Delhi District Court
State vs Sanaullah @ Imran on 27 March, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. GEETANJALI
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)- 03; SOUTH EAST
DISTRICT SAKET COURTS: DELHI
S.C. NO. 574/2019
FIR NO. 148/2019
PS Shaheen Bagh
U/s. 302/34 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act
CNR DLSE01-010687-2019
THE STATE
VERSUS
1. Sanaullah @ Imran
S/o Mr. Abdul Rehman
R/o F-95/2, Shaheen Bagh, Delhi
(Permanent R/o Village Kazipada,
PO Begnan Bazar, PS Begnan,
District Hawrah, State West Bengal)
2. Bapi Das S/o Mr. Sudama Das
R/o Deepak Nursary, Shram Vihar,
Delhi
(Permanent R/o Mohalla - Soladanga Haricharan
Sarkarer Para Soladanga, Village Bulbulchandi,
PS Habibpur, District Maldah, State West Bengal)
...... Accused persons
SC No. 574/2019 Digitally signedFIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. by Page no. 1 of 73
GEETANJALI
GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27
16:35:37 +0530
Date of Institution : 17.12.2019
Order reserved on : 24.03.2026
Order delivered on : 27.03.2026
JUDGMENT
1. The accused persons namely Sanaullah @ Imran and Bapi Das are facing trial for the offences u/s. 302/34 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act.
BRIEF FACTS
2. The case of prosecution is that on 05.08.2019 vide DD no. 14- B a missing report of his brother Azhruddin was lodged by Abbas Golder and all required efforts were made to trace him out by his relatives as well as police officials. In the meanwhile vide DD no. 21-B was lodged regarding recovery of dead body at Canal Colony, Madanpur Khadar and same was handed over to SI Gaurav Chaudhary for necessary action. On the receipt of DD no. 21-B SI Gaurav Chaudhary along with HC Ravinder went to the spot. Vide DD no. 26-B IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap and ATO Sanjay Neolia went to the spot along with Abbas and Aslam where SI Gaurav Chaudhary, HC Ravinder, Ct. Surender and SHO were already present. SI Gaurav Chaudhary called the Crime team and the Crime team inspected the spot. In the meanwhile, IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap also inspected the scene of crime and the dead body which was having five stab injuries on his chest. The dead body was sent to Mortuary, AIIMS and thereafter SI Gaurav Chaudhary recorded statement of Mr. Abbas Golder who stated that SC No. 574/2019 Digitally signed by GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 2 of 73 2026.03.27 16:35:53 +0530 he is residing in Delhi along with his younger brother Azruddin and used to come to Delhi for the purpose of the embroidery work; that his aunt (mausi) is also residing in the area of Shaheen Bagh, Delhi along with her family but they were not in talking terms with her however her son namely Sanaullah used to talk with his younger brother Azruddin and his younger brother Azruddin also used to visit their house; that in the meanwhile he came to know that his younger brother Azruddin used to love younger sister of Sanaullah namely Hanifa and they want to marry each other; that when the said affair came in the knowledge of his aunt (mausi), she threatened his younger brother Azruddin with bodily injury in case he is seen in Delhi due to which he left Delhi and went to Hyderabad and started working there; that around one and half months back his brother Azruddin and one of his village boy namely Aslam came to Delhi and started working along with younger brother of his jija (brother-in-law); that on 04.08.2019 at about 12.30 p.m. when he was present in his house along with his brother Azruddin and Aslam, his brother Azruddin received a call from Sanaullah and he called to meet him; that he asked his brother Azruddin to take Aslam along with him and at about 3.15 p.m. his brother Azruddin along with Aslam left the house in order to meet Sanaullah; that at about 05:30 PM he received a call from Aslam stating that he was asked to stop at one place near tea shop by his brother Azruddin and Sanaullah; that Aslam further told him that when he called at mobile number of his brother same was received SC No. 574/2019 Digitally FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh signed by State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Page no. 3 of 73 GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 16:36:27 +0530 by Sanaullah and he asked him to stay for 10 to 15 minutes; that after about 15 to 20 minutes, Aslam again made a call which was picked by accused Sanaullah and he told him "tu auto waley ko phone de, wo usko (autowaley ko) batayega ki kahan aana hai"; that thereafter Aslam called him and told that he does not know about the place where he was dropped by auto driver and he asked Aslam to inquire about the whereabout of place; that after making inquiry from someone, he called him and told that he is present at Batla House; that he asked him to hire auto for Kotla Mubarakpur; that when Aslam reached at factory he again called his brother but same was found to be switched off; that thereafter he called his other brother-in-law (jija) Muniruddin who was residing at Badarpur; that thereafter he went to his house and searched for his deceased brother and Sanaullah in the area of Shaheen Bagh; that his jija Muniruddin's brother namely Mohd Raju called at 100 number and on 05.08.2019 he made complaint in the PS Shaheen Bagh. " On the basis of his statement, present FIR was registered. After completing other necessary formalities charge-sheet was filed against both the accused persons.
3. On the basis of charge-sheet so submitted before Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, cognizance was taken by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate. After compliance with the provisions of Section 207 Cr.PC, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and was assigned to this Court.
CHARGE Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:36:32 +0530 Page no. 4 of 73
4. After hearing arguments on point of charge and finding a prima facie case requisite charge under Sections 302/34 IPC was framed against accused persons namely Sanaullah and Bapi Das and and u/s 27 of Arms Act was framed against accused Sanaullah to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
5. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined as many as twenty one witnesses.
CHART OF WITNESSES EXAMINED Prosecution Name of the Description.
witness no. witness
PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder He is the complainant and brother
of the deceased Azharuddin.
PW-2 Mr. Aslam Golder He is the witness to the fact that he
had lastly seen the accused
Sanaullah with the deceased.
PW-3 Shri Veer Pal @ He is the person who seen dead
Birender body for the first time and
informed one guard namely Rahim
about the same.
PW-4 Mr. Kamalluddin He is the person who found the
mobile phone, make Techno
golden color near Sharan Vihar in
front of Shaheen Bagh and handed
over the same to the police.
PW-5 Mohd. Raju He is deceased brother-in-law's
brother and called at 100 number
regarding missing of the deceased.
Digitally signed
by GEETANJALI
SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27
16:36:38 +0530
Page no. 5 of 73
PW-6 Mr. Abdul Wahab He did not support the case of the
Prosecution.
PW-7 Shri Sachin He provided the CCTV footage of
Saxena the camera installed at his Wine
and Beer Shop, Living Style Mall,
Jasola Village to the police in a
pen drive.
PW-8 Shri Suresh He provided the CCTV footage of
Kumar the camera installed at his office at
Fast Track Realcon, Living Style
Mall, Pocket 6, Jasola Village to
the police in a pen drive.
PW-9 Ms. Hanifa She did not support the case of the
Prosecution.
PW-10 Mr. Abdul He did not support the case of the
Rehman Prosecution.
PW-11 Smt. Sakina @ She did not support the case of the
Sabila @ Sabi Prosecution.
PW-12 Ms. Roshan Aara She is the wife of PW-4
Kamalludin and she is the person
who was using mobile phone
which was found by PW-4 and
thereafter handed over the same to
the police.
PW-13 Shri Deepak He identified accused Bapi Das.
Manshramani
PW-14 Mr. Subhan Khan He is the landlord of the premises
where family of accused Sanaullah
used to reside.
PW-15 HC Roshan He is the messenger who delivered
SC No. 574/2019 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Digitally signed
by GEETANJALI Page no. 6 of 73
GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27
16:36:43 +0530
the copy of FIR at the office of
ACP, DCP, Joint CP as well as
Ilaka Magistrate.
PW-16 ASI Rakesh Singh He is the police official who along
with Abbas and two other persons
went in search of Azharuddin upon
receipt of DD no. 2A however he
could not be traced out.
PW-17 HC Ravinder He joined the IO during the
investigations, got registered the
present FIR and was part of the
team who arrested, personally
searched and recorded disclosure
statement of accused namely
Sanaullah and Bapi Das.
PW-18 Inspector Gyan He got the postmortem of dead
Prakash body conducted and prepared the
handing over memo of the same.
He further handed over the five
sealed parcels and four samples
seals to the IO.
PW-19 HC Surender He was the beat constable to
whom the information was given
Kumar
about the dead body near rait ka
teela by one security guard.
Thereafter he informed about the
same to duty officer as well as
SHO and Crime team was and he
also took the dead body to
Mortuary, AIIMS.
