil and all of them were confronted with accused Akash Chauhan in Jail No.3, Administrative Block, Tihar Jail and he prepared interrogation report Ex. PW29/AG. He had also got prepared the scaled site plan Ex. PW21/A through ASI Sonu Kaushik. He identified accused Nazim, Akash Chauhan, Kamil and Kamar present in the court. He also identified case properties i.e. Ex. P1 to Ex. P34, Ex.PW29/P1 and Ex.PW29/P2.
He also identified one DVR make HIKVISION Ex.PW4/Article-1, one blackberry mobile and I-Paky (Apple) Ex.PW29/P2, one Nokia mobile Ex.PW29/P3, one Samsung 4G Duos mobile Ex.PW29/P4, one Samsung Duos (Black colour) Ex.PW29/P5 and visit register of S. S. Residency Ex. PW5/Article-1.
Admission/ Denial of Documents:
40. All accused gave separate statements u/s 294 Cr. PC and admitted the documents i.e. (i) MLC no. 5954 and brought dead summary Ex. P1 & P2, (ii) FSL report dated 29.11.2017 Ex.
A-1, (iii) FSL report dated 13.12.2017 Ex. A-2, (iv) Polygraph report dated 20.02.2017 Ex. PA, (v) FSL report dated 19.01.2017 Ex. PB, (vi) TIP proceedings of accused Farook Majhar Ex. PC. Statement of Accused U/s 313 Cr. PC:
41. In their statements recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C all accused denied all the incriminating evidence. They took a plea that they have been falsely implicated. All accused opted not to lead defence evidence.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 45 of 67 Arguments:
42. I have heard the final arguments advanced by ld.
Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well as by ld. Defence counsel / Amicus Curiae .
43. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has argued that the allegations against the accused have been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution evidence is completely reliable. Hence, the all accused may be convicted of the offences charged against them.
44. On the other hand, the ld. Defence counsels for accused vehemently argued that accused persons were falsely implicated in this case. The prosecution has not been able to prove its case either by way of direct ocular evidence or by way of circumstantial evidence. None of the alleged eye-witnesses have supported the case of prosecution. The prosecution has failed miserably to establish the chain of events for the court to draw an inference that the case has been proved on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has failed to prove that any of the accused were involved in criminal conspiracy. The prosecution failed to establish that the accused persons had stayed in Hotel SS Residency. The prosecution failed to prove that accused Dilshad and Akash Chauhan had telephonic conversation with each other. The mobile phones recovered from accused persons do not belong to them. The location of their mobile phones has not been proved on record. The weapon used in commission of offence could not be recovered. The FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 46 of 67 documents i.e. visitor register of Meerut Jail brought on record by prosecution has not been proved as per law as the jail authorities were not examined. They also argued even otherwise the entire case of prosecution is based on surmises. Hence, all the accused may be acquitted.
Appreciation of Evidence vis-a-vis Allegations of Commission of Offences by Accused Persons:
45. I have considered the submissions and combed through evidence on record very carefully.
46. At the outset, it is required to be noted that section 101 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 mandates that the burden of proving existence of any fact lies on the party which desires that a court should give a judgment on the basis of existence of the said facts. The provision of the section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act is reproduced below in this context:-
"101. Burden of proof - whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person."
47. While endorsing the mandate of section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act, similar views were expressed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sharad Briduchand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra 1984 (4) SCC 116 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court had reiterated that the burden of proving its FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 47 of 67 case always lies on prosecution in a criminal trial and the said burden does not get reduced on account of weakness of the defence of an accused person. Observations made in para 150 the said judgment are reproduced below in this context :-
" It is well settled that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own legs and it cannot derive any strength from the weakness of the defence. This is trite law and no decision has taken a contrary view. What some cases have held is only this where various links in a chain are in themselves complete, then a false plea or false defence may be called into aid only to lend assurance to the Court. In the other words, before using the additional link it must be proved that all the links in the chain are complete and do not suffer from any infirmity. It is not the law that where there is any infirmity or lacuna in the prosecution case, the same could not be cured or supplied by a false defence or a plea which is not accepted by a court."
