Delhi District Court
State vs Daleep Kumar Ram @ Daleep Ram on 31 August, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SUSHANT CHANGOTRA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)
EAST DISTRICT, DELHI
Session Case No.: 973/2016
State Vs : Daleep Kumar Ram @ Daleep Ram
FIR No. : 221/14
U/s : 302 IPC
PS : Shakarpur
CNR No.: DLET01-002015-2014
Date of Institution : 28.07.2014
Date of Judgment reserved on 27.08.2024
Date of Judgment : 31.08.2024
Brief Details Of The Case
Offence complained of or
proved : 302 IPC
Name of the accused : Daleep Kumar Ram @
Daleep Ram S/o Ram
Janam Ram R/o Harijan
Tola, Mohiuddin Nagar,
Distt. Samastipur, Bihar
Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final order : Acquitted
JUDGMENT
1. The accused Daleep Kumar Ram @ Daleep Ram is facing trial with respect to allegations of having committed offences u/s 302 IPC.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 1 of 48
2. The brief facts leading to the initiation of criminal proceedings against the accused are that:
(a) On 31.01.2014 at 9:40 AM information was received in Police Station Shakarpur from police control room that a person was lying unconscious in H.No. L-58, Laxmi Nagar. The said information was recorded vide DD No. 20 B and it was handed over to SI Sudhir Rathi who left for the spot alongwith Ct. Rakesh. Thereafter, Inspector Daya Sagar alongwith SI Amit Verma, HC Jasbir and Ct. Sagarmal also went to the aforementioned house and found that a dead body of a person was lying on a cot at the ground floor of the aforementioned house and it was. There were injury marks on the left side of his head and the upper portion of his left ear had been cut. On enquiry, the name of deceased was found to be Mohd. Aslam S/o Mohd. Sattar.
(b) Inspector Daya Sagar called the crime team at the spot and the said crime team inspected the spot and took photographs. The blood samples of deceased were taken in gauze, blood stained earth control and blood samples on the wall were also taken. The blood stained hammer lying near the cot, the blood stained quilt taken by deceased, mat under the body of deceased, cot itself and the blood stained pillow were also seized.
All these articles were sealed with seal of 'PS SHAKARPUR EAST DISTT SP 02'. No eye witness of the incident was found at the spot. The dead body was sent for postmortem examination FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 2 of 48 to the mortuary of Sabji Mandi alongwith aforementioned exhibits.
(c) On the basis of aforementioned facts, offence u/s 302 of IPC was found to have been committed, therefore, Insp. Daya Sagar prepared 'tehrir' and sent Ct. Sagar Mal to police station for registration of FIR. Thereafter, he prepared site plan at the instance of witness. He also recorded statement of the care taker of the building namely Sh. Aman Gupta who disclosed that deceased Mohd. Aslam (mason) and accused Daleep Ram (labourer) used to sleep in the said under construction property. On 30.01.2014 at about 6.30 pm both of them quarreled with each other and on the morning of 31.01.2014 Aslam was found dead. He called owner of property namely Rajesh and then called the police.
(d) IO tried to find Daleep Ram, but he was not found around the place of incident. He made inquiry from the contractor Jaikant Paswan and recorded his statement. On 01.02.2014, Insp. Daya Sagar got the postmortem examination of deceased conducted and handed over the body of deceased to relatives. The viscera, clothes, nail clippings and blood samples were taken into possession. As per postmortem report, the cause of death was "combined effect of cranio cerebral damage and hemorrhagic shock consequent upon blunt force impact to the head and chest region respectively".
(e) On 04.02.2017, the police party consisting of SI Sudhir Rathi went to the house of Daleep Ram at Moinuddin FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 3 of 48 Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar, but the house of accused was found locked. Thereafter, police officials were repeatedly sent to the village of accused Daleep Ram, but he always evaded apprehension. IO also prepared scaled site plan. Insp. Daya Sagar got transferred and investigation was handed over to Insp. Nipun Kumar.
(f) On 12.04.2014, once again police party led by SI Sudhir Rathi went to the house of accused in Bihar and on 15.04.2014 accused Daleep Ram was arrested at the instance of Jaikant Paswan. Information regarding his arrest was given to his brother Satish and to the officials of police station Moinuddin Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar.
(g) During interrogation IO, IO recorded disclosure statement of accused Daleep Ram and he disclosed that on the night of 30.01.2014 after consuming liquor, deceased Aslam kept giving filthy abuses to him due to which scuffle ensued between them. He gave a hammer blow to chest and head of Aslam. Thereafter, he picked up his belongings and came to the house of his known person at Uttam Nagar, Delhi and from there he went to Bihar.
(h) Accused Daleep Ram led the police party and pointed out the place of incident. He disclosed that after the occurrence he went to the house of Jitender at A-540, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and stayed with him till 31.01.2014. He also led police to the said place. Thereafter, he stayed with his cousin Savitri at Nathan Vihar, Delhi and also pointed out the FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 4 of 48 said place to police and got his belongings i.e. clothes and utensils recovered from there. The clothes which the accused was wearing at the time of incident were taken into possession. The exhibits were sent to FSL, Rohini. As per viscera report methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol were found in the body of deceased. Accordingly, chargesheet was filed in the court.
3. The court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offences. The case file was committed to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 21.07.2014 after completion of necessary legal formalities u/s 207 Cr.P.C. Pursuant to order of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, East, the matter was fixed for hearing on point of charge. Vide order dated 17.09.2014, charge u/s 302 IPC was framed against accused and he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to establish its case, prosecution examined 36 witnesses. A brief account of the depositions made by the witnesses of prosecution is reproduced herein below:-
Evidence of Public Witnesses:
5. PW-4 Jaikant Paswan was the contractor of construction being carried out at the site of incident i.e. House no. L-58/A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. The prosecution had examined this witness to prove that accused Daleep Ram and deceased Mohd. Aslam were working together at the aforementioned site of construction on the day of incident. In his examination in chief, PW Jaikant deposed that both Mohd. Aslam and Daleep Ram were working at the aforementioned site and they used to FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 5 of 48 reside on the ground floor of above-mentioned under construction house. On 30.01.2014 at about 6:30 PM he gave dues of Rs. 2000/- to deceased Mohd. Aslam and Rs. 6000/- to accused Daleep Ram.
This witness further deposed that 2/3 days prior to the incident accused Daleep Ram had quarreled with Mohd. Aslam, but he intervened and pacified the matter. On 30.01.2014 they again quarreled and Daleep Ram threatened to kill Mohd. Aslam, but yet again he pacified the matter and left for his house. On the next day i.e. 31.01.2014 at 9 AM when he reached at the spot alongwith mason Vijay and Saheer he found Mohd. Aslam was lying on cot and he was covered with a blanket. He further found blood on the head of Mohd. Aslam and accused Daleep Ram was not present in the house. He called the owner of the house namely Rajesh Kumar and told him about injuries to Mohd. Aslam. Sh. Rajesh Kumar sent his supervisor Aman Gupta to the spot. After coming to the spot Aman Gupta found Mohd. Aslam in dead condition and made a call at 100 number and after sometime police officials as well as Rajesh Kumar came to the spot.
On 15.04.2014 he alongwith four police officials went to Mohiddin Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar and accused Daleep Ram was apprehended by police from his house. He proved the arrest memo of accused Ex. PW4/A and personal search memo Ex. PW4/B and stated that police official prepared the said documents and he signed on the said documents. He further FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 6 of 48 deposed that he handed over his register containing record of labour i.e. P1 and it was seized by IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW4/C. In his cross-examination conducted on 04.02.2016, the witness deposed that he had prepared the above-mentioned diary as the police officer was harassing him to prepare the same. He further stated that on 30.01.2014 at about 9 AM accused informed him that his sister in law had expired in Bihar and he accepted the request of accused for going to Bihar. He also stated that he did not see accused after 9 AM at that day. He also stated that his earlier statement recorded in examination in chief was false.