PW-20 Inspector Gaurav He is the police officials who
Chaudhary conducted initial proceedings in
the present case and also recovered
the dead body of Azharuddin.
SC No. 574/2019 Digitally signed FIR
by GEETANJALI
No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 7 of 73
2026.03.27
16:36:56 +0530
PW-21 Inspector Jitender He is the IO of the present case.
Kashyap
Documents produced on behalf of the Prosecution.
Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/ attested by
Ex.PW1/A Complaint PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Golder
Ex.PW1/B Seizure memo of two beer PW-1 Mr. Abbas
bottles Golder
Ex.PW1/C an Seizure memos of two PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Ex.PW1/D blood stained sand Golder
Ex.PW1/E Seizure memo of belt PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Golder
Ex.PW1/F Seizure memo of chappal PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Golder
Ex.PW1/G Arrest memo of accused PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Sanaullah Golder
Ex.PW1/H Personal search memo of PW-1 Mr. Abbas
accused Sanaullah Golder
Ex.PW1/I Arrest memo of accused PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Bapi Das Golder
Ex.PW1/J Personal search memo of PW-1 Mr. Abbas
accused Bapi Das Golder
Ex.PW1/K and Disclosure statements of PW-1 Mr. Abbas
Ex.PW1/L accused Sanaullah and Golder Bapi Das Ex.PW1/M Handing over memo of PW-1 Mr. Abbas dead body. Golder Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:37:02 +0530 Page no. 8 of 73 Ex. PW1/DX-1 Statement/complaint given PW-1 Mr. Abbas by PW-1 to the police Golder Ex.PW4/A Seizure memo of mobile PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin phone make Techno of golden colour Ex.PW6/A Seizure memo of mobile PW-6 Abdul Wahab phone make Samsung Ex.PW6/DX1 Statement of PW-6 Abdul PW-6 Abdul Wahab Wahab recorded u/s. 161 Cr.PC Ex.PW7/A Seizure memo of pendrive PW-7 Shri Sachin containing relevant CCTV Saxena footage Ex.PW7/B Certificate u/s. 65-B of the PW-7 Shri Sachin Indian Evidence Act qua Saxena genuineness of CCTV footage Ex.P-7 Seizure memo Scandisk PW-8 Shri Suresh pendrive containing CCTV Kumar footage Ex.PW8/A Certificate u/s. 65-B of the PW-8 Shri Suresh Indian Evidence Act qua Kumar genuineness of CCTV footage Ex.PW10/DX1 Statement of PW-10 Abdul PW-10 Abdul Rehman Rehman u/s. 161 Cr.PC Ex.PW11/DX1 Statement of PW-11 Smt. PW-11 Smt. Sakina @ Sakina @ Sabila @ Sabi Sabila @ Sabi u/s. 161 Cr.PC Ex. PW17/A, Sketch memo of weapon of PW-17 HC Ravinder Ex.PW17/B and offence i.e. knife, its Ex.PW17/C handle and blade Ex.PW17/D Seizure memo of knife PW-17 HC Ravinder Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:2026.03.27
SC No. 574/2019 16:37:06 +0530 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 9 of 73 Ex. PW17/E Seizure memo of clothes PW-17 HC Ravinder having blood stained i.e. grey coloured t-shirt and one saleti coloured pant of accused Bapi Das Ex. PW17/F Seizure memo of clothes PW-17 HC Ravinder having blood stained i.e. shirt and pant of accused Sanaullah Ex.PW17/G Seizure memo of mobile PW-17 HC Ravinder make Oppo Ex.PW18/A and Statement qua PW-18 Inspector Gyan Ex.PW18/B identification of dead body Prakash by brother and brother-in-
law of deceased Ex.PW18/C Seizure memo of 5 sealed PW-18 Inspector Gyan parcels and 4 sample seal Prakash handed over by the concerned doctor who conducted postmortem Ex.PW20/A Tehrir/rukka PW-20 Inspector Gaurav Chaudhary Ex.PW20/B and Site plans PW-20 Inspector Ex.PW20/B-1 Gaurav Chaudhary Ex.PW20/C Pointing out memo of PW-20 Inspector place of incident prepared Gaurav Chaudhary at the instance of accused persons.
Ex.PW20/D Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector
recovery of knife. Gaurav Chaudhary
Ex.PW20/E Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector
recovery of clothes of Gaurav Chaudhary accused Bapi Das Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 10 of 73 16:37:11 +0530 Ex.PW20/F Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector recovery of clothes of Gaurav Chaudhary accused Sanaullah Ex.PW20/G Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector recovery of mobile phone Gaurav Chaudhary make Oppo.
Ex. A1 (colly) Subsequent opinion dated Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 03.12.2021 (3 pp).
Ex. A-2 (colly) Copy of FIR along with Admitted u/s. 294 certificate u/s. 65-B Indian Cr.PC Evidence Act.
Ex. A-3 Scaled site plan. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC Ex. A-4 DD no. 21B, 26B, 15A, Admitted u/s. 294 16A, 2A, 14B all dated Cr.PC 05.08.2019.
Ex. A-5 DD No. 15A dated Admitted u/s. 294 06.08.2019. Cr.PC Ex. A-6 (colly) CDR, CAF of Mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 9643829390 (Vodafone/ Cr.PC Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA.
Ex. A-7 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 7065409361 (Vodafone/ Cr.PC Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA.
Ex. A-8 (colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 9810741658 (Bharti Airtel) Cr.PC along with certificate u/s.
65-B IEA.
Ex.A-9 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 7428606582 (Bharti Airtel) Cr.PC along with certificate u/s.
65-B IEA.
Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:37:21 Page no. 11 of 73 +0530 Ex. A-10 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 8017691564 (Vodafone/ Cr.PC Idea) along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA Ex. A-11 (colly) Acknowledgment receipts Admitted u/s. 294 of FSL dated 29.08.2019, Cr.PC 11.09.2019 and 05.09.2019 Ex. A-12 (colly) Copy of RC no. 54/21/19, Admitted u/s. 294 RC No. 60/21/19 and RC Cr.PC No. 62/21/19 as Ex. A13 (colly) Photocopy of Register no. Admitted u/s. 294 19 (16 pp) Cr.PC Ex. A-14 MLC of deceased Ex. A-15 Crime scene report dated Admitted u/s. 294 05.08.2019 Cr.PC Ex. A-16 DAD Notification dated Admitted u/s. 294 17.02.1979 Cr.PC Ex. A-17 (colly) Photographs of Crime Admitted u/s. 294 scene (31 in number) Cr.PC Ex. A-18 FSL Report dated Admitted u/s. 294 23.03.2021 Cr.PC Ex. A-19 FSL Report dated Admitted u/s. 294 05.10.2020 Cr.PC Ex. A-20 FSL Report dated Admitted u/s. 294 27.02.2020 as Cr.PC Ex. A-21 FSL Report dated Admitted u/s. 294 27.11.2019 Cr.PC Ex. A-22 CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 9667717597 (Bharti Airtel) Cr.PC (Colly).
along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 16:37:26 +0530SC No. 574/2019 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 12 of 73 Ex. A-23. Postmortem report of Admitted u/s. 294 deceased Azharuddin Cr.PC bearing no. 969-2019 dated 05.08.2019 List of Material Objects.
Material object Description of exhibit Proved by / attested by no.