48. In light of aforementioned principles of law expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decided cases of "Sharad Briduchand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra 1984 (4) SCC 116, Dr. S.L.Goswami Vs. State of MP" 1972 A.I.R (SC) 716 :1972 (2) SCR 948 : 1972 Cri. L.J.511 : 1972 (3) S.C.C.22 and "Ram Swarup and others Vs. State of Haryana" 1993 Supp (4) Supreme Court Cases 344, it can be safely concluded that it is the duty of prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by examining reliable witnesses not only to prove the commission of an offence, but also to prove the manner in which the offence in question had been committed.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 48 of 67
49. As per case of prosecution, accused Akash Chauhan entered into criminal conspiracy with accused Sumit Chauhan, Kush Chauhan and Dilshad and in pursuance of their criminal conspiracy they committed murder of victim Vinu Pandit with the help of accused Mohd. Kamil @ Nahid, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farukh Mazhar, Bilal Tansir and Babu Waseem. The case of prosecution was essentially based on the deposition of eye- witness namely Vicky Ghorai vis-a-vis allegations that accused Akash Chauhan, Farukh Majhar, Nazim, Kamil and Bilal Tansir had committed murder of the victim and the prosecution intended to establish the factum of criminal conspiracy as well as role played by other accused persons on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
50. In order to prove its case prosecution examined PW- 1 Vicky Ghorai. As per case of prosecution, PW Vicky Ghorai was present at the place of incident on 23.10.2016 and at about 3:30 PM accused Akash Chauhan came to the office and then victim Vinu Pandit also came there at 4:30 PM and thereafter at about 5:45 PM 3/4 boys forcibly entered the office and they had covered their faces and then accused Akash Chauhan as well as aforementioned persons started firing bullets upon Vinu Pandit. However, the said witness did not support the case of prosecution.
51. PW-1 Vicky Ghorai in his examination in chief deposed that on 23.10.2016 he was present at the place of incident and at about 2:30 PM accused Akash Chauhan left the office and thereafter Vinu Pandit came to the office at about 5 p.m. After FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 49 of 67 about 10 minutes, Rakesh Chillan came there and then both of them took permission from Vinu Pandit and went to take tea and when they returned they saw that glass of the office was damaged and Vinu Pandit was lying in the pool of blood on the floor of office.
52. As per prosecution version, the said witness also identified the other four assailants who had shot Vinu Pandit at the spot i.e. Farukh Majhar, Nazim, Kamil and Bilal Tansir on the basis of identification of their hairstyle, eyes and forehead.
53. The aforesaid witness did not support the case of prosecution qua the allegation that accused Akash Chauhan had fired bullets upon Vinu Pandit as well as qua his identification of the other four accused persons. He was cross-examined at length by ld. APP for the State, but nothing material came out in his cross-examination as he denied all the suggestions given to him as per the case of prosecution.
54. The prosecution also examined PW-2 Rakesh Singh @ Chillen i.e. Driver of accused Sumit to establish that he had seen accused Akash Chauhan and Vinu Pandit in the office (place of incident) on 23.10.2016 at about 5:30 PM and he also saw 3/4 persons were running from the office and Vinu Pandit was lying on the floor and accused Akash Chauhan had fled away. However, he also did not support the case of prosecution to that extent and he rather deposed that on 23.10.2016 at about 5/5:15 PM he went to the place of incident i.e. 10/90, Geeta Colony, Delhi and he saw Vinu Pandit was alone sitting in the office. Thereafter, he FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 50 of 67 alongwith Vicky went to take tea and after about half an hour when they returned they saw victim Vinu Pandit was lying in the pool of blood in his office. Therefore, the said witness also did not support the case of prosecution and rather corroborated the deposition of PW-1 Vicky Ghorai that both of them had not witnessed the incident.
55. The prosecution also examined PW-9 Deepak Kumar @ Kale and PW-10 Mohd. Aslam @ Guddu to establish that accused Akash and deceased Vinu Pandit were present at the scene of crime on 23.10.2016 at about 5 PM, however, both these witnesses denied the aforementioned fact and nothing material came out in their cross-examination conducted at length by the ld. Addl. PP for the State. PW-9 Deepak Kale deposed that he did not know anything about murder of Vinod Sharma as he was out of Delhi in light of externment order passed against him by DCP.