This witness was recalled on application u/s 311 Cr. PC filed by ld. Amicus Curiae vide order dated 17.10.2023 and he was further cross-examined on 23.11.2023. Thereafter, ld. Addl. PP for the State also moved an application u/s 311 Cr. PC and he was yet again summoned vide order dated 06.03.2024 and was re-examined on 03.04.2024. In his re-examination, this witness denied the contents of his cross-examination and he reiterated that the contents of his examination in chief were correct. He was also cross-examined by ld. defence counsel on that occasion.
6. PW-6 Rajesh Kumar who was stated to be owner of House no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi stated that the said property was in his wife's name and he was re-constructing it after demolishing the same. He gave contract to Jaikant and FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 7 of 48 appointed Aman Gupta as supervisor of construction activity. On 30.01.2014 at 8:30 AM Jaikant gave him a telephone call and told that a labourer namely Aslam had been murdered. He sent Aman to the spot and later on he also went to there. He handed over the photocopy of contract agreement with Jaikant i.e. Ex. PW6/A to the IO alongwith photocopy of ID of Jaikant Ex. PW6/D. Later on he went to police station with Aman Gupta and identified accused who was working as 'beldar' for contractor Jaikant at his house and had gone missing since murder. He identified the accused in the court and stated that during interrogation by police accused had disclosed in his presence that on the night of 30/31.01.2014, Aslam had abused him due to which he hit hammer on his head and caused his death and fled away.
In his cross-examination, he denied the factum of confession of accused and also denied visiting the spot on 30.01.2014. He also stated that he did not see accused living in the said house and was not aware whether accused was present on site on 30.01.2014.
7. PW-7 Aman Gupta i.e. supervisor of construction activity of House no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar also deposed that contract of construction of said house was given to Jaikant. One mason namely Aslam and accused Daleep i.e. labourer were working of Jaikant and both of them used to sleep at ground floor of building at night. On 30.01.2014 at about 6:30 PM he saw that accused and victim were arguing with each other. On the FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 8 of 48 morning of 31.01.2014 he received telephone call from Rajesh and went to the house which was under construction and met Jaikant and his labour standing outside the house. Then Jaikant told him that labourer was bleeding from head inside the building. He went inside and found that Aslam was lying on a cot and was bleeding from head and blood had spilled over to the floor. He conveyed the information to Rajesh and at his instruction he called the police at 100 number from his mobile no. 9910980196 which was in the name of his father Sh. Jagdish Prasad Gupta. Police came to the spot and inquired from him and took body of Aslam with them and accused Daleep was not present at the spot. At the spot he came to know that Aslam had expired and he again called the police at 100 number to inform this fact.
On 16.04.2014, he received a call from police station regarding arrest of Daleep Ram and then he alongwith Rajesh went to PS Shakarpur and identified accused Daleep. Accused disclosed in his presence that in the night of 30- 31.04.2014 Aslam was abusing him and he stuck a hammer on his head out of anger and fled away after murdering him. He also identified the accused in the court.
In his cross-examination, he stated that he could not confirm if deceased Aslam and accused Daleep were on duty on 30.01.2014 or not. He did not know if on the morning of 30.01.2014 Daleep Ram and Aslam were giving payment by FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 9 of 48 Jaikant or not and the construction work was closed at about 5:30 PM on that day.
8. PW-25 Mohd. Akram i.e. younger brother of deceased Mohd. Aslam deposed that on 28 th day in the year of 2014 i.e. five days before the murder of his brother at 3 PM, he went to meet his brother at Laxmi Nagar. At that time, his brother was residing there and was working as a mason. His brother pointed towards accused Daleep Ram who was also residing with him and told him that he used to drink and quarrel with him. His brother also told him that accused Daleep Ram was angry with him as he was staying with him in the same building at night. He tried to convince Daleep Ram not to quarrel with him and live peacefully.
He further stated that in the year 2014 he received information from PS Shakarpur that accused Daleep Ram had been arrested. He went to PS and identified the accused who led them to place of incident i.e. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and also pointed towards the room where he committed murder of his brother. He proved the pointing out memo Ex. PW25/A. He also stated that on 01.02.2014 he identified the dead body of his brother vide identification memo Ex.PW25/B and he proved the handing over memo of dead body i.e. Ex. PW1/B vide which dead body was handed over to him.
In his further examination in chief on the basis of leading questions asked by ld. Addl. PP for the State, he stated that it was correct that he met his brother on 28.01.2014 at 7 PM FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 10 of 48 at Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and police had called him to PS Shakarpur on 16.04.2014. He also identified accused Daleep Ram in the court.
9. In his cross-examination, he stated that he was not sure if Aslam and accused were on duty on 30.01.2014. He did not know if Jaikant gave payments to Daleep and Aslam on 30.01.2014. The prosecution also examined 9 other public witnesses, however, their depositions were materially different as compared to their statements u/s 161 Cr. PC. The crux of their statements u/s 161 Cr. PC and their depositions in court are given below:
(I) PW-9 Sunil Ram S/o Parmeshwar Ram -
Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
On 30.01.2014 at about 8 :30 / 9 PM accused Daleep Ram came to his room and both of them went to meet Vijay (i.e. PW-31) and accused took a sum of Rs. 4000/- from Vijay to go back to his village.
Deposition in Court:
PW-9 Sunil Ram S/o Parmeshwar Ram deposed that accused Daleep Ram was his cousin and he used to supply building material at the building site of Jagatram Park, Laxmi Nagar and accused Daleep was working as Baildar at the said site. He also deposed that about two years ago, on a Tuesday, the accused met him and told him that he was going to his home in Bihar because his sister-in-law was ill.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 11 of 48 Since, the witness did not support the case of prosecution, therefore, he was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness stated that Jaikant was the contractor of above-mentioned site and accused had deposited his wages with one Vijay who was residing with him. He stated that it was correct that in the year 2014 at about 8:30 - 9:00 PM accused had gone with him to collect his cash amount of Rs. 4,000/- from Vijay Mistri and on the next day accused Dalip Ram went to his native village. He denied the suggestion that it was 30.01.2014 when the accused accompanied him to Vijay Mistri to collect the money.
In his cross-examination by defence counsel he stated that accused told him about illness of his 'bhabhi' on the same day and he was going to his native village on the same night.
(II) PW-10 Sunil Ram S/o Shoki Ram Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
He stated that he knew accused Daleep as they hailed from the same village. On 16.04.2014 he alongwith Jagdeep Ram returned from work and saw that accused Daleep Kumar came alongwith police and accused pointed out towards their house and disclosed that on the night of 30/31.01.2014 after committing murder of Aslam, he came to house no. A-540, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar in the morning and stayed with Jitender who used to live in the said house. The accused also disclosed that he washed his blood-stained clothes in the same FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 12 of 48 house. Thereafter, he also disclosed that after that he went to the house of Savitri who also hailed from the same village and stayed at her house.
Deposition in Court:
He deposed that in the year 2014 he used to reside in house no. 580, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar and about two months prior to 29.01.2014 his uncle Ashok had gone to the village and he telephonically asked him to inform his brother i.e. accused Daleep that his sister-in-law was unwell. However, since he did not know Daleep's address or phone number, therefore he could not convey this information to him, but on 29.01.2014, he came to know that accused Daleep had also gone to his village. He further deposed that in the year 2014, at about 9:30 PM police alongwith the accused Daleep came to his house and informed him that the accused was involved in a murder case.