Ex.P-1 Mobile phone of the PW-1 Abbas Golder
deceased
Ex.P-2 Slippers of the PW-1 Abbas Golder/PW-17
(Ex.PX-2) deceased HC Ravinder
Ex.P-3 (colly.) Two beer bottles with PW-1 Abbas Golder/PW-17 (Ex.PX-5 and label Kingfisher HC Ravinder Ex. PX-6) Ex.P-4 Belt of the deceased PW-1 Abbas Golder (Ex.PX-4) Ex. P-5 (colly.) Eight photographs of PW-1 Abbas Golder the deceased Ex.P-6 Pendrive "SanDisk PW-1 Abbas Golder Cruzer Blade 16GB"
Ex.P-7 Pendrive "SanDisk PW-1 Abbas Golder Cruzer Blade 8GB"
Mark PX-1 Sim card on which no. PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin 9667717597 is written Ex.PX2 Mobile phone make PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin Techno of golden colour Ex.PX-2 Mobile phone make PW-6 Abdul Wahab/ (Ex.PX-20A) Samsung of blue Inspector Gaurav Chaudhary SC No. 574/2019 Digitally signed FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh by GEETANJALI State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 13 of 73 2026.03.27 16:37:35 +0530 colour Ex.PX1 Scandisk pendrive PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar Ex.PX-1 (colly.) Clothes of accused PW-17 HC Ravinder Sanaullah Ex.PX-3 (colly.) Clothes of accused PW-17 HC Ravinder Bapi Das Ex.PX-7 Mobile phone make PW-17 HC Ravinder Oppo Ex.PW17/X Knife. PW-17 HC Ravinder 5.1 During the prosecution evidence, statement of both the accused persons was recorded u/s.294 Cr.PC whereby they admitted subsequent opinion dated 03.12.2021 (3 pp) as Ex. A1 (colly), copy of FIR along with certificate u/s. 65-B Indian Evidence Act as Ex. A-2 (colly), scaled site plan as Ex. A-3; DD no. 21B, 26B, 15A, 16A, 2A, 14B all dated 05.08.2019 as Ex. A-4, DD No. 15A dated 06.08.2019 as Ex. A-5, CDR, CAF of Mobile no. 9643829390 (Vodafone/Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA as Ex. A-6 (Colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. 7065409361 (Vodafone/Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA as Ex. A-7 (colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. 9810741658 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA as Ex. A-8 (colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. 7428606582 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA as Ex.A-9 (colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. 8017691564 (Vodafone/Idea) along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA as Ex. A-10 (colly), acknowledgment receipts of FSL dated 29.08.2019, 11.09.2019 and Digitally signed SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 14 of 73 16:37:41 +0530 05.09.2019 as Ex. A-11 (colly), copy of RC no. 54/21/19, RC No. 60/21/19 and RC No. 62/21/19 as Ex. A-12 (colly), photocopy of Register no. 19 (16 pp) as Ex. A13 (colly), MLC of deceased as Ex.
A-14, crime scene report dated 05.08.2019 as Ex. A-15, DAD Notification dated 17.02.1979 as Ex. A-16, photographs of Crime scene (31 in number) as Ex. A-17 (colly), FSL Report dated 23.03.2021 as Ex. A-18; FSL Report dated 05.10.2020 as Ex. A-19, FSL Report dated 27.02.2020 as Ex. A-20, FSL Report dated 27.11.2019 as Ex. A-21, CDR, CAF of mobile no. 9667717597 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA as Ex. A-22 (Colly) and postmortem report of deceased Azharuddin bearing no. 969-2019 dated 05.08.2019 as Ex.A-23. Accordingly, witnesses namely Nodal Officer, Vodafone Idea Ltd., Nodal Officer, Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd., Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel, Ct. Vikram, Ct. Amit Singh, HC Ajit Singh, HC Rattan, HC Sompal, Inspector Mukesh Kumar Jain, DO/SI Madan Lal, DO/ASI Kamal Ram, HC Pankaj, MHC(M), Dr. Rohit Singh (SCMO), AIIMS, Dr, Bhuvnesh Bhardwaj (Jr. NA) AIIMS), Dr. Abhilash, Sr. Resident, Dr. Benjy Tom Varughese and concerned clerk from Delhi Administration were dropped from the list of witnesses and prosecution evidence was closed.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
6. After completion of prosecution evidence, all the incriminating material was put to both the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.PC. They pleaded innocence and stated that they Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
SC No. 574/2019 2026.03.27
16:37:46 +0530
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 15 of 73
have been falsely implicated by the police in connivance with the complainant. Though, the accused persons took the plea of being innocent in his statements u/sec. 313 Cr.P.C. They opted to lead defence evidence and examined DW-1 Mr. Safi Ahmed, DW-3 Ms. Reeta Das, DW-3 Mr. Akbar Ali and DW-4 Ms. Shanaz in their defence.
ARGUMENTS
7. It was argued by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that PW-1 and PW-2 have fully supported the case of the Prosecution; that testimony of PW-2 with regard to the fact that deceased Azharuddin went with both the accused persons has further been corroborated by the testimony of PW-1, PW-5 and medical evidences; that CCTV footage itself shows that both the accused persons went with the deceased before his murder was committed; that the motive has also been well established by the Prosecution that accused Sanaullah was not happy with the love affair between his sister Hanifa with the deceased and due to this reason he planned along with accused Bapi Das to murder Azharuddin; that as per expert evidence, blood of deceased was found on the clothes of accused Sanaullah which has not been explained by him which is the duty of the accused to explain the same in the light of section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act; that the accused failed to discharge the burden cast upon him u/s. 106 of the Evidence Act. Section 106 of the Evidence Act clearly lays down that when any fact is specially within the knowledge of a person, the burden approving that fact is upon him Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 16 of 73 2026.03.27 16:37:51 +0530 in the light of the judgment titled as State of Rajasthan Vs. Kashiram, (2006) 12 SCC 254; that as per the postmortem report the injuries found on the body of deceased are possible with the weapon of offence i.e. knife; that the weapon of offence i.e. knife was also recovered at the instance of both the accused persons which also supports the case of Prosecution; that the pointing out memo of the spot have been prepared at the instance of both the accused persons which shows their conduct that they have committed murder of the deceased on the said place; that Prosecution witnesses have also supported the case of the Prosecution regarding the use of weapon of offence hence offence u/s. 27 Arms Act has also been proved against accused Sanaullah; that the deceased was lastly seen alive in the company of accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das which fact has also been proved by PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena and PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar who produced the CCTV footage which is the last seen evidence; that PW-2 had also witnessed the deceased in the company of accused persons when deceased had parted his company with the accused persons therefore it has been fully established that the deceased was lastly seen alive in the company of accused persons and this is the duty of accused persons to explain as to how they had parted with the company of deceased; that the said facts have not been explained from the side of the accused persons during the course of trial as well as during the course of recording of their statement which has also strengthen the case of the Prosecution; that the identity of the accused persons was duly Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh Date:
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 17 of 73 16:37:55 +0530 established before the Court by way of testimonies of PW-2 and PW-1; that PW-1 and PW-2 have also identified both the accused persons and deceased in the said footage; that accused persons have taken a plea that they were not present at the place of incident i.e. near Jasola Mall however this plea is taken by the accused for the first time during defence evidence and at the time of final arguments and no question or suggestion was given to any of the Prosecution witness regarding the same therefore it is afalse plea and it should be treated as additional link to support the case of the Prosecution; that no substantive contradictions or omissions have been duly established by the ld. defence counsels during the course of examination of prosecution witnesses; that the accused have not offered a plausible explanation except a mere denial while saying that they have been falsely implicated in the present case; that the Prosecution has duly established the chain of circumstantial evidence which is known as "panchsheel principle" in the present case as established by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case titles as "Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra (1984)"; that the Prosecution has further duly established the last seen theory together with the accused, the recovery of weapon of offence at the instance of accused persons, use of weapon of offence i.e. knife in the commission of murder of deceased by the accused persons, motive of the accused persons behind the present murder and the blood of deceased on the clothes of accused Sanaullah which are the esssential principles of panchsheel theory. In view of the same, the Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 18 of 73 2026.03.27 16:38:03 +0530 accused persons should be convicted for the offence u/s. 302/34 IPC and u/s. 27 Arms Act.
7.1 Per contra it was argued from the side of accused Sanaullah that accused Sanaullah was present at Jasola mall on 04.08.2019 at 4.21 p.m. and thereafter returned to his home; that accused Sanaullah went to meet his friend namely Akbar at about 4.30 to
8.00 p.m. and returned to his home thereafter; that on 06.08.2019 at about 2.00 a.m. it came to the knowledge of the accused that his parents and sister have been falsely implicated by the police and they have also been apprehended by the police; that accused was arrested in the police station and his clothes were kept in the police station; that police told him that they will release him in the morning through Court; that police did not seize the clothes of the accused in his presence; that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the accused and the alleged recoveries have been planted upon him; that mother of the accused and mausi of the accused had property dispute and this is the reason he has been falsely implicated in the present case; that there is no eye witness in the present case and no CCTV footage has been produced by the IO in the present case. In view of the same it has been prayed that accused Sanaullah be acquitted of the offences charged against him. 7.2 It was argued from the side of accused Bapi Das that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case; that nothing incriminating was recovered from the accused Bapi Das or at his instance; that the entire case of the Prosecution is based on Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:38:08 +0530 Page no. 19 of 73 last seen witness / circumstantial evidence; that Prosecution failed to prove that deceased went to the tea shop along with PW-2 Aslam Golder and both the accused persons since no CCTV footage of the said shop was placed on record nor the owner or workers of the tea shop was cited as witness in the present case; that IO did not try to match the batch number, lot number and bill of wine shop with the beer bottles recovered from the alleged spot of the incident to establish the fact that the said bottles were purchased by accused Bapi Das and the bottles which were recovered from the spot are the same which were purchased from the said shop; that the accused Bapi Das purchased the said bottles for his father which fact has been proved by the statement of DW-2; that there is no direct evidence against the accused Bapi Das and chain of circumstantial evidence is incomplete; that dead body was recovered on 05.08.2019 at about 10.00 a.m. and the weapon of offence i.e. knife was recovered on the next day i.e. 06.08.2019; that the said knife was not recovered at the instance of accused Bapi Das thus it is apparent that same was planted upon him; that as per FSL report blood could not be detected on the clothes of accused Bapi Das. In view of the same it has been prayed that accused Bapi Das be acquitted of the offences charged against him.
ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS
8. I have heard the Ld. Addl. PP for the State as well as Ld. Counsel for the accused and perused the record. 8.1 The accused persons are facing trial for the offence U/s.
Digitally signed by GEETANJALISC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 20 of 73 16:38:13 +0530 302/34 IPC and 27 Arms Act.
8.2 Section 302 IPC deals with murder. The essential ingredients of the offence U/s. Section 302 IPC are as follows :
1. Death of a human being was caused;
2. Such death was caused by or in consequence of the act of the accused;
3. Such act was done;
a. with the intention of causing death, or b. that the accused knew it to be likely to cause death, or c. that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
8.3 In order to prove the offence U/s.302 IPC against the accused the Prosecution has to prove :
A. The presence of accused persons on the spot at the time of incident.
B. Their identification by the eye witness. C. The injuries caused to the deceased and medical opinion as regards cause of death.
D. The motive of the accused persons in causing death of deceased.
8.4 Section 25 Arms Act provides punishment for manufacturing, selling, transferring, converting, repairing, or tests or proves or exposes or offers for sale or transfer or has in his possession for sale, transfer, conversion, repair, test or proof, any arms or ammunition in contravention of section 5. 8.5 Coming to the first ingredient i.e. death, as per the MLC Ex.A-14 deceased Azruddin was brought dead to the hospital at 2.45 Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
SC No. 574/2019 2026.03.27
16:38:18
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. +0530 Page no. 21 of 73
pm on 05.08.2019. The postmortem report Ex.A-23 disclosed the cause of death as "shock as a result of cut throat injury and multiple stab injuries to the chest and abdomen" and no question mark was raised from the defence side on the said opinion. In view of the same Azharuddin suffered an unnatural death on 04.08.2019.
Ocular Evidence
9. There is no eye witness in the present case. Since there is no direct evidence with regard to any aspect of the matter in the present case, the Prosecution has relied on the testimonies of witnesses namely Abbas Golder and Aslam Golder to prove the circumstances that lead to the conclusion that it was the accused persons who murdered Azharuddin.
LAST SEEN TOGETHER EVIDENCE
10. The most important circumstance which the Prosecution has relied against the accused is the last seen evidence of the deceased being last seen alive in the company of the accused persons on 04.08.2019 at around 4.00 p.m. On the issue of last seen together evidence, in State of Goa Vs. Sanjay Thakran, 2007 (3) Scale 740, the Supreme Court has held as follows:
"28. ... It is a settled rule of criminal jurisprudence that suspicion, however grave, cannot be substituted for a proof and the courts shall take utmost precaution in finding an accused guilty only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. This Court has applied the above-mentioned general principle with reference to the principle of last seen together in Bodh Raj alias Bodha and Ors. v. State of Jammu and Kashmir : 2002 (8) SCC 45 as under:Digitally signed
SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 22 of 73 2026.03.27 16:38:22 +0530 "31. The last-seen theory comes into play where the timegap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were seen last alive and when the deceased is found dead is so small that possibility of any person other than the accused being the author of the crime becomes impossible. It would be difficult in some cases to positively establish that the deceased was last seen with the accused when there is a long gap and possibility of other persons coming in between exists. In the absence of any other positive evidence to conclude that the accused and the deceased were last seen together, it would be hazardous to come to a conclusion of guilt in those cases..."
"In Ramreddy Rajesh Khanna Reddy and Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh JT 2006 (4) SC 16 (para
29)] the Court further opined that even in the cases where time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were last seen alive and when the deceased was found dead is too small that possibility of any person other than the accused being the author of the crime becomes impossible, the courts should look for some corroboration.
In Jaswant Gir v. State of Punjab (2005) 12 SCC 438, it was observed that:
"5. ...In the absence of any other links in the chain of circumstantial evidence, it is not possible to convict the appellant solely on the basis of the 'last-seen' evidence, even if the version of PW 14 in this regard is believed..." xxx From the principle laid down, the circumstance of last-seen together would normally be taken into consideration for finding the accused guilty of the Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh GEETANJALI Date:
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 23 of 73 16:38:27 +0530 offence charged with when it is established by the prosecution that the time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were found together alive and when the deceased was found dead is so small that possibility of any other person being with the deceased could completely be ruled out. The time gap between the accused persons seen in the company of the deceased and the detection of the crime would be a material consideration for appreciation of the evidence and placing reliance on it as a circumstance against the accused. But, in all cases, it cannot be said that the evidence of last seen together is to be rejected merely because the time gap between the accused persons and the deceased last seen together and the crime coming to light is after a considerable long duration. There can be no fixed or straight jacket formula for the duration of time gap in this regard and it would depend upon the evidence led by the prosecution to remove the possibility of any other person meeting the deceased in the intervening period, that is to say, if the prosecution is able to lead such an evidence that likelihood of any person other than the accused, being the author the crime, becomes impossible, then the evidence of circumstance of last seen together, although there is long duration of time, can be considered as one of the circumstances in the chain of circumstances to prove the guilt against such accused persons. Hence, if the prosecution proves that in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no possibility of any other person meeting or approaching the deceased at the place of incident or before the commission of the crime, in the intervening period, the proof of last seen together would be relevant evidence. For instance, if it can be demonstrated by showing that the accused persons were in exclusive possession of the place where the Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh 2026.03.27 State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:38:32 +0530 Page no. 24 of 73 incident occurred or where they were last seen together with the deceased, and there was no possibility of any intrusion to that place by any third party, then a relatively wider time gap would not affect the prosecution case."
(Emphasis Supplied)
11. Thus in view of the above discussed law, the evidence led by the Prosecution has to be examined in the context of proximity of not only time but of place as well. In this regard, Prosecution has extensively relied upon the testimony of PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder and PW-2 Mr. Aslam Golder, CCTV footage and the FSL report. Now let's see what they have deposed in order to support the story of Prosecution.
11.1 The story in the present case started with the missing report of deceased Azharuddin lodged by his brother namely Abbas Golder and all possible efforts were made by his relatives and the police officials to trace him out. While they were tracing out, information was received in the police station regarding the recovery of unknown dead body near Canal Colony, Yamuna Khadar. The body was found to be having five stab wounds on his chest and cut throat injury and the same was identified to be that of missing Azharuddin by his brother Abbas Golder on whose complaint the present FIR was registered. He was examined as PW-1 and he has deposed that "he alongwith his deceased brother namely Azharuddin used to come to Delhi for work of embroidery since year 2016-17; that they used to work at a factory situated near Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:38:37 +0530 Page no. 25 of 73 Kamal Gali, South Extension, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi belonging to Moinuddin who is younger brother of his brother-in- law namely Mobjal Laskar; that they used to reside at room no. 1894, Kamal Gali, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi; that one Aslam Golder who was friend of his deceased brother as well as resident of same native place and he was also residing there; that Aslam also used to work in the same factory; that in the May, 2019 his deceased brother came to Delhi along with Aslam and he came to Delhi after three weeks of their arrival; that on 04.08.2019 i.e. Sunday, accused Sanaullah who was son of his mausi Sabila made a call to his deceased brother from the mobile phone of his brother-in- law and he had never seen him; that accused Sanaullah asked his deceased brother to come to Shaheen Bagh; that at that time, they all i.e. he, his deceased brother and Aslam were present in the factory and call was made at about 12.30 pm; that he did not remember the complete mobile number of his deceased brother however last three digit numbers were 390; that his deceased brother alongwith Aslam left the factory about 3.00 pm to meet accused Sanaullah; that he asked Aslam to accompany his deceased brother; that he received a call from Aslam at about 05.30 pm stating that he was asked to stop at one place near tea shop by his deceased brother and accused Sanaullah; that Aslam told him that he had made call on the mobile number of his deceased brother however said call was received by accused Sanaullah who asked him to stay for 10-15 minutes; that after about 15 to 20 minutes, Aslam again made a call which was Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 26 of 73 16:38:41 +0530 picked by accused Sanaullah and he told him "tu auto waley ko phone de, wo usko (autowaley ko) batayega ki kahan aana hai"; that thereafter Aslam called him and told that he does not know about the place where he was dropped by auto driver and he asked Aslam to inquire about the whereabout of place; that after making inquiry from someone, he called him and told that he is present at Batla House; that he asked him to hire auto for Kotla Mubarakpur; that when Aslam reached at factory he again called his deceased brother but same was found to be switched off; that thereafter he called his other brother-in-law (jija) Muniruddin who was residing at Badarpur; that thereafter he went to his house and searched for his deceased brother and accused Sanaullah in the area of Shaheen Bagh; that his jija's Muniruddin brother namely Mohd Raju called at 100 number and on 05.08.2019 he made complaint in the PS Shaheen Bagh."