56. The prosecution had also examined PW-6 Ms. Deepika Sharma i.e. wife of deceased and PW-8 Ms. Nirupama Sharma i.e. mother in law of deceased Vinu Pandit to prove that accused Akash Chauhan had called deceased Vinu Pandit to come to the office and upon receiving his call deceased went to the office. The prosecution also intended to establish that deceased was threatened by accused Sumit as well as the fact that upon reaching the office deceased called his wife to tell her that Sumit had called someone on telephone and he was apprehending risk to his life and he had asked them to come to the office immediately.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 51 of 67
However, the aforementioned witnesses also did not support the prosecution version to that extent and they also turned hostile. In their depositions, they stated that on the day of incident at about 5:30 PM PW-6 Ms. Deepika Sharma received a telephone call from an unknown person informing that her husband was taken to Max Hospital as he had sustained bullet injuries. PW-6 i.e. wife of deceased denied all the suggestions given to her in her cross-examination by the ld. Addl. PP for the State and even denied the fact that her husband had given loan of Rs. 3 crores to accused Akash and Rs. 2 crores each to his cousins or Rs. 80 lacs to one Honey.
57. PW-8 Ms. Nirupa Sharma deposed that she had called Vinod Sharma at 5:09 PM, but he did not tell him that accused persons had quarreled with him due to which he was apprehending threat to his life and rather stated that they had discussed some routine domestic matter.
58. Moreover, as per case of prosecution, Ms. Nirupa Sharma had identified accused Kush Chauhan while he was allegedly trying to help the accused who shot Vinu Pandit. As per case of prosecution she had brought CD containing CCTV footage, wherein some young persons were riding the bikes and according to prosecution accused Kush Chauhan was helping the shooters in parking their motorcycles. However, in her cross- examination conducted by the ld. Addl. PP for the State she denied having handed over any CD of the incident to IO and stated that the IO had played the CCTV footage in the office and FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 52 of 67 she denied having identified accused Kush in the aforementioned CD (Mark PW7/Article-2). She also stated that it was not the footage which had been shown by the IO to her. Thus, the aforementioned witness did not support the case of prosecution even to that extent.
59. The prosecution also examined PW-4 Gaurav Mandal from where DVR of CCTV having relevant footage regarding murder of Vinu Pandit was collected. However, the said witness also failed to identify the DVR which was produced in the court.
60. In effect, the prosecution failed to prove the aforementioned CCTV footage. The investigating agency also did not send the aforementioned CCTV footage to FSL for the purpose of ensuring that no tampering was done in it. Even otherwise, perusal of said footage shows that none of the accused persons can be identified in it.
61. Hence, the prosecution failed to lead any sort of direct / ocular evidence to establish that accused Akash Chauhan or accused Farukh Mazhar, Nazim, Kamil and Bilal Tansir had fired bullets upon the victim or any one of them were present at the place of incident or near it.
62. Now, coming to the circumstantial and other evidence lead on record by prosecution to establish the existence of criminal conspiracy and then commission of offence of murder, at the very outset it is necessary to note that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution is under a legal FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 53 of 67 obligation to establish a complete chain of circumstances that unerringly points towards the guilt of the accused persons and excludes every possible hypothesis of innocence. Each circumstance relied upon must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and all the circumstances so established must 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.
63. The law with respect to probative value of circumstantial evidence is well settled. In Sharad Bridhichand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116, Shailendra Rajdev Pasvan Vs. State of Gujarat (2020) 14 SCC 750 and Laxman Prasad Vs. State of Maharashtra 2023 SCC Online SC 743, it was held and reiterated that, "In a case of circumstantial evidence, the chain has to be complete in all respects so as to indicate the guilt of accused and also exclude any other theory of crime."
64. In the present case, the prosecution had alleged that the reason for commission of murder of Vinu Pandit was the fact that accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan alongwith others owed debt of huge amount to him. In addition, prosecution was also required to establish the facts such as the mobile phone locations and call detail records of the accused persons to show their presence and communication at relevant times, the stay of accused persons at hotel and residence of accused Sumit Chauhan prior to the incident for establishing the FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 54 of 67 necessary evidence to prove conspiracy or pre-planning and the alleged meeting between Waseem and Dilshad to indicate coordination and common intention.