Since, the witness did not support the case of prosecution, therefore, he was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness denied the suggestions given by ld. Addl. PP for the State.
(III) PW-11 Jagdeep Ram S/o Saryu Ram:
Statement u/s 161 Cr.PC:
He knew accused Daleep Kumar as his elder brother Ashok Kumar used to live with him. On 16.04.2014, police officials brought accused Daleep Kumar to his room. On the morning of 31.01.2014 accused Daleep came to the room of Jitender Ram and brought his clothes and utensils in a white bag.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 13 of 48 He stayed in Jitender's room and had breakfast with him. In the evening, the accused was planning to go to Punjab for work. The next day, he went to the house of Savitri and later on he discovered that Daleep Ram had committed murder.
Deposition in Court:
In the year 2014, he used to reside at house no. 580, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar, Delhi. Accused Daleep Ram is the brother of Ashok who had gone to village about two months prior to 29.01.2014 and he telephonically asked him to inform his brother i.e. accused Daleep that his sister-in-law was unwell. However, since he did not know Daleep's address or phone number, therefore he could not convey this information to him, but on 29.01.2014, he came to know that accused Daleep had also gone to his village. He further deposed that in the year 2014, at about 9:30 PM police alongwith the accused Daleep came to his house and informed him that the accused was involved in a murder case. He was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness denied the suggestions given by ld. Addl. PP for the State.
(IV) PW-12 Sarwan Ram S/o Rameshwar Ram Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
On 16.04.2014 his brother-in-law accused Daleep Kumar Ram along with police officials came to his house and accused got recovered a plastic bag containing his belongings. He also stated that about two and a half months ago the accused along with his belongings came to his house and stayed with him FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 14 of 48 for two days. The accused told him that he was going to his village and would return after some days.
Deposition in Court:
Accused Daleep was his distant relative from his village. About two years ago, accused Daleep met him and told him that his sister in law was unwell and then accused went to his village. After few days police officials came to his house and took his signatures on blank papers. He was cross-examined by ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness denied the suggestions given by ld. Addl. PP for the State.
(V) PW-13 Mohd. Shahid S/o Sabdul Mian Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
He was mason by occupation and knew contractor Jaikant. In January, 2014 Jaikant had taken contract of construction of 3/4 houses in Laxmi Nagar. He had worked with Jaikant in house no. 58A, Laxmi Nagar and 3 rd storey of the said building was under construction. At that time, Daleep Kumar Ram was working in the said house and he used to sleep there. Later on Jaikant also took contract for construction of adjoining building and he started working there. In the meanwhile a mason namely Aslam started working with Jaikant and he alongwith Daleep Kumar Ram used to sleep in house no. 58A, Laxmi Nagar.
On 30.01.2014 he was working at the adjoining building of house no. 58A, Laxmi Nagar for contractor Jaikant. On that day, after finishing his work as he came out of the house FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 15 of 48 he met Vijay. Accused Daleep Kumar Ram, Aslam and Jaikant were present in house no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar. At about 6:30 pm, he left accused Daleep Kumar at the said house and he alongwith Vijay went to his house. During his conversation accused Daleep Kumar told him that Aslam used to abuse him at night after getting drunk and due to this there was tension between them. Jaikant also told him that a quarrel had taken place between accused Daleep Kumar and Aslam. On the next day at about 9 am, he met Jaikant in front of house no. L-58, Laxmi Nagar. He saw Aslam was lying dead on a cot in the room at the ground floor and blood was oozing from his head. Accused Daleep Kumar Ram was not present there and his belongings were also not found there. Jaikant telephonically informed the owner of above-said house about Aslam. After sometime, supervisor Aman Gupta came there and called at 100 number.
Deposition in Court:
About two and a half years ago construction work was going on at a site in Laxmi Nagar. He was working at the site as mason for the contractor Jaikant. One morning when he came at the site, he came to know about the recovery of a body from the adjoining house which was also under construction. He did not know whose body it was. He went back to his house. He did not give any statement to police nor he knew as to how the occurrence took place. He was cross-examined by ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness denied the FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 16 of 48 suggestions given by ld. Addl. PP for the State. During cross- examination, he stated that he did not know anyone by the name of Daleep Kumar resident of Samastipur, Bihar or Aslam or the fact that any of them used to sleep in house no. 58-A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. He also denied having given statement Mark PW13/A to the police.
(VI) PW-15 Mrs. Nathi Devi W/o Sedu Ram Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
She was owner of house no. A-580, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar and Jagdeep, Sunil Ram and Jitender Ram were residing on rent in three rooms of top floor of said house. About three months ago Jitender Ram went to his village after locking his room and did not return back. Later on she came to know that one person from Bihar stayed with Jitender Ram after committing murder at Laxmi Nagar.
Deposition in Court:
In the year 2014, one Sunil Ram alongwith 2-3 persons used to live on the fourth floor of her house on rent where three rooms were constructed. In the year 2014, police met her and asked her name, address etc and she did not know anything else regarding the case. She was cross-examined by ld. Addl. PP for the State. She denied having given statement to police.
(VII) PW-30 Jitender Ram S/o Late Sh. Munni Ram Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 17 of 48 He was residing at A-540, Hastsal Road, Uttam Nagar, Delhi on rent. Earlier Ashok Kumar with his younger brother Daleep Kumar also resided at above-said address with him. On 31.01.2014 after performing his night duty he returned to his room at about 10:00 am. The persons who were living with him had already went for their daily work. Accused Daleep Kumar came to his room and told him that he was working in Laxmi Nagar and a quarrel had taken place between him and a labour. He also told him that he wanted to send money to his brother Ashok Kumar as he was not well. Then, accused Daleep gave Rs. 5000/- to him. After 2/3 days he received a call from his village that police was searching for Daleep who had committed murder a labour. He has a joint account with his mother in United Bank of India at Moinuddin Nagar Branch and he deposited his money as well as money of Daleep Kumar in the said bank account at Fateh Nagar Branch, Delhi.
Deposition in Court:
In the year 2014, he was residing in Holy Chowk, Hastsal Vihar, Uttam Nagar, Delhi as a tenant. He knew accused Daleep and his brother Ashok as they all belonged to same village. About four years ago, at about 9:30/9:45 AM he returned to his room after finishing his night duty and no one was present. After waking up he received a call from accused Daleep who informed him that his 'Bhabhi' had expired and he asked for some money from him, but he refused. Thereafter, he again slept and in the evening he went to his duty.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 18 of 48 (VIII) PW-31 Vijay Shah S/o Ram Gulam Shah Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
He was mason by occupation and earlier he used to work with contractor Jaikant. During his tenure of work at house no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi he came to know that accused Daleep Kumar Ram who was working as 'baildar' with Jaikant and he also worked with him for about one month. The said Daleep Kumar Ram used to sleep in the aforementioned house no. L-58A. Later on contractor Jaikant shifted him to site of another construction at Subhash Chowk, Laxmi Nagar, but Daleep Kumar Ram continued to work at L-58A, Laxmi Nagar. Jaikant called another mason namely Aslam for constructing house no. L-58A. As per his information, Daleep Kumar Ram and Aslam used to sleep in the same house. Daleep Kumar Ram had deposited his wages of Rs. 4,000/- with him.
On the evening of 30.01.2014 after finishing his daily work he went to L-58A Laxmi Nagar and met Daleep Ram, Aslam and Jaikant. Jaikant gave the dues of accused Daleep Kumar Ram and Aslam to them. Aslam and Daleep Kumar Ram had quarreled with each other. Daleep Kumar Ram told him that Aslam used to abuse him after consuming liquor. At 6:30 pm he alongwith another mason Shahid went to his house and Jaikant also followed them, whereas, Aslam and Daleep Kumar Ram remained at house no. L-58A.