11.2 In view of the aforesaid PW-1 Abbas Golder has deposed that accused Sanaullah called his deceased brother Azharuddin at Shaheen Bagh and it was on his instructions did PW-2 Aslam Golder accompanied Azharuddin but he was left to wait at tea shop by accused Sanaullah and his brother Azharuddin. He was cross examined at length by the Ld. defence counsel and during cross examination he has stated that he did not know the contents of conversation which took place between deceased Azharuddin and accused Sanaullah. Further suggestion was given that only a formal chit-chat took place between them over phone from which it can be Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:38:46 Page no. 27 of 73 +0530 concluded that accused Sanaullah did make call to deceased Azharuddin. However a question mark was raised on their meeting by giving suggestion to the effect that accused Sanaullah did not ask his brother Azharuddin to meet at Shaheen Bagh on 04.08.2019. The said suggestion falls to the ground when the Prosecution produced CCTV footage of the camera wherein deceased Azharuddin was seen along with accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das. During the testimony of PW-1 Abbas Golder he has admitted that on 21.10.2019 IO had shown him the CCTV footage of Beer Shop, Jasola Mall in which he had identified the accused Sanaullah wearing dark blue having white checks T-shirt and blue jeans in the said CCTV footage; that he also identified accused Bapi Das wearing saleti and blue color T-shirt and saleti color trouser (pant) in the said CCTV footage; that he also identified his deceased brother wearing black color T-shirt and blue color jeans in the said CCTV footage; that accused Sanaullah and Azharuddin were seen present in front of the mall and accused Bapi was seen purchasing the beer from the beer shop." Further two pen-drives containing the CCTV footage were exhibited in his evidence as Ex.P-6 and Ex.P-7. In this regard, PW1 has deposed that:-
"At this stage, MHCM has produced one yellow color envelope Parcel No.1 Exhibit M + OPC bearing particulars of FSL, Rohini as well as particulars of instant case FIR, duly sealed with the seal of Dr C.P. SINGH FSL DELHI. Seal is broken after taking permission from the court and same is found containing one small plastic Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:38:51 +0530 Page no. 28 of 73 container bearing the particulars of present case FIR in which one pen drive 'SanDisk Cruzer Blade 16GB' bearing the details of FSL. It also mentions Exhibit M and bearing initials.
The said pen is played on the laptop brought by the IO after taking permission from the court. The said pen drive is containing two MP4 files i.e. Camera4_gyan_gyan_20190804161847_201908... and Camerall_gyan_gyan_20190804161659_20190..
CCTV footage of Camera4 is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies accused Bapi Das seen in the said footage at 16.19.56 to 16.20.44, dated 04.08.2019 who was purchasing two beer bottles from liquor shop.
CCTV footage of Camerall is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies the accused Bapi Das seen in the said footage at 16.19.32 going towards a shop and seen returning at 16.20.53 dated 04.08.2019.
The said pen drive mentions Exhibit M is now exhibited as Ex.P6.
At this stage, MHCM has also produced one yellow color envelope Parcel No.2 Exhibit N+ OPC bearing particulars of FSL, Rohini as well as particulars of instant case FIR, duly sealed with the seal of Dr C.P. SINGH FSL DELHI. Seal is broken after taking permission from the court and same is found containing one small plastic container bearing the particulars of present case FIR in which one pen drive 'SanDisk Cruzer Blade 8GB' bearing the details of FSL. It also mentions Exhibit N and bearing initials.
The said pen is played on the laptop. The said pen drive is containing two MP4 files ie. HCVR chl main 201908041600000 _20190804163000, HCVR ch11 main Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 Date:
2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:38:56 +0530 Page no. 29 of 73 201908041600000 20190804 163000, HCVR_ch12_main_201908041600000_20190804163000 and HCVR_ch15_main 201908041600000 20190804163000.
CCTV footage of chl (camera no.1) is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies his deceased brother wearing black shirt alongwith accused Sanaullah wearing white strips blue T-shirt and accused Bapi Das at 16.22.21 dated 04.08.2019 standing outside the mall.
CCTV footage of ch11 (camera no.11) is played. After seeing the same, witness again identifies his deceased brother alongwith accused Sanaullah and accused Bapi Das at 16.21.44 dated 04.08.2019.
CCTV footage of ch12 (camera no.12) is played. After seeing the same, witness again identifies his deceased brother alongwith accused Sanaullah and accused Bapi Das.
CCTV footage of ch15 (camera no.15) is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies accused Bapi Das. The said pen drive mentions Exhibit M is now exhibited as Ex.P7."
11.3 No question was raised regarding the authenticity of said pen-drives during his cross examination. In view of the same, it stands established that deceased Azharuddin met accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das on 04.08.2019 at around 4.30 p.m. and disappeared thereafter.
11.4 PW-1 Abbas Golder has deposed that he asked Aslam Golder to accompany deceased Azharuddin on 04.08.2019 while he was going to meet accused Sanaullah and this part of his testimony Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 Date:
2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:39:01 Page no. 30 of 73 +0530 has been corroborated by the testimony of Aslam Golder who was examined as PW-2. He has deposed that "he came to Delhi for first time along with his co-villager i.e. deceased Azharuddin in the year 2019 and started working in the factory of Moinuddin situated at Kotla Kamal gali where they were also residing; that after about three weeks of his aforesaid stay i.e. on 04.08.2019 at about 12-
12.30 pm accused Sanaullah called on the mobile of deceased Azharuddin in his presence and that of Abbas (brother of deceased Azharuddin) and he asked him to come to meet him in Shaheen Bagh; that Abbas asked him to accompany the deceased to Shaheen Bagh; that he alongwith deceased Azharuddin left the factory in between 02:00 PM-02.30 pm and reached Shaheen Bagh at around 04.00 pm; that after de-borarding from bus, deceased Azharuddin called accused Sanaullah and told that 'mai aa gaya tu bhi aa ja' and after about 2-5 minutes of said call, accused Sanaullah along with alongwith co-accused Bapi Das came there and they went to nearby tea shop and had tea; that thereafter he alongwith co-accused Bapi Das and deceased Azharuddin left the tea shop leaving him there and after about 15 minutes, he made a call on the mobile number of deceased Azharuddin who told him that 'jahan ruke the wohin par ho' 'abhi aata hun'; that after 2-3 minutes of the abovesaid call, accused Sanaullah made a call from phone of deceased Azharuddin and told that as they had come far away from the said tea shop; that he asked accused Sanaullah to give phone to deceased Azharuddin, however he heard his voice over the phone by saying that 'ye jo bol Digitally signed SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 31 of 73 16:39:07 +0530 raha hai wohi par aa ja, rikshawaley ko phone de de'; that thereafter he handed over his phone to one rikshawala who took him to Batla house on instruction of accused Sanaullah; that on the way and after reaching Batla house, he made many calls on the phone of deceased Azharuddin which were not responded and later on it was switched off; that at around 05:00 PM, accused Sanaullah called him from the mobile number of deceased Azharuddin and he asked him to let him talk to deceased Azharuddin but accused told that 'Azharuddin thori doori pe hai, hum thori der me aatey hain and the mobile phone was switched off after some time; that accused Sanaullah did not allow him to talk with deceased Azharuddin over phone. " During cross examination certain facts were confronted to him with his statement u/s. 161 Cr.PC. which are reproduced below:-
"After some time, he received a call from the mobile number of deceased Azharuddin at around 05.00 pm. Said call was made by accused Sanaullah who asked him "aa gaya"., he replied "haan mai pahunch gaya'. He asked from accused Sanaullah Azharuddin kahan hai. Accused told him that Azharuddin thori doori pe hai, hum thori der me aatey hain".