65. The case of prosecution infact began with the assertion that accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan entered into criminal conspiracy and accused Akash Chauhan contacted Waseem. Thereafter, said Waseem met Majhar at Dasna Jail and asked him to contact Akash through Dilshad. Thereupon, Majhar contacted Dilshad who provided mobile number of Akash. Thereafter, Majhar involved Bilal Tansir @ Manhar, Kamar, Kamil and Nazim. Subsequently, accused Akash brought them to a hotel SS Residency where accused Dilshad took them and made them stay in the said hotel. The country made pistols were provided by accused Akash and consequently they committed the murder of Vinu Pandit on 23.10.2016.
66. In the present case, the most important piece of evidence vis-a-vis involvement of accused Mohd. Kamar, Dilshad, Babu Waseem, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan was the direct evidence of the alleged eye-witnesses. Upon establishing of the fact that accused Akash Chauhan, Farukh Majhar, Bilal Tansir, Nazim and Kamil had committed murder of Vinu Pandit, the chain of sequence of events would have been established backwards, but since the aforesaid evidence has not been proved, therefore, the case of prosecution took a beating vis-
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 55 of 67
a-vis accused Mohd. Kamar, Dilshad, Babu Waseem, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan as well.
67. However, even otherwise if we look into the evidence of each of the components step by step we will arrive at a conclusion that the prosecution has also failed to prove the elements relating to motive of commission of offence (of accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan), digital presence of accused persons, the sequence of communication between each of them, visit of Mohd. Waseem in Jail to meet accused Majhar as well as vis-a-vis stay of accused persons namely Farukh Majhar, Bilal Tansir, Mohd. Kamil and Nazim at the instance of accused Akash Chauhan, Sumit Chauhan and Dilshad.
68. The prosecution had examined the wife and mother in law of deceased Vinu Pandit i.e. PW-6 Ms. Deepika and PW-8 Ms. Nirupa qua the fact that the accused persons owed huge amount of money to deceased Vinu Pandit. The perusal of their depositions (as even referred earlier) shows that they did not support the case of prosecution. PW-6 and PW-8 denied the fact that accused Akash and his brother Chinu and accused Sumit owed money to deceased Vinu Pandit.
69. As per case of prosecution, one diary containing details of transactions allegedly recorded by deceased was produced by PW-8 Ms. Nirupa Sharma, however, the said witness in her cross-examination by ld. Addl. PP for the State she denied that the diary Ex. PW7/Article-I was handed over by her to the FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 56 of 67 IO. Therefore, the evidentiary value of recovery / discovery of said diary stood diminished. The prosecution was also liable to prove that the said diary was written in the handwriting of deceased, however, the prosecution did not lead any evidence to prove the said fact. Neither the sample handwriting of deceased was taken or sent for examination by handwriting expert nor any of the relatives of deceased were even questioned with regard to identification of his handwriting.
70. Thus, the prosecution miserably failed to prove that the accused persons owed debts to the deceased. Hence, the prosecution failed to prove even an element of its theory of projected motive for commission of murder of deceased Vinu Pandit by accused persons.
71. As per case of prosecution, accused Akash Chauhan had contacted accused Waseem, but besides the confessional statements of accused persons, the prosecution did not produce any material to establish the said fact. It is settled proposition of law that the aforesaid confessions made by accused to police without discovery of tangible fact is barred by section 25 & 26 of Indian Evidence Act.
72. The prosecution's case is that accused persons were in contact with each other prior to the incident. As per case of prosecution 15 calls were made between mobile number 9871616934 (registered in the name of Rakesh Chhillan) and mobile number 9873098428 (i.e. mobile phone of accused Dilshad). It is alleged that accused Akash was using the mobile FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 57 of 67 phone of Rakesh Chhillan for talking to accused Dilshad. The prosecution relied heavily on the deposition of Rakesh Chillan to establish the fact that accused Akash was using his mobile phone, however, the said witness also did not support the case of prosecution. However, PW-2 Rakesh Singh @ Chhillan turned hostile and denied all such facts. He deposed that he never gave his phone to Akash and had no knowledge of any such calls. In his cross-examination he rather deposed that he himself was in contact with accused Dilshad as they were looking for a room on rent for his friend Bantu and thereby they had gone to the shop of Dilshad who was a property dealer. Hence, there is no evidence on record to show that accused Akash was in regular touch with accused Dilshad prior to the incident.