At about 9/9:30 PM, Daleep Kumar Ram and his cousin Sunil Ram came to his room and Daleep took Rs. 4000/-FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 19 of 48 which he had deposited with him. On the next day i.e.
31.01.2014 he came to know that Aslam had been murdered the night before. He went to house no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar and saw that dead body of Aslam was lying at the said house and Daleep Kumar Ram was not traceable.
Deposition in Court:
In the year 2014, he was residing at House no. A-8, Gali no. 2, Kishan Kunj Extn. He was acquainted with accused Daleep Ram as he used to work with him as labour. In the year 2014, they both worked for contractor Jaikant. Accused Daleep Ram gave him Rs. 4,000/-. In the evening of 29.01.2014 accused Daleep met him at his above-mentioned house and collected his money. Accused also told him that he was going to his village. He was not present alongwith accused Daleep Ram on 30.01.2014 at House no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar. He was cross-
examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. In his cross-examination the witness denied the suggestions given by ld. Addl. PP for the State.
(IX) PW-34 Hasmuddin S/o Amrula Ansari Statement u/s 161 Cr. PC:
He was carpenter by occupation. On 16.04.2014, he was working at Rajesh Kumar's house at L-58A, Laxmi Nagar. Police officers along with Daleep and Akram came to the said house. He came to know that about two and a half months earlier, accused Daleep had murdered another labour namely Aslam (Akram's brother) with a hammer and then he had fled away. Accused Daleep also pointed to a room on the ground floor FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 20 of 48 where a cot was lying and informed that he had killed Aslam on that cot. The police prepared site plan and he signed the same.
Deposition in Court:
He supported the case of prosecution and also deposed that IO had prepared 'Nishandehi' i.e. Ex. PW25/A at the spot.
Formal Witnesses-
10. PW-1 Mohd. Sattar deposed that on 01.02.2014 he identified dead body of his elder brother in law namely Mohd.
Aslam in the mortuary of Sabzi Mandi vide his statement Ex. PW1/A and after postmortem dead body was handed over to him as well as Mohd. Akram vide handing over memo Ex. PW1/B.
11. PW-8 Surender Kumar, Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel proved the certified copy of CAF of mobile no. 8800585244 which was in the name of Jaikant Paswan i.e. Ex.PW8/A / Ex. PW8/D, copy of voter ID of Jaikan Paswan Ex. PW8/A1 / Ex. PW8/D1. He also proved the certified copy of CDR of above- mentioned mobile number for the period from 30.01.2014 to 01.02.2014 Ex. PW8/A2 / Ex. PW8/D2.
This witness also proved certified copy of CAF of mobile number 9910980196 in the name of Jagdish Kumar Gupta Ex. PW8/B / Ex. PW8/E, voter ID of Jagdish Kumar Ex. PW8/B1 / Ex. PW8/E1 and CDR of mobile no. 9910980196 from 30.01.2014 to 31.01.2014 Ex. PW8/B2 / Ex. PW8/E2. He proved certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW8/C & Ex. PW8/F. He also proved location ID card of said mobile Ex.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 21 of 48 PW8/E3. He identified signatures of Mr. Vishal Gaurav, Nodal Officer as he was familiar with his writing and signature.
12. PW-28 H. K. Bhargava, Retd. Manager, United Bank of India deposed that on 05.08.2014 on the request of IO from PS Shakarpur, Delhi, Ms. Raj Bala, Sr. Branch Manager had provided details of A/c no. 0782010224512 pertaining to one Jitender Ram i.e. Ex. PW28/A. In pursuance of notice u/s 91 Cr. PC dated 04.08.2014 Ms. Raj Bala informed the IO that Rs. 9,000/- was deposited in said account on 25.02.2014 in their branch. He proved letter in this regard Ex. PW28/B. He also identified the handwriting and signature of Ms. Raj Bala as he had seen her writing and signing during course of his official duty.
Medical Evidence-
13. PW-2 Dr. Akash Jhanjee deposed that he conducted postmortem examination on the dead body of deceased Mohd. Aslam S/o Late Mohd. Sattar. He prepared his report Ex.PW2/A. He also stated that on 19.06.2014 he also received application from Inspector Nipun Kumar, PS Shakarpur for providing subsequent opinion on viscera report alongwith FSL report Ex.PW2/B and after examining the same he gave his detailed report on the back side of the request application i.e. Ex. PW2/C. He also deposed that cause of death was combined effect of craniocerebral damage and hemorrhagic shock consequent upon blunt force impact to the head and chest region FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 22 of 48 respectively. The deceased showed presence of methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol in the body at the time of incident.
14. PW-5 Dr. Sushil Kumar deposed that on 16.04.2014 at about 10.45 am one person namely Daleep Kumar Ram was produced by Ct. Janardan Pandey for medical examination and preservation of blood sample for DNA. He medically examined him vide MLC Ex. PW5A. He collected blood sample in gauze, dried it and sealed with the seal of hospital. He handed over the sample to the police official alongwith sample seal. Expert Evidence-
15. PW-33 Dr. Adesh Kumar, Sr. Scientific Officer (Chemistry) deposed that on 02.04.2014 one sealed wooden box was received in FSL, Rohini and same was marked to him for chemical examination. The seal of box was intact. After chemical examination, he prepared his detailed report Ex. PW2/B and the remnant of exhibits were sealed with the seal of AY FSL Delhi.
16. PW-35 Ms. Poonam Sharma deposed that on 12.05.2014, 14 sealed parcels in connection with the present case were received in the FSL laboratory. After examining the exhibits she prepared DNA report Ex. PW35/A. Police Witnesses-
17. PW-3 HC Karan Singh i.e. Duty Officer deposed that on 31.01.2014 at about 1.35 pm, Ct. Sagarmal produced a rukka and on the basis of said rukka, he got registered the present FIR Ex.PW3/A and he also made endorsement on it Ex. PW3/B. FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 23 of 48 He handed over rukka and copy of FIR to Ct. Sagarmal for further handing it over to Insp. Daya Sagar. He proved DD No. 20A Ex. PW3/C and DD No. 20A Ex. PW3/D. He also issued certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW3/E.
18. PW-14 W/Ct. Nirmala Meena deposed that on 31.01.2014 she received a call from mobile no. 9910981096 that one person was lying unconscious at L-58 Laxmi Nagar near Sabzi Mandi. She proved PCR form Ex. PW14/A and certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW14/B. She proved another copy of PCR form Ex. PW14/B1 and stated that she had dispatched the said call for further necessary action.
19. PW-16 Ct. Praveen deposed that on 02.04.2014 on the directions of IO, he went to FSL Rohini and deposited the exhibit i.e. one sealed wooden box of this case. The exhibit was duly sealed and it remained intact till the time it was in his possession. He further deposed that after depositing the exhibit he handed over the receipt Mark 16/A to MHC (M).
He also deposed that on 16.04.2014, he alongwith IO and accused Daleep Kumar went to house no. 580, Hastsal Road near Uttam Nagar Metro Station belonging to one Jitender and IO prepared pointing out memo Ex. PW10/A. Thereafter accused took them to house of his cousin situated at Nathan Pura at Uttam Nagar and accused got recovered a plastic 'katta' containing some utensils kept underneath a table and IO seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW16/A. FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 24 of 48 He further deposed that IO recorded disclosure statements of accused Daleep Ex. PW16/B (on 16.04.2014), Ex. PW16/C (on 17.04.2014) and Ex. PW16/D (on 18.04.2014). On 18.04.2014, vide memo Ex. PW16/E IO seized clothes which accused Daleep Kumar was wearing at the time of incident i.e. one shirt of coca cola colour and one pant having black and grey colour. The above-mentioned clothes were kept in a cloth and converted into a pullanda and sealed with the seal of 'Shakarpur East Distt. SP 02'.
