Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Sc No.58005/16 State vs . Abhishek Kumar Page No. 1/4 on 5 April, 2017

            IN THE COURT OF MR. RAKESH KUMAR-I :
     ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE / SPECIAL JUDGE: (NDPS)
         WEST DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI


IN THE MATTER OF

SESSIONS CASE NO.58005/16
FIR NO.232/16
P.S. MIANWALI NAGAR
U/S 302/34 IPC

STATE

            VERSUS

ABHISHEK KUMAR,
S/O MR. PARMOD KUMAR,
R/O B-492, II FLOOR, CAMP NO.4,
JWALA PURI, DELHI.
                                                      .....ACCUSED


DATE OF INSTITUTION                       :       26.08.2016
DATE OF RESERVING THE ORDER               :       05.04.2017
DATE OF DECISION                          :       05.04.2017

                          JUDGEMENT

1. Briefly stating as per the case of the prosecution on 14.05.2016 at about 08:00 PM at C-Block Complex, Jwala Puri, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station Mianwali Nagar, accused Abhishek Kumar along with his associates Deepak @Lala and Chandni(JCLs) had committed the murder of Mr. Prem Chand.

2. Accused Abhishek Kumar is facing trial for the offence punishable under section 302/34 IPC. Charge was framed vide order dated 04.10.2016, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. Prosecution in all examined following witnesses :-

PW-1 Dr. Nishant Bisht has proved the portion A of MLC Ex.PW1/A;

PW-2 Dr. Rohit Kumar has proved the MLC Ex.PW1/A;

PW-3 Mr. Sanwar Mal, the principal has proved the admission record of accused in school;

PW-4 Ms. Dhaneshwari, the mother of deceased has identified the dead body of deceased vide identification memo Ex.PW4/A and handing over memo Ex.PW4/B;

PW-5 Mr. Sanjay @Vickey, the elder brother of deceased has identified the dead body of deceased vide identification memo Ex.PW5/A and handing over memo Ex.PW4/B;

PW-6 Dr. Anurag Thapar has conducted the postmortem on the dead body of deceased vide report Ex.PW6/A and gave subsequent opinion Ex.PW6/D;

PW-7 ASI Rajesh Kumar, the duty officer has proved the FIR Ex.PW7/A, endorsement Ex.PW7/B and certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW7/C;

PW-8 SI Om Prakash, the draughtsman has proved the scaled site plan Ex.PW8/A;

PW-9 Constable Sunil, the photographer has proved the negatives Ex.PW9/A-1 to Ex.PW9/A-13 and photographs Ex.PW9/B-1 to Ex.PW9/B-13;

PW-10 Ms. Geeta is the complainant/ wife of deceased and she is the material witness in this case but she has not supported the case of prosecution rather resiled from her statement despite she being cross-examined at length by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State.

4. Prosecution evidence has been closed today vide separate detailed order. Statement of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. has been dispensed with as there is no incriminating/ scientific evidence against the accused.

5. The record has been carefully and thoroughly perused. Submissions of Mr. Ram Pyara, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State and Mr. Uday Prasad, learned counsel for accused have been heard. The respective submissions of either side have been considered.

6. PW-10 Ms. Geeta, the complainant/ wife of deceased is the only material witness/eye witness in this case but she has not supported the case of the prosecution rather resiled from her statement despite she being cross examined at length by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State. She has deposed that one day she was cooking food at her house when she received a phone call of one unknown boy on her mobile phone no. 9250228461 and he informed PW-10 that her husband Prem Chand was admitted in Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital in injured condition. PW-10 reached there and found her husband admitted there and he was unconscious and was unable to speak. PW-10 has further deposed that her husband expired on the same night during treatment in the hospital. PW-10 was not allowed by the doctor to see the injuries received by her husband. PW-10 has further deposed that she is not aware as to who had caused injuries to her husband Prem Chand. PW-10 has also deposed that accused Abhishek, Chandni(JCL) or any other person had not caused any injury to her husband. PW-10 had not seen the present incident and none of the accused persons was arrested in her presence.

7. A perusal of record shows that PW-10 Ms. Geeta, the wife of the deceased is the only material witness/ eye witness in this case but she has not supported the case of prosecution rather resiled from her statement despite she being cross-examined at length by SC No.58005/16 State Vs. Abhishek Kumar Page No. 3/4 Ld. Addl. PP for State. Even a perusal of FSL result filed today reveals that it is not in consonance. Although the human blood is detected on the knives but its group is not there. The scientific evidence is also not in support of the case of the prosecution and not conclusive. There is nothing to show that the human blood was found on the weapon of offence i.e. knives was of deceased,

8. In view of the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. Accordingly, accused Abhishek Kumar is acquitted of the offence punishable under section 302/34 IPC in this case FIR No.232/16, Police Station Mianwali Nagar. He is in judicial custody in this case. He be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. He is directed to furnish his personal bond in sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of the like amount in view of provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. within a week from today.

File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
ON : 05th APRIL, 2017         (RAKESH KUMAR-I)
                         ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
                             SPECIAL JUDGE : NDPS
                             WEST DISTRICT/ DELHI




SC No.58005/16          State Vs. Abhishek Kumar       Page No. 4/4