73. Further, as per case of prosecution, accused Waseem was arrested in FIR No. 1458/2016 u/s 25 of Arms Act and in FIR No. 1457/2016 u/s 307 IPC, both registered at PS Sahibabad and he was lodged in Dasna Jail. As per record collected, his contact number was recorded as 8430801380. The CDR analysis revealed that 98 calls were exchanged between mobile number 8430801380 (used by Waseem) and mobile number 9873098428, which was being used by accused Dilshad.
74. The investigating agency had filed a copy of customer application form alongwith the chargesheet with respect to mobile no. 8430801380. The prosecution proved a document i.e. Ex.PW19/D which shows that the original CAF of said mobile phone was not available with service provider, FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 58 of 67 however, still the copy thereof Ex.PW19/C was placed on record. The bare perusal of Ex.PW19/C shows that it is in the name of one Arif S/o Shotan. However, no evidence was even collected in investigation to show as to how the said mobile phone allegedly landed in possession of accused Waseem. Hence, the prosecution failed to produce the best evidence with respect to proof that the aforementioned mobile no. 8430801380 belonged to accused Waseem as it was used by him.
75. PW-20 Surender Kumar, Nodal Officer of Bharti Airtel produced the customer application form of mobile no. 9873098428 i.e. Ex.PW20/C. The perusal thereof shows that it was issued in the name of Rajpal S/o Kishan Lal. However, once again no evidence was collected in investigation to show as to how the said mobile phone has been shown to be used by accused Dilshad. Hence, the prosecution has also failed to prove the allegation that accused Dilshad and Mohd. Waseem were constantly contacting each other prior to the incident.
76. As per case of prosecution set out in the chargesheet accused Kamil was using the mobile phone having no. 8476929212 and the same was issued in the name of Ms. Huma, however, during investigation the said address of said Ms. Huma could not be traced. Therefore, there is apparent lapse in the investigation vis-a-vis the aforementioned aspect as prosecution has failed to connect usage of mobile phone no. 8476929212 by accused Kamil as well. Accordingly, the allegation that accused FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 59 of 67 Waseem had talked to accused Kamil twice also could not be proved.
77. The prosecution had also examined the nodal officers of different service providers vis-a-vis the record pertaining to mobile numbers:- 9540822859 (in the name of Rakesh S/o Sh. Charan Singh), 9911224004 (Gurmeet Singh), 9953663289 (Sh. Dinesh), 8586864080 (Bhole Nath Ghouri), 8860720801 (Sh. Om Prakash Singh), 72909361345 (Sh. Rajender), 8447387799 & 8430801380 (CAF destroyed/not traced).
78. The record of aforementioned mobile phones does not connect any of the accused in this case to usage of the aforementioned mobile phones. No supporting or corroborating evidence was also collected during investigation to prove that the said phone numbers were being used by any of the accused persons.
79. The CDR analysis observation memos Ex.PW31/A, Ex.PW31/B and Ex.PW31/C respectively were prepared by IO on the basis of CDR's of mobile phone numbers as mentioned above. Hence, the said observation memos are also devoid of any evidentiary value. Hence, the evidence proved on record does not establish the allegation qua the fact that the all the aforementioned accused persons were talking to each other on mobile phones.
80. In this regard, in Jitender @ Jittu Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi, Crl. Appeal no. 593/2022, Decided on 23.03.2023, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held that, "CDR FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 60 of 67 data can only be taken as supporting or corroborative piece of evidence and conviction cannot be made solely on basis of CDR data. CDRs proved and relied on by the prosecution only proved that the appellants Jitender @ Jitu and Azad @ Gaurav, on day of incident, were present near place of occurrence/incident but it is not proved that they have actually participated in commission of offence as per complaint Ex. PW1/A. The respective counsels for the appellants Jitender @ Jitu and Azad @ Gaurav rightly argued that CDR data cannot be safely relied on to establish their criminality for the offence punishable under section 395 IPC."