He also stated that on 12.05.2014 on the direction of IO he collected exhibits i.e. 14 pullandas alongwith sample seal from MHC (M) vide RC No. 105/21/14 and deposited the same in FSL Rohini. He identified the case properties i.e. utensils Ex. PW16/A-1 (colly) and clothes Ex. PW16/A-2 (colly). He also identified the accused in the court.
20. PW-17 HC Sher Ali deposed that on 31.01.2014 at about 2:35 PM Duty Officer Karan Singh handed over a copy of FIR to him and on his direction he handed over the copy of FIR to ld. MM concerned, Joint CP, DCP East, Addl. DCP and ACP Preet Vihar.
21. PW-18 ASI Rakesh Kumar deposed that on 10.04.2014 upon direction of SHO and after taking permission from ACP vide his application Ex. PW18/A he alongwith Ct. Manoj went to Calcutta in search of accused Daleep Kumar. He obtained railway warrant vide application Mark PW18/A. They remained in Calcutta till 13.04.2014. SI Sudhir Rathi FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 25 of 48 telephonically informed him that accused Daleep might be available at his native place i.e. Moinuddin Nagar, District Samastipur, Bihar. He alongwith Ct. Manoj reached Moinuddin Nagar, Bihar. On 15.04.2014 Jaikant Paswan took them to house of accused Dalip Kumar near Shankar Chowk Moinuddin Nagar and at the instance of Jaikant Paswan accused Dalip Ram was arrested vide arrest memos Ex. PW4/A and Ex. PW4/B. IO recorded their arrival entry in local police station.
22. PW-19 Ct. Sagar deposed that on 31.01.2014, he alongwith Insp. Daya Sagar reached House no. L-58 A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and found dead body of a person lying at the ground floor. There was a deep wound upon the left side of head and a cut on the left ear of dead body. They came to know the name of deceased as Mohd. Aslam. IO called crime team and crime team took photographs of the spot i.e. Ex. PW19/A. The dead body was sent to mortuary through Ct. Rakesh. IO prepared rukka and got the FIR registered through him.
23. PW-20 HC Rakesh deposed that on 31.01.2014 on receipt of PCR call he alongwith SI Sudhir Rathi reached House no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. The house was under
construction and a person was found lying on a cot in a room on the ground floor. The person was dead and blood was oozing from his face and head and a deep injury mark was present on the left side of his head. IO Insp. Daya Sagar also reached at the spot. The name of deceased was revealed as Aslam. The blood was also found on the wall and on the floor of the building. IO FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 26 of 48 called crime team and crime team took photographs and collected the exhibits. The dead body was shifted to mortuary of Sabzi Mandi. On 01.02.2014, postmortem of dead body was got conducted and dead body was handed over to Akram and Sattar. He also identified photographs of dead body Ex. PW19/A (colly).
24. PW-21 HC Pawan Kumar i.e. DD Writer deposed that on 30.01.2014, he received information that one person was lying unconscious at L-58, Laxmi Nagar near Sabzi Mandi and he recorded the said information vide DD No. 20B Ex. PW21/A and it was marked to SI Sudhir.
25. PW-22 HC Satya Narayan deposed that on 31.01.2014, he alongwith crime team headed by SI Kaushal Ganguly reached at the spot i.e. L-58, Ground Floor, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and he noticed that one dead body was lying on a cot. He took nine photographs of the spot i.e. Ex. PW19/A. He also proved the negatives of the said photographs as Ex. PW22/A.
26. PW-23 HC Janardhan Pandey deposed that on 15.04.2014, he alongwith ASI Rakesh, SI Sudhir Rathi, Ct. Manoj and Jai Kant reached Mohdi Nagar, District Samastipur, Bihar in search of accused Daleep Kumar. They went to house of accused situated at Shankar Chowk and at the pointing out of Jai Kant accused Daleep was arrested vide memo Ex. PW4/A. Personal search of accused was also conducted vide memo Ex. PW4/B. He identified the accused in the court.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 27 of 48 He further deposed that on 12.05.2014 upon directions of IO he collected 14 exhibits alongwith sample seal from MHC (M) and deposited the same in FSL Rohini vide RC No. 105/21/14 and handed over the receipt to MHC (M).
27. PW-24 Insp. Nipun Kumar deposed that on 28.03.2014, investigation of this case was marked to him. On 02.04.2014, the viscera of deceased Mohd. Aslam was sent to FSL Rohini through Ct. Praveen vide RC No. 81/21/14.
He further deposed that on 07.04.2014, he called Rajesh Kumar owner of under construction building and contractor Jai Kant in police station and obtained photocopy of agreement Ex. PW6/A executed between them. He also obtained one certificate Ex. PWPW24/A. On 12.04.2014 he sent a team headed by SI Sudhir Rathi to the residence of accused Daleep Ram at Mohiuddin Nagar, Distt. Samastipur, Bihar.
He also deposed that he recorded disclosure statement and supplementary disclosure of accused Ex.PW16/B and Ex.PW24/B. Thereafter, accused took them to place of incident at Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and he prepared pointing out memo Ex. PW25/A. Then accused took them to house no. A- 540, Hastal, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and he prepared pointing out memo Ex.PW10/A. They met Jagdeep Ram and Sunil Ram at that address and they disclosed about the arrival of accused on said address on 01.02.2014. Thereafter, accused took them to house of Pintoo situated at Gali No.4, Natthan Vihar, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and disclosed that his relative namely Savitri w/o FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 28 of 48 Sharwan was residing there on rent and he had stayed there for two days. Accused also got recovered one plastic katta containing utensils from there. He affixed his seal of NK on the plastic katta and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW16/A. He also deposed that on 17.04.2014, he again interrogated accused and accused disclosed that he had washed the clothes which he was wearing at the time of incidents and took the same along with bed sheet and blanket to his village Mohiuddin Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar. He recorded another supplementary disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW16/C. He deposed that during investigation, he seized one copy / register Ex. P1 from contractor Jaikant Paswan in which he used to keep record of payment of his labour. He kept the said copy / register in envelope and sealed the same with seal of 'PS Shakarpur East Distt. SP02' which was seized vide memo Ex. PW4/C. He sent viscera to FSL Rohini. He also sent exhibits collected from the spot alongwith blood sample. He also obtained PCR call form Ex.PW14/A and CDR / CAF of witness Jaykant and Aman Gupta. He collected scaled site plan Ex. PW27/A and photographs of the spot Ex. PW19/A. He collected FSL vicscera report Ex. PW2/B and sent a copy of FSL result to concerned doctor for subsequent opinion. Dr. Akash gave his opinion Ex. PW2/C. He also obtained DD entries Ex. PW32/A with respect to visit of their police team to PS Mohiuddin Nagar.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 29 of 48 He further deposed that on 13.04.2014, police team headed by SI Sudhir Rathi reached PS Bachhawar, Distt. Begusarai, Bihar in search of accused, but accused was not found. He proved DD recorded in PS Bachhawara Ex. PW24/C. On 14.04.2014, police team headed by SI Sudhir Rathi reached PS Mohiuddin Nagar again and arrested the accused and accused was brought to Delhi vide entry Ex.PW32/C. He also stated that on 16.04.2014 when accused took them to place of incident he also took photographs of witness Hasmuddin and Mohd. Akram Ex. PW24/D. On 16.04.2014 he seized the blood sample of accused vide memo Ex. PW24/E. Thereafter, he filed chargesheet.