"After some time since they did not return, he called to Abbas and told about the aforesaid facts. He told him that 'Azharuddin ne mujhe yahan lakar chor diya, Sanaullah ke saath kahin gaya hai. Abbas asked me to about the place where he was waiting. He told that he do not know. Then Abbas asked him to inquire about the place where he was waiting and after inquiry, he came to know that said place is Batla House. He was nervous at Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 SC No. 574/2019 16:39:12 +0530 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 32 of 73 that time. Abbas told him over phone that he would make a call to Azharuddin. After some time, Abbas call him back and informed that the mobile phone of Azharuddin was switched off. He inquired him as to whether he had call to Azharuddin or not. He told him that he had tried to call many times, however, his phone was switched off"
"Thereafter, he asked one rikshavala to talk with Abas who told him about the address of the factory and thereafter, he boarded in the said rickshaw who took him to the said factory where he met Abbas."
"After reaching factory, they tried to make calls to Azharuddin however he could not be contacted."
11.5 From perusal of his statement under Section 161 Cr. P.C. it evinces that those confronted facts were not found in the same. However the witness has stated that he told the said facts to the IO and the burden of non recording of those facts in the statement under Section 161 Cr. P.C. lies upon the IO and no question was put to the IO PW-21 Inspector Jitender Kashyap regarding non recording of said facts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as "Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) in Criminal Appeal no. 2482 OF 2014 decided on 13.02.2025" held as under:-
"11. Before we part with the judgment, we must refer to a peculiar practice followed by the Trial Court. PW-1 and PW-3 were confronted in the cross-examination with their statements recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC. In the depositions, it is mentioned that the attention of the witness was invited to a particular Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:39:18 Page no. 33 of 73 +0530 portion of the prior statement. After recording the answer of the witness, the portion of the prior statement used to contradict the witness has been reproduced in brackets. The law is well settled. The portion of the prior statement shown to the witness for contradicting the witness must be proved through the investigating officer. Unless the said portion of the prior statement used for contradiction is duly proved, it cannot be reproduced in the deposition of the witnesses. The correct procedure is that the Trial Judge should mark the portions of the prior statements used for contradicting the witness. The said portions can be put in bracket and marked as AA, BB, etc. The marked portions cannot form a part of the deposition unless the same are proved."
11.6 Secondly, the facts which are confronted to the witness are not contradicting his previous statement. Rather those confronted facts are, in a way, elaborating the fact that deceased Azaruddin was lastly seen with accused Sanullah and Bapi Das. The fact that deceased Azaruddin indeed went along with accused Sanullah on the day when he was lastly seen alive has been confirmed by the CCTV footage of the camera installed near the place of their meeting. PW-2 Aslam Golder too has exhibited the said CCTV footage as Ex. P-6 and Ex. P-7. In this regard PW-2 had deposed that :-
"At this stage, MHCM has produced one yellow color envelope Parcel No.1 Exhibit M + OPC bearing particulars of FSL, Rohini as well as particulars of instant Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 34 of 73 16:39:23 +0530 case FIR, duly sealed with court seal. Seal is broken after taking permission from the court and same is found containing one small plastic container bearing the particulars of present case FIR in which one pen drive 'SanDisk Cruzer Blade 16GB' bearing the details of FSL. It also mentions Exhibit M and bearing initials. The said pen is played on the laptop brought by the IO after taking permission from the court. The said pen drive is containing two MP4 files Camera4_gyan_gyan_20190804161847_201908... i.e. and Camerall_gyangyan_20190804161659_20190..... CCTV footage of Camera4 is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies accused Bapi Das seen in the said footage at 16.19.56 to 16.20.44, dated 04.08.2019 who was purchasing two beer bottles from liquor shop. CCTV footage of Camerall is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies the accused Bapi Das seen in the said footage at 16.19.32 going towards a shop and seen returning at 16.20.53 dated 04.08.2019. The said pen drive mentions Exhibit M is already exhibited as Ex.P6.
At this stage, MHCM has also produced one yellow color envelope Parcel No.2 Exhibit N + OPC bearing particulars of FSL, Rohini as well as particulars of instant case FIR, duly sealed with court seal. Seal is broken after taking permission from the court and same is found containing one small plastic container bearing the particulars of present case FIR in which one pen drive SanDisk Cruzer Blade 8GB' bearing the details of FSL. It also mentions Exhibit N and bearing initials. The said pen is played on the laptop. The said pen containing two HCVR_ch1_main_201908041600000 Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:39:28 Page no. 35 of 73 +0530 MP4 files i.e. 20190804163000, 163000, and HCVR_ch11_main_201908041600000_20190804 HCVR_ch12_main_201908041600000_20190804163000 HCVR_ch15_main 201908041600000 20190804163000 CCTV footage of chl (camera no.1) is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies deceased wearing black shirt alongwith accused Sanaullah wearing white strips blue T-shirt and accused Bapi Das at 16.22.21 dated 04.08.2019 standing outside the mall.
CCTV footage of ch11 (camera no.11) is played. After seeing the same, witness again identifies his deceased alongwith accused Sanaullah and accused Bapi Das at 16.21.44 dated 04.08.2019.
CCTV footage of ch12 (camera no. 12) is played. After seeing the same, witness again identifies his deceased alongwith accused Sanaullah and accused Bapi Das.
CCTV footage of ch15 (camera no.15) is played. After seeing the same, witness identifies accused Bapi Das. The said pen drive mentions Exhibit M is already exhibited as Ex.P7."
11.7 Ld. defence counsel failed to put any question to PW-2 which may doubt the authenticity of said pen-drives during his cross examination.
11.8 The said CCTV footage were got preserved by the IO during the course of investigation and regarding the same PW-21 IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap has deposed that " they went to the wine shop and met with Sachin Saxena who was manager of the said wine shop; that they had seen the CCTV footage of the said Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:39:33 Page no. 36 of 73 +0530 Wine shop dated 04.08.2019 and on seeing the footage of camera no. 4 and 11 at about 4:15 to 4:21 pm both the accused persons along with deceased were seen in the said footage coming towards the wine shop; that in the said footage, accused Sanaullah and deceased Azaruddin were stopped at the some distance away of the said wine shop and accused Bapi Das came at the said wine shop counter and purchased two bottles of beer from the said shop; that he had asked the manager of the said shop to preserved the footage of said camera till further request; that thereafter, they went to the office of Fastrack Security Living Style, Jasola Mall, situated in the said Mall along with both the accused persons; that they had seen the CCTV footage of the camera bearing no.1, 11, 12 and one another camera and the timing of the said footage was differ approximately four minutes of the usual time; that in the said footage in between aforesaid period, both the accused persons along with the deceased Azruddin were seen coming towards the Jasola Mall and accused Bapi Das was seen going towards the said wine shop; that on seeing the footage the cloth of the accused persons and deceased were the same cloth which were seized at the instance of the accused persons being their cloth; that the cloth of the deceased which was found with the dead body at the spot are the same cloth which was seen in the footage; that he told Mr. Suresh Kumar Manager of the Fastrack Company to preserve the footage of the aforesaid camera of the relevant time till further request. " The facts were not assailed by the Ld. defence counsel during cross Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:39:39 +0530 Page no. 37 of 73 examination.
11.9 The persons from whom the IO collected the CCTV footage during course of investigation were examined as PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena and PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar.