81. Therefore, although it has been held that the prosecution failed to connect the mobile numbers with accused persons, even otherwise in view of proposition of law as referred above, the CDR data can only be used as corroborative evidence and it cannot be the sole reason to hold any of the accused persons guilty of the offences charged against them. Thus, it has to be said that prosecution has also failed to prove the aforementioned factum.
82. It is also alleged that accused Dilshad had gone to meet accused Waseem while he was lodged in Dasna Jail. As per the case of prosecution, the investigating officer had got collected the visitor register from Dasna Jail to show that accused Waseem and Dilshad had met each other in Dasna Jail on 03.10.2016 and 06.10.2016.
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 61 of 67
83. In order to prove the aforementioned facts, prosecution examined PW-22 SI Murlidhar who deposed that on 19.01.2017 he along with ASI Tehjib Haider went to Dasna Jail and collected attested copies of the under trial register and visitor Ex. PW22/B and Ex. PW22/C vide seizure memo Ex. PW22/A. However, neither the statement of maker of the register was recorded nor the statement of any official of the concenred jail who had the custody of said record was recorded during investigation. In absence of examination of witnesses who had prepared the record or were entrusted with the custody of the siad record, it has to be said that the prosecution has not been able to prove the aforementioned documents.
84. Therefore, it has to be held that prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the abovementioned accused persons were actually in touch with each other and were talking to each other in furtherance of their criminal conspiracy.
85. The other set of evidence sought to be proved by prosecution is that accused Mazhar, Bilal Tansir, Kamil and Kamar came to ISBT, Anand Vihar, Delhi and they were brought to a hotel by accused Akash. However, once again no evidence in that respect was collected during investigation nor such evidence was produced in the court. On the contrary, the case of prosecution as set out in the chargesheet is also to the effect that accused Dilshad was the friend of the owner of hotel SS Residency i.e. PW-13 Satish Soni and Dilshad had brought 3/4 persons to that hotel on 22.10.2016 and they stayed in the room FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 62 of 67 no. 304 of the hotel, but did not hand over / submit their identity proof nor made entries in the register of the hotel.
86. Prosecution examined PW-13 Sh. Satish Soni, but he only deposed that on 22.10.2016 he did not visit his hotel, however, he knew accused Dilshad as he was a property dealer and he had met him with regard to search of property. He was also cross-examined by the ld. Addl. PP for the State, but he denied having made statement u/s 161 Cr. PC to police officials. He further denied that accused Dilshad alongwith four persons had stayed in his hotel on 22.10.2016 and he was aware of the said fact.
87. The prosecution also examined Ms. Geetanjali i.e. Receptionist of abovesaid Hotel on 22.10.2016 as PW-5. Ms. Geetanjali also did not support the case of prosecution and she deposed that she was working as receptionist of SS Residency Guest House and in the month of 2016 she had showed the register of hotel to police officials i.e. PW5/Article-1.
88. As per prosecution version, four accused persons who had sought the victim had stayed in room no. 304 of Hotel SS Residency, but their identity cards could not be collected as the hotel staff got scared due to harsh tone of accused Dilshad. However, as per the register of hotel collected by investigating officer, one Rizwan had stayed in room no. 304 of the said hotel on 22.10.2016.
89. PW-5 Ms. Geetanjali also deposed that one Rizwan Ali S/o Shaukat Ali had stayed in room no. 304 of hotel on FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 63 of 67 22.10.2016 and she took the Adhar card of said person and no other persons had visited alongwith him. In her cross- examination by ld. Addl. PP for the State she denied the fact that she knew accused Dilshad who used to visit the hotel regularly. She also denied all the suggestions given to her as per case of prosecution to the extent that she had requested Dilshad to give identity proofs but he did not give the documents to her and rather scolded her. She also denied the fact that she had identified accused Majhar in the CCTV footage shown by Insp. Pankaj to her.