He also deposed that after filing of chargesheet he conducted further investigation on some points. He interrogated witness Jitender Ram to whom accused had given Rs. 5000/- for delivering the same to his elder brother at his village. He also obtained bank account statement of witness Jitender Ram Ex. PW28/A. Concerned bank manager also gave reply on 25.02.2014 Ex. PW28/B. He filed these documents with supplementary chargesheet. Later on he also obtained FSL report dated 29.01.2016 Ex. PW35/A and submitted the same before the court. As per FSL result the blood of deceased matched with the blood present on weapon of offence i.e. hammer. He identified the accused in the present and identified the case property i.e. utensils Ex. PW15/A1, clothes Ex. PW16/A2.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 30 of 48
28. PW-26 SI Sudhir Rathi deposed that on 31.01.2014 at about 9.40 a.m a DD was marked to him regarding a person lying in unconscious condition at H.No. 58, Laxmi Nagar. Thereafter, he along with Ct. Rakesh went to the spot and he saw that one dead body was lying on a cot. He noticed that there was deep injury on his head. He also noticed that lot of blood was also lying over there. In the meanwhile, Insp. Daya Sagar came at the spot. IO Inspector Daya Sagar seized several things which were lying there vide seizure memo Ex. PW 26/A. He also deposed that on 01.02.2014, Insp. Daya Sagar got conducted the postmortem of deceased Mohd. Aslam and thereafter the dead body was handed over to relatives of deceased. Statements of relatives of deceased i.e. Ex. PW 1/A and Ex. PW 1/B were recorded . After postmortem doctor handed over some exhibits to the IO which were seized vide memo Ex. PW 26/B. He also stated that on 04.02.2014 he along with ASI Rakesh and Ct. Muninder went to the area of PS Moiddinpur, Bihar. They tried to find accused Daleep Kumar Ram, but could not succeed. On 14.04.2014, he alongwith ASI Rakesh, Ct. Dhir Singh, Ct. Manoj and Ct. Janardan Pandey again reached the area of PS Moiddinpur. They also lodged their arrival entry in PS Moiddinpur. On the next day i.e. on 15.04.2014, they arrested accused Daleep Kumar Ram from his house near Shankar Chowk, Harijantoli, Moiddinpur, District Samastipur, Bihar and prepared arrested memo Ex. PW4/A. Personal search of accused was conducted vide memo Ex. PW 4/B. The information of FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 31 of 48 arrest was given to concerned SHO vide application Ex. PW 26/C. He also identified the accused in the court.
29. PW-27 Insp. Mahesh Kumar i.e. Draftsman deposed that on 22.02.2014 on the request of Insp. Daya Sagar he reached at the spot i.e. House no. L-58A, Ground Floor, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi and inspected the spot. He took measurements and prepared rough notes. On 12.03.2014 he prepared scaled site plan Ex. PW27/A.
30. PW-29 ASI Virender Kumar, MHC (M) deposed that on 31.01.2014, Insp. Daya Sagar had deposited nine sealed parcels duly sealed with the seal of SP- 02 PS Shakarpur East District in MHC (M) and he made entry no. 4571 in register no.
19. On 01.02.2014, Insp. Daya Sagar again deposited four exhibits and four sample seals duly sealed with the seal of CMO- I/C AAAGH Sabzi Mandi Mortuary Delhi and he made entry in Register no.19.
He deposed that on 16.04.2014, Insp. Nipun Kumar deposited blood sample with sample seal duly sealed with the seal of LBS Hosp. KP and seizure memo-cum-memo of pointing out. He made entry in this regard in register 19. On 18.04.2014, Insp. Nipun Kumar again deposited seizure memo of blood sample and sample seal and he made entry no. 4839 in register no. 19. On 09.05.2014, Insp. Nipun Kumar deposited the copy of seizure memo and he made entry in register no. 19. He proved copies of said entries Ex. PW 29/A-1 to Ex. PW 29/A-5.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 32 of 48 He also deposed that on 02.04.2014, he sent viscera box to FSL Rohini with sample seal through Ct. Praveen vide RC No. 81/21/14 Ex. PW29/B. He received copy of receipt Ex. PW29/C from Ct. Pravin. He also stated that on 12.05.2014, he sent aforesaid exhibits to FSL Rohini through Ct. Praveen Kumar and Ct. Janardan Pandey vide RC No. 105/21/14 Ex. PW29/D. He also proved copy of receipt of FSL Ex. PW29/E. He also stated that no tampering was done while the aforesaid exhibits / parcels / viscera box / sample seal and the case property remained intact in his possession.
31. PW-32 SI Umesh Kumar Paswan, SHO of PS Mohiuddin Nagar, Distt. Samastipur, Bihar deposed that as per record officials of Delhi Police had visited PS Mohiuddin Nagar on 04.02.2014, 06.02.2014, 20.02.2014, 27.02.2014, 14.04.2014 and 15.04.2014. He proved arrival and departure entries of police officials Ex. PW32/A to Ex. PW32/C. Evidence of Investigating Officer-
32. PW-36 Insp. Daya Sagar deposed that on 31.01.2014 he was working as SHO and DD No.20B dated 31.01.2014 was received at PS Shakarpur which was marked to SI Sudhir Rathi. SI Sudhir Rathi along with Ct. Rakesh went to the spot i.e. H.No.L58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. SI Sudhir Rathi telephonically informed him that one person was found lying on a cot in the above-said house and was having injuries on his head and he was not responding. He along with Ct. Sagar Mal and HC Jasbir also went to the spot. The said spot was a under construction house.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 33 of 48 At the spot, he saw that one person was lying on a cot in badly injured condition and lot of blood was present on the cot. The blood was also present on the wall and floor of that room. One hammer having blood stains was also lying on the floor near the cot. After some time, crime team consisting of SI Kaushal Ganguli and Ct. Satya Narayan reached at the spot. Scene of crime was inspected and crime scene was also photographed. On formal inquiry at the spot, deceased was identified as Aslam S/o Mohd. Sattar R/o Distt. Begusarai Bihar. Dead body was sent to Subzi Mandi Mortuary.
The dead body of Aslam was semi covered with a quilt having orange, red and light yellow colour flower pattern and the quilt was also stained with blood. The cot was made of iron (folding) and plastic Niwar and one plastic mat (chatai) of blue, green and orange colour was lying on the cot. One chunni like cloth of green and white colour was also present around the neck of the deceased Aslam. One dark brown bedsheet having blood stains towards the head of the dead body was also lying there. He filled Death Report Form of unnatural death by violence i.e. Ex.PW36/A. He also prepared rough sketch plan of the place where the dead body was found. Thereafter, dead body of Aslam was sent to Subzi Mandi Mortuary.
He lifted the exhibits i.e. blood sample in gauze, blood stained earth control, blood spot present on the wall, blood stained hammer, quilt having blood spots, plastic mat having blood stain, dark brown bedsheet having blood spots, cot having blood spots. The said articles were sealed with the seal FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 34 of 48 of PS SHAKARPUR EAST DISTT-SP02 and were seized vide memo Ex.PW26/A. Thereafter, he had prepared a rukka on DD No.20B dated 31.01.2014 Ex. PW36/B and the same was handed over to Ct. Sagar Mal for registration of FIR. He also prepared site plan Ex.PW36/C. He also prepared rough site plan of the incident spot Ex.PW36/D. After some time, Ct. Sagar Mal returned to the spot and handed over copy of FIR No.221/14 and original rukka to him. He made inquiry from contractor Jaikant Paswan at the spot and recorded his statement. The contractor Jaikant Paswan informed him that accused Daleep Ram can be traced in Krishan Kunj area of Laxmi Nagar. Thereafter, Jaikant Paswan, Ct. Sagar Mal and SI Sudhir Rathi joined him and they tried to search accused Daleep Ram in a house situated in the area of Krisha Kunj, Laxmi Nagar but accused Daleep Ram was not found there.