11.10 PW-7 Sh. Sachin Saxena has deposed that "on 07.08.2019, police had come to his Wine and Beer shop situated at Living Style Mall, Jasola Village and checked the CCTV footage of 04.08.2019 from 04.15 to 04.30 PM of camera no. 4 and camera no. 11; that on 14.08.2019, he provided the copy of relevant CCTV footage in a pen drive make Sandisk which was seized by police vide seizure memo Ex. PW 7/A; that he had also given the certificate U/S 65-B Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW 7/B and he identified pen drive 16 GB as Ex.P6." He was cross examined by the Ld. defence counsel and he very well answered all the questions put to him. During cross examination he has stated that "he was working in the wine shop since 2015 and his duty hours were from 10.00 AM to 10.00 PM;
that in his absence, second Incharge used to look after the work; that the distance between their shop and the bus stop is around 150 meters and it takes around one minute to cover the said distance; that he did not remember the time when IO came to their office on 07.08.2019 however it must be in afternoon; that IO did not inquire from any other official of their shop except him; that IO remained in their shop for about 15-20 minutes; that there were 11 CCTV cameras installed in their shop at that time and all were working; that the cameras are operational round the clock and its back up Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 38 of 73 16:39:45 +0530 remains for one month; that he did not remember as to how many footages of cameras were seen by the IO on that day; that he had given the said footages from DVR to the IO; that IO did not ask for DVR and only asked for footages; that all the cameras were showing exact date and time online." In view of the same, the Ld. defence counsel failed to erode his credibility during the same and the witness withstand his testimony throughout the same. 11.11 PW-8 Sh. Suresh Kumar has deposed that "he was working as Manager in Fast Track Realcon, Living Style Mall, Pocket 6, Main Kalindi Kunj Road, Jasola, New Delhi since 2017 and on 07.08.2019, police officials came to his office for checking the CCTV footage; that the police officials checked the CCTV footage of camera no. 1, 11, 12 and 15 and asked him to preserve CCTV footages of 04.08.2019 from 04.00 PM to 04.30 PM and he preserved the same; that after 4-5 days, police officials came to his office and he handed over the aforesaid CCTV footage in a Scandisk pen drive to them and they seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.P7; that he issued certificate U/S 65-B Indian Evidence Act to the police officials in support of the CCTV footage which is Ex.PW8/A; that he did not tamper the CCTV footages in any manner and gave the original footages to police in pen drive; that he identified the pendrive which is Ex.PX1". During cross examination he has stated that "on 04.08.2019 his duty hours were from 11.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m.; that he was M.Com pass; that there were 34 CCTV Camaras installed in the Living Style Mall at that point of Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:39:50 +0530 Page no. 39 of 73 time; that he did not remember the exact time when IO came to came to him however it was after lunch time in afternoon but before 6 PM; that IO only inquired from him; that his staff accompanied the IO for checking the CCTV footages and after checking all 34 cameras, he asked him to preserve footages of 4 cameras; that he was not present at that time; that it took around 1½ to 2 hours to the IO to check all CCTV footages; that IO remained in the Mall complex for about 3 Hours; that IO had made inquiries from him but he does not know if his statement was also recorded by him. "
Further during cross examination he denied the suggestion that he tampered the footage and handed over the same to the IO and Ld. defence counsel failed to produce any positive evidence to support the said suggestion.
11.12 PW-21 IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap has further deposed that he got sent all the exhibits including CCTV footage to the FSL for their scientific examination. The said facts were not challenged during the cross examination neither any doubt was raised on their veracity.
11.13 The FSL report is Ex.A-19 is an admitted document. The description of articles as per the FSL report is as under:-
"Exhibit-M : One pen drive of make "Sandisk" of 16 GB capacity, containing two CCTV video files in ".mp4" format.
Exhibit-N : One pen drive of make "Sandisk", of 8 GB capacity, containing four CCTV video files in "ast" format.Digitally signed by GEETANJALI
SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:39:55 +0530 Page no. 40 of 73 RESULTS OF EXAMINATION/OPINION: On laboratory examination of CCTV video files in pen drive marked "Exhibit-M" and "Exhibit-N", it was observed that each video file are continuous video footage of CCTV recording. There is no indication of alteration in the continuous video footage of CCTV recordings on the basis of frame- by-frame examination using Video Analyst System."
11.14 The necessary conclusion from the abovesaid is that no tempering was done with the CCTV footage. From the said chain of events it stood established that deceased Azharuddin was with the accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das on 04.08.2019. The fact stands established that deceased was lastly seen alive in the company of accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das on 04.08.2019 at about 4.00 p.m.
12. Moving forward to trace out any link, if any, of the circumstantial evidence I shall delve upon the other vital piece of evidence and firstly is medical evidence.
MEDICAL EVIDENCE
13. The dead body of Azharuddin was brought to the AIIMS hospital on 05.08.2019 which was examined vide MLC Ex.A-18 as per which the patient was brought dead in the hospital. Thereafter the postmortem of the body was conducted and the postmortem report is Ex.A-23 which is an admitted document. The opinion as to the cause of death as per the postmortem report Ex.A-23 is" shock as a result of cut throat injury and multiple stab injuries to the chest and abdomen." There are thirteen injuries on the dead body as per Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 41 of 73 16:40:00 +0530 the postmortem report. The postmortem report details the injuries as follows:-
1. An oblique stab wound with postero- superior and antero- inferior ends, of size 2 cm x 1 cm x soft tissue deep over the lateral aspect of left side of neck, 1 cm behind and above the left angle of mandible. Margins were regular with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue
2. An oblique stab wound with postero- superior and antero- inferior ends, of size 2.5 cm x 1 cm x soft tissue deep over the postero lateral aspect of left side of neck 4.5 cm below the left mastoid process and 6 cm from the posterior midline. Margins were regular with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue.
3. A horizontally placed cut throat wound of size 13 cm x 5 cm present over the front and both sides of the neck with lower margin located at the lever of supra-sternal notch in the anterior midline and having regular edges and infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue. All neck structures within the wound were absent and cervical vertebrae were exposed.
4. An oblique stab wound with supero-lateral and infero -medial ends, of size 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm x 5 cm (muscle deep) over the left side of front of chest 3 cm below middle of left clavicle and 9 cm medial to the tip of left shoulder. The wound was directed postero-laterally and had regular margins with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue.
5. A horizontal stab wound of size 3.5 cm x 2 cm x subcutaneous tissue deep over the front of left chest, 5 cm below middle of left clavicle and 6 cm medial to the tip of left shoulder. Margins Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 42 of 73 16:40:05 +0530 were regular with infiltration of subcutaneous tissue.
6. An oblique stab wound, with right superior and left inferior ends, of size 3.5 cm x 1 cm x sternum deep over the front of chest, 2.5 cm below the supra-sternal notch in the anterior midline. Margins were regular with infilteration of the subcutaneous tissue.
7. A horizontal stab wound of size 4 cm x 2.3 cm x 5.5 cm deep (pleural cavity deep) over the front of right side of chest with medial end over the anterior midline, 9 cm below the supra sternal notch. Margins were regular with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue. ON dissection and oopening of chest cavity, the soft tissues of the mediastinum were contussed. The wound was passing through the right third intercostal space along the lateral margin of the sternum with contusion of the soft tissues in the intercostal space. A cut injury of size 3 cm x 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm over the fron of ubeer lobe of right lung, 6 cm below the apex and just above the interlobar fissure with infilteration of the adjacent lung parenchyma.
8. A horizontal stab wound of size 4 cm x 2.2 cm x chest wall deep over the front lower part of left chest, 5 cm lateral to the midline and 27 cm below the middle of left clavicle. The wound was directed postero- infero- medially and had regular margins with infiltrationof the subcutaneous tissue. On dissection of the abdonminal cavity, the wound passed through the left eighth intercostal space with contusion of the soft tissues I the intercostal space and the adjacent diaphragm. A vertical cut wound of sizze 3 cm x 0.2 cm present over the lower Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 43 of 73 16:40:09 +0530 aspect of left lobe of liver, involving the inferior margin with infiltration of the adjacent liver parenchyma.
9. Skin, soft tissues and muscles including the genitalia were absent with torn and irregular edges over the lower abdomen, groin, left thigh, left leg and upper half of right thigh exposing the abdominal and pelvic cavities, left femur, left tibia and upper half of right femur.
10. A vertical stab wound of size 3 cm x 0.5 cm x scapula deep over the back of right side of chest, 10 cm lateral to the posterior midline and 10 cm above the inferior angle of right scapula.
The wound was directed antero-supero-laterally and had regular margins with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue.
11. A reddish abrasion of size 2.5 cm x 0.2 over the back of the left side of chest, 6 cm from the posterior midline and 8 cm below the inferior angle of left scapula.
12. A horizontal stabl wound of size 1 cm x 0.5 cm x subcutaneous deep present over the left flank, 7 cm lateral to the posterior midline. Margins were regular with infiltration of the subcutaneous tissue.