90. Similarly, prosecution also examined PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Rai i.e. hotel attendant of SS Residency. Io had recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C to the effect that he had seen accused Dilshad in Room No.304 of the hotel, but he also did not support the case of prosecution in his evidence recorded in the court. He completely denied the fact that he had gone to aforesaid room for serving water and food or the fact that he saw accused Dilshad in the said room. He also denied the suggestion given to him by the ld. Addl. PP for the State that Ms. Geetanjali had told him that accused Dilshad alongwith his associates had stayed in room no. 304 of the hotel on 22.10.2016.
91. The prosecution had examined PW-12 Amit Kumar as well as PW-2 Rakesh Chillan for establishing the fact that accused persons who were involved in murder of Vinu Pandit had also stayed in the house of accused Sumit Chauhan. However, FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 64 of 67 both the said witnesses did not support the case of prosecution qua the said fact.
92. Therefore, it has to be concluded that the prosecution also failed to prove that accused Akash Chauhan or Sumit Chauhan or Dilshad had arranged for the stay of the assailants who had committed murder of Vinu Pandit.
93. As far as recovery of weapons used in commission of offence is concerned, no such weapon was recovered at the instance of any of the accused persons during investigation. IO had recovered country made pistols allegedly used in the commission of offence from the spot. The said weapons were also sent to FSL, but no attempt was made to lift fingerprint impressions from the said pistols which could lead the investigation directly towards the guilt of the perpetrators of the crime. The other materials seized at the spot also do not even point out towards involvement of persons accused of commission of offence in this case. No other other direct evidence in the form of scientific evidence was collected and produced in the court which could unequivocally point towards the guilt of accused persons.
94. Thus, the prosecution failed to prove its case against all the accused as well as against any of them beyond reasonable doubt by way of direct evidence to the effect that accused Akash Chauhan, Farookh Mazhar, Bilal Tansir, Nazim and Kamil had shot the victim Vinod Sharma @ Vinu Pandit. It has also failed to prove the complete chain of circumstances which could lead to FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 65 of 67 irresistible conclusion that the murder of Vinod Sharma @ Vinu Pandit was committed in pursuance of criminal conspiracy/abetment/common intention of all or any of the accused persons.
Conclusion:
95. In view of the aforementioned discussion, it has to be concluded that prosecution has failed to lead cogent and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of accused persons either by way of direct evidence or by way of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused Akash Chauhan, Dilshad, Mohd. Kamil, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farookh Mazhar and Bilal Tansir had committed the murder of Vinod Sharma @ Vinu Pandit. It has also failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the aforesaid accused persons alongwith accused Sumit Chauhan, Kush Chauhan and Babu Waseem had entered into criminal conspiracy for committing murder of Vinod Sharma @ Vinu Pandit.
96. In absence of direct as well as circumstantial evidence, the accused persons cannot be convicted on the basis of conjectures and surmises. It is the settled proposition of law as reiterated in " K. Gopal Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh"
AIR 1979 Supreme Court, 387 that, "Where two divergent versions given by the prosecution and the defence and when two views were possible, the benefit of doubt should be extended to accused."
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 66 of 67
97. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned discussion, all the accused i.e. Akash Chauhan, Dilshad, Babu Waseem, Mohd. Kamil, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farookh Mazhar, Bilal Tansir, Sumit Chauhan and Kush Chauhan are given the benefit of doubt and accordingly they are acquitted of charges u/s 120-B IPC and section 107 IPC read with section 302 of IPC. Further accused Akash Chauhan, Dilshad, Mohd. Kamil, Mohd. Kamar, Mohd. Nazim, Farookh Mazhar and Bilal Tansir are also acquitted of the charge u/s 302 IPC r/w section Sec. 120-B IPC and in the alternative u/s 302/34 IPC.
98. All accused have already furnished bail bonds/surety bonds u/s 437-A Cr. PC. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by SUSHANT SUSHANT CHANGOTRA CHANGOTRA Date:
Announced in open Court on 2025.05.01
17:25:15
+0530
23.04.2025
(Sushant Changotra)
ASJ (FTC) / East
KKD Court/ Delhi
FIR No. 382/2016 PS Geeta Colony
State Vs Akash Chauhan & Ors Page no. 67 of 67