He deposited the case property in Malkhana and recorded the statements of witnesses. On 01.02.2014, postmortem of the deceased was got conducted and he recorded statement of Mohd. Akram Ex.PW25/B and one Sattar, brother in law of deceased Ex.PWI/A. Thereafter, the dead body of deceased was handed over to the relatives of deceased vide memo Ex.PW1/B. He collected viscera box, clothes of deceased, nail clipping of deceased, blood sample in gauze piece alongwith four sample seals and same were sealed with the seal of CMO I/C AAAGH SUBZI MANDI MORTUARY DELHI and were seized vide memo Ex.PW26/B. FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 35 of 48 On 02.02.2014, he sent SI Sudhir along with police team to the residence of the accused at Mohiuddin Nagar Samastipur, Bihar. They returned back on 09.02.2014 and disclosed that they could not find the accused despite their best efforts. He also handed over DD entry of PS Mohiuddin Nagar i.e. Ex.PW32/A. On 19.02.2014, Ct. Janardhan Pandey was sent for the same purpose vide entry already Ex.PW32/B. However, he also could not find the accused. On 22.02.2014, Inspector Mahesh visited the spot and took rough notes at his instance. On 07.03.2014, he was transferred from said police station and he handed over the case file to MHC(R). He identified the case properties i.e. cotton wool swab Ex.PW36/P1, blood stained earth material in a plastic box Ex.PW36/P2, earth control in a plastic box Ex.PW36/P3, small pieces of brick Ex.PW36/P4, hammer Ex.PW36/P5, quilt Ex.PW36/P6, plastic mat Ex.PW36/P7, metallic cot with plastic niwar Ex.PW36/P8, bedsheet Ex.PW36/P9, five pieces of clothes i.e. one pant, one shirt, one T-shirt, one chunni and one sweater Ex.PW36/P10 (colly).
Statement of Accused U/s 313 Cr. PC:
33. In his statement recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C accused denied all the incriminating evidence. He took a plea that he had already gone to his native village much prior to the alleged incident and in order to solve blind murder case he has been falsely implicated. Accused opted not to lead defence evidence.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 36 of 48 Arguments:
34. I have heard the final arguments advanced by ld.
Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well as by ld. Defence counsel / Amicus Curiae .
35. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has vehemently argued that the allegations against the accused have been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution evidence is completely reliable. Hence, the accused may be convicted of the offences charged against him.
36. On the other hand, ld. defence counsel has argued that accused has been falsely implicated. There is no eye-witness and the prosecution has failed to prove the complete chain of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution witnesses did not support the case of prosecution. All the witnesses are planted witnesses. The testimony of PW Jaikant suffers from material contradictions. In his cross-examination he denied all the material allegations. His subsequent cross-examination by ld. Addl. PP is an attempt to fill up the lacunas. The IO had collected a diary from PW Jaikant, but his evidence shows that it was manufactured subsequently. The perusal of said document also shows that it does not bears any material details nor it bears the signatures of the persons to whom payments were made. He also argued that statement of brother of deceased was recorded after about four months and he has also been planted as a witness. There is neither any direct evidence nor any other cogent evidence on record to establish the guilt of accused. Hence, he argued that accused may be acquitted.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 37 of 48 Appreciation of Evidence vis-a-vis Allegations of Commission of Offences by Accused:
37. I have considered the submissions and combed through evidence on record very carefully.
38. 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."
39. 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 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.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 38 of 48 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."
40. 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.
41. Therefore, in the present case in order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution was under obligation to establish beyond reasonable doubt that accused had committed murder of Aslam.
Absence of Direct Evidence:
42. As per case of prosecution, accused Daleep Kumar Ram committed murder of Aslam on the night of 30.01.2014 by giving blows of a hammer on his head and chest. The case of prosecution is that no one had witnessed the crime. There is also FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 39 of 48 no other direct evidence in the form of scientific evidence to point out towards the guilt of accused.
43. IO had recovered the hammer allegedly used in the commission of offence. The said hammer was also sent to FSL, but no attempt was made to lift fingerprint impressions from the said hammer which could lead the investigation directly towards the guilt of the perpetrator of the crime. The other materials seized at the spot also do not even point out towards involvement of accused Daleep Kumar Ram in the commission of offence.
44. As per case of prosecution when the police officials and other persons discovered the commission of offence, a lot of blood of victim had spilled at the spot and even the blood of deceased was found splashed at the adjoining walls. Hence, in such circumstances there was a possibility that the blood of deceased could have also fallen on the clothes of the culprit. As per prosecution version accused Daleep Kumar Ram was arrested on 15.04.2014 and the clothes allegedly worn by him at the time of incident were also recovered. However, the said clothes were not sent to FSL for finding the traces of blood stains of victim on them and rather it is alleged that the accused had washed his clothes after the incident.
45. Hence, in absence of any direct - ocular or scientific evidence, the entire case of prosecution rested on the circumstantial evidence. The prosecution tried to establish the guilt of accused on the premise that he had a motive to kill the victim and he was the last person to be seen with deceased on the day of commission of crime.
Motive:
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 40 of 48
46. As regards the existence of motive of accused for committing murder of victim is concerned, the prosecution theory is that accused Daleep Kumar Ram was nursing a grudge against Aslam and they frequently quarreled with each other and on the evening of 30.01.2014 accused was the last person to be seen and even at that time he was quarreling with deceased.
47. The prosecution examined PW-4 Jaikant Paswan, PW-6 Rajesh Kumar, PW-7 Aman Gupta, PW-13 Mohd. Shahid, PW-25 Md. Akram and PW-31 Vijay Shah to establish that accused Daleep Kumar Ram and victim Aslam used to sleep together at house no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and they were seen together on 30.01.2014 at about 6:30 PM at the aforementioned house itself.
48. However, in their depositions in the court:
(a) PW-6 Rajesh Kumar and PW-7 Aman Gupta stated that they did not know whether accused Daleep Kumar was present at the site on 30.01.2014 or not.
(b) PW-13 Mohd. Shahid also did not support the case of prosecution and he denied that he even knew Daleep Kumar Ram or Aslam and rather denied having given any statement to police.
(c) PW-31 Vijay Shah in his examination in chief did not support the case of prosecution. He did not depose that accused and victim were residing together at the spot or there was any quarrel between them. He rather deposed that he did not know Aslam. Therefore, the deposition of this witness is also of no use to the case of prosecution as far as aspect of existence of motive for accused to kill Aslam is concerned.FIR No.221/14
PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 41 of 48
(d) PW-25 Mohd. Akram i.e. the brother of deceased deposed that about 2 days prior to the incident he met his brother i.e. deceased Aslam at Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and his brother told him that accused Daleep Ram was angry with him because he had started staying in the same building at night. However, it is required to note here that no other prosecution witness deposed that PW Akram had visited the place of occurrence two days prior to the incident. It is also necessary to mention that the statement of this witness u/s 161 Cr. PC was recorded on 22.05.2014 i.e. almost 4 months after the incident and there is no explanation for such delay in recording his statement. These facts when seen in totality leave a scope for doubt that the witness may have been planted subsequently.
(e) PW-4 Jaikant Paswan was the star witness of the case of prosecution. In his examination in chief he totally supported the case of prosecution, but in his cross-examination he completely turned hostile and deposed that accused Daleep Kumar Ram was not present at the spot on 30.01.2014 as he had left for his native village because his sister in law was ill. Though this witness in his re-examination by ld. Addl. PP again supported the prosecution version, but in his subsequent cross- examination by ld. Amicus Curiae he stated that quarrel did not take place between accused and victim in his presence nor the accused had threatened to kill the victim. Therefore, in both the cross-examinations, the witness did not support the case of prosecution regarding the alleged quarrel which had taken place between the victim and accused on the day of incident.
FIR No.221/14PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 42 of 48
49. PW's Rajesh Kumar, Aman Gupta, Mohd Shahid and Vijay Shah did not support the prosecution version and the deposition of PW Jaikant Paswan is highly unreliable. Therefore, the prosecution has not been able to establish beyond reasonable doubt that accused Daleep Ram used to sleep in the same building where the offence had taken place as well as the fact that he used to quarrel with victim Aslam or they had quarreled with each other on the day of incident.
Last Seen Theory:
50. As far as the invocation of 'last seen theory' is concerned, the law in this respect has been vividly described by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nizam and Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan AIR 2015 SC 3430. It was held that, "Undoubtedly, 'last seen theory' is an important link in the chain of circumstances that would point towards the guilt of the accused with some certainty. The 'last seen theory' holds the court to shift burden of proof to the accused and the accused to offer a reasonable explanation as to the cause of death of deceased. It is well settled by this court that it is not prudent to base the conviction solely on 'last seen theory'. 'Last seen theory' should be applied taking into consideration the case of prosecution in its entirety and keeping in mind that circumstances that precede and follow the point of being so last seen."
51. In light of the above-mentioned proposition of law, the examination of the case of prosecution shows that it has been alleged that accused Daleep Ram had committed the murder of Aslam on the intervening night of 30/31.01.2014 and accused FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 43 of 48 Daleep Ram was the last person to be seen with deceased Aslam and they were seen together at 6:30 PM on the day of incident at House no. L-58A, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi.
52. Prosecution has proved the postmortem report of deceased Ex. PW7A. The aforementioned postmortem examination was conducted on 01.02.2014 at 12:15 PM and as per PM report the time since death was between 36 hours to 48 hours. Hence, as per said report the deceased may have died between 12 PM on 30.01.2014 and 12 AM on 31.01.2014.
53. In order to establish the allegations that accused was the last person to be seen with victim, the prosecution examined several witnesses. PW-4 Jaikant Paswan was the prime witness to establish the aforementioned fact. However, as already mentioned above this witness contradicted himself on several occasions. In his cross-examination, the witness rather supported the defence that accused Daleep Ram had left the city on the morning of 30.01.2014 at 9 AM. Hence, the testimony of this witness in the examination in chief as well as re-examination cannot be the sole reason to believe that accused was seen with victim on the same day at 6:30 PM. Thus, testimony of PW Jaikant stood impeached and it cannot be relied upon.
54. The prosecution has proved a diary / account book allegedly maintained by PW-4 Jaikant Paswan as Ex. P1 to show the accused and victim were working for Jaikant Paswan and they were present at the place of incident on 30.01.2014. In his cross-examination, PW Jaikant Paswan categorically stated that he had prepared the said diary on the asking of police officer as he was harassing him to prepare the same. The said document was FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 44 of 48 seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW4/C on 09.05.2014 i.e. after more than three months of incident.
55. Further perusal of aforementioned book Ex.P1 shows that the initial pages of the same are completely blank. The first entry begins from page no. 4, but it only had mention of two names. The remaining entries begin from page no. 6 and on the said page the entries are completely blank for the first many dates. The entries of the remaining months are also made irregularly. The names of the persons in the book include the name of the witness himself. There is no mention of parentage of any of the persons nor any of the entries have been counter signed by the persons against whom such entries have been made. No entry has been made in it after February, 2014.
56. Thus, the aforementioned facts show that attendance register cum accounts register i.e. Ex. P1 appears to be highly cryptic and the possibility of it having been created subsequently cannot be ruled out. Therefore, reliance cannot be placed on the entries in the said register to assume that accused Daleep Ram was present at the spot on 30.01.2014.
57. The prosecution also examined PW-6 Rajesh, PW-7 Aman Gupta, PW-13 Mohd. Shahid and PW-31 Vijay Shah to establish that accused was seen with victim at 6:30 PM on 30.01.2014. PW's Rajesh and Aman Gupta in their cross- examinations stated that they did not even know whether accused Daleep Ram was present at the spot on 30.01.2014. Therefore, no weightage can be attached to their depositions in examination in FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 45 of 48 chief qua presence of accused at the spot. PW-13 Mohd. Shahid also did not support the case of prosecution and PW-31 Vijay Shah not just denied having seen the accused at the place of incident on 30.01.2014, but rather stated that accused Daleep had left for his native village on 29.01.2014.
58. It is further pertinent to mention that the prosecution had examined PW-9 Sunil Ram S/o Parmeshwar Ram, PW-10 Sunil S/o Shoki Ram, PW-11 Jagdeep Ram, PW-12 Sarvan Ram, PW-30 Jitender Ram and PW-31 Vijay Shah to establish that accused Daleep Ram went to the house of PW-31 Vijay Shah on the evening of 30.01.2014 and thereafter on the next day he gave the said amount to PW-30 Jitender Ram.
59. In his examination in chief, PW-31 Vijay Shah deposed that accused had collected the amount deposited with him not on the night of 30.01.2014, but he had collected it on 29.01.2014. PW-30 Jitender Ram also did not support the prosecution case and rather stated that accused had informed him that his sister in law was unwell due to which he was going back to his native village. Therefore, these two witnesses who were the important cog in the wheel of prosecution story also did not depose as per case of prosecution.
60. The other witnesses i.e. PW-9 Sunil Ram S/o Parmeshwar Ram, PW-10 Sunil S/o Shoki Ram, PW-11 Jagdeep Ram and PW-12 Sarvan Ram were examined for proving the fact that accused had got the articles recovered from house no. A-540, Hastsal Road, Delhi where he stayed and thereafter he went to FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 46 of 48 stay with Ms. Parvati. However, all these witnesses not just categorically denied the said facts, but rather deposed that accused had left for his native place on 29.01.2014 as his sister in law had expired.
61. It is also necessary to mention that the above- mentioned public witnesses of recovery of utensils denied the factum of recovery of such articles, but the articles alleged to have been recovered also do not have any unique identification which could suggest that no other person could have owned them. Even otherwise once the witnesses denied the presence of accused in Delhi on 30.01.2014, therefore, the factum of recovery of such utensils becomes meaningless.
62. 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."
63. However, the evidence as discussed above shows that prosecution has failed to establish a complete chain of evidence which could only indicate the guilt of accused. Infact, the evidence on record points to the direction that the accused Daleep Ram may not be present in Delhi at the time of incident or on a later day. Therefore, it has to be said that prosecution has FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 47 of 48 failed to establish the complete chain of circumstantial evidence for establishing the guilt of accused.
Conclusion:
64. In view of the aforementioned discussion, it has to be concluded that prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused Daleep Kumar Ram @ Daleep Kumar had committed murder of deceased Aslam. Hence, accused Daleep Kumar Ram @ Daleep Kumar is given the benefit of doubt and is acquitted of the charge levelled against him for the commission of offence punishable u/s 302 of IPC.
65. Accused has already furnished bail bonds u/s 437-A Cr. PC.
66. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Court on 31.08.2024 (Sushant Changotra) ASJ (FTC) / East KKD Court/ Delhi Digitally signed by SUSHANT SUSHANT CHANGOTRA CHANGOTRA Date:
2024.09.02 16:15:38 +0530 FIR No.221/14 PS Shakarpur State Vs Daleep Kumar Ram Page no. 48 of 48