13. Multiple reddish abrasions of varying shape and size ranging from 3cm x 1cm to 4cm x 2cm over an area 13cmm x 12cm over the left flank, 5 cm above the iliac crest and 4 cm lateral to the posterior midline"
13.1 All the above said injuries are pin pointing towards the fact that the deceased suffered an unnatural death. As per the postmortem report the time since death is 24-48 hours and from the Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date:
2026.03.27 Page no. 44 of 73 16:40:14 +0530 aforesaid discussion on the last seen circumstance it has been proved that accused persons were lastly seen with the deceased on 04.08.2019 at around 4.00 p.m. The dead body of Azharuddin was recovered on the next day i.e. 05.08.2019 at about 10.00 a.m. on the receipt of information given by PW-3 Shri Veerpal who has deposed that "on 05.08.2019 at about 10:00 AM he saw a dead body lying in the bushes while he was going to attend the nature's call; that he came back near gate no. 3, Canal colony and informed the guard Rahim about the same" and the Ld. defence counsel failed to elicit anything during cross examination which may erode his credibility.
Though the guard to whom PW-3 Shri Veerpal informed about the dead body could not be examined due to his death but the fact that PW-3 Shri Veerpal indeed informed the security guard at gate no. 3, Canal Colony about the dead body has been confirmed by the police official HC Surender Kumar who was examined as PW-19. He has deposed that "on 05.08.2019 at about 11:00 am one security guard at gate no. 3 (teele wala gate), Canal colony informed him about one dead body found on reit ka teela towards Jamuna (behind the bushes); that thereafter he alongwith security guard went to reit ka teela near Canal colony, Yamuna river where they found one dead body and few animals were eating the lower part of the dead body. "
There is nothing in cross examination which may belie the fact that the dead body was recovered in the Khadar area of river Yamuna. The dead body was received for postmortem in AIIMS hospitals on 05.08.2019 at about 3.30 p.m. and the autopsy was done on Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 45 of 73 2026.03.27 16:40:19 +0530 06.08.2019 at about 2.30 p.m. In view of the same, the date and time when the dead body was recovered and the time when the deceased was lastly seen alive falls within the bracket of 'time since death' as per the postmortem report which is 24-48 hours and this further shifts the blame of the present murder towards the accused persons.
13.2 In view of the aforesaid finding on the last seen circumstance since it has been established that the deceased was lastly seen alive with accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das, the burden is on accused to prove what happened thereafter since these facts are especially within the knowledge of accused. Section 106 of the Evidence Act clearly lays down that when any fact is specially within the knowledge of a person, the burden approving that fact is upon him. Since, the accused failed to do so, it must be held that he failed to discharge the burden cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act. This circumstance, therefore, provides the missing link in the chain of circumstances which prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In judgment titled as State of Rajasthan Vs. Kashiram, (2006) 12 SCC 254,the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ".... It is not necessary to multiply with authorities. The principle is well settled. The provisions of section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and catergoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within the knowledge of a person, the burden of proving the fact is upon him. Thus, if a person is last seen with the deceased, he must offer an explanation as to how and when he parted Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 46 of 73 2026.03.27 16:40:24 +0530 company. He must furnish an explanation which appears to the Court to be probable and satisfactory. If he does so he must be held to have discharged his burden, If he fails to offer an explanation on the basis of facts within his special knowledge, he fails to discharge the burden cast upon him by section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. In case resting on circumstantial evidence if the accused fails to offer a reasonable explanation in discharge of the burden placed on him, that itself provides an additional link in the chain of circumstances proved against him...."
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE/ RECOVERIES
14. The Investigating agency zero down on the accused persons regarding the present homicide on the basis of the statement given by the last seen witnesses namely Mr. Abbas Golder and Mr. Aslam Golder. It was on the basis of the statement of the last seen witnesses did the accused persons were arrested and their disclosure statements were recorded.
14.1 Undoubtedly, the Court cannot rely upon the disclosure statement of the accused, however, the fact remains that the same can be relied upon U/s. 27 of Indian Evidence Act, when any fact is deposed to and discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovery may be proved. In Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka, Crl. Appeal No. 64 of 2021 decided by Hon'ble SC on 17/04/2023, the Hon'ble Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 47 of 73 2026.03.27 16:40:30 +0530 Supreme Court has held that "19. It is a trite law that in pursuance to a voluntary statement made by the accused, a fact must be discovered which was in the exclusive knowledge of the accused alone. In such circumstances, that part of the voluntary statement which leads to the discovery of a new fact which was only in the knowledge of the accused would become admissible under Section
27. Such statement should have been voluntarily made and the facts stated therein should not have been in the knowhow of others." 14.2 Thus, what is admissible being the information, the same has to be proved and not the opinion formed on it by the police officer. In other words, the exact information given by the accused while in custody which led to recovery of the articles has to be proved. It is, therefore, necessary for the benefit of both the accused and the prosecution that information given should be recorded and proved and if not so recorded, the exact information must be adduced through evidence. The basic idea embedded in Section 27 of the Evidence Act is the doctrine of Confirmation by subsequent events. The doctrine is founded on the principle that if any fact is discovered as a search made on the strength of any information obtained from a prisoner, such a discovery is a guarantee that the information supplied by the prisoner is true. The information might be confessional or non inculpatory in nature but if it results in discovery of a fact, it becomes a reliable information. The "fact discovered" envisaged in the section embraces the place from which the object was produced, the knowledge of the accused as to it, but Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:40:35 Page no. 48 of 73 +0530 the information given must be relate distinctly to that effect. 14.3 It was disclosed by accused Sanaullah that he was not happy with the relationship of deceased Azharuddin with his sister Hanifa and he threatened to cause bodily harm to him in case he is found around his sister Hanifa; that Azharuddin got scared and ran away from Delhi but he came back to Delhi around one and a half month back and again started meeting his sister Hanifa; that around one month back he planned along with his friend Bapi Das to kill Azharuddin and under that plan he called Azharuddin on 04.08.2019 for meeting; that after reaching Shaheen Bagh, Azharuddin called him and asked him to reach there; that he reached there along with his friend Bapi Das and brought one sharp edged knife along with him; that Azharuddin came along with one of his friend namely Aslam there and all four of them had tea at Aggarwal tea stall and left; that he along with Bapi Das took Azharuddin at Jasola wine shop from where Bapi Das purchased two beer bottles and thereafter proceeded to Yamuna Khadar behind Canal Colony; that on the way he told his friend Bapi Das that today they will finish off Azharuddin; that all three of them had beer at the Khadar area and after that he took out knife and attacked Azharuddin with the same which hit his leg; that Azharuddin tried to escape but he attacked him from the back and Bapi Das caught hold of him and lay him on the ground; that he attacked Azharuddin with knife on his chest and throat due to which he became unconscious; that they left Azharuddin there considering him to be dead and while going from Digitally signed SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 49 of 73 2026.03.27 16:40:42 +0530 there he took out the mobile phone of Azharuddin and threw the same in the bushes after taking out the sim from the same. He has further disclosed that he can get recovered the weapon of offence i.e. knife and his wearing clothes and mobile phone of deceased Azharuddin. Accused Bapi Das also disclosed on the same lines. 14.4 After recording their disclosure statements, both the accused got recovered the weapon of offence i.e. knife and their wearing clothes at the time of incident during the course of investigations. PW-21 IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap has deposed that " that thereafter accused Sanaullah alongwith co-accused Bapi Das got recovered one blood stained knife from the bushes on the eastern side of place of incident and he had prepared sketch of the knife as well that of handle and blade of knife vide sketch memos which is Ex. PW-17/A, Ex. PW-17/B and PW-17/C respectively; that thereafter he sealed and seized the said knife vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW-17/D and also prepared the recovery site plan of the aforesaid knife which is Ex. PW-20/D; that in pursuance of disclosure statement of accused Bapi Das he got recovered his t- shirt (slety/blue colour) and his wearing pant (slety colour) from the corner of the room and he seized and sealed the same vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW-17/E and accused Sanaullah got recovered t-shirt (blue colour having the line of sky and white colour) and blue coloured pant stained in blood and sand from near the wash room of rented accommodation of sister of accused Sanaullah at house no. C-256 A ground floor, Shaheen Bagh, Delhi and he sealed and Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
SC No. 574/2019 2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:40:48 +0530 Page no. 50 of 73 seized the same vide seizure memo which is Ex PW-17/F and he got deposited the case property in the Malkahana." However during the cross examination suspicion has been cast on the said recoveries since admittedly no public person was joined the recovery proceedings. It is stated by the IO that though he has requested 4-5 persons to join the investigations but none agreed and left the place without disclosing their names and addresses. It is common that generally public is averse to become a witness in a criminal case because of the attitude of the Courts in summoning the witnesses time and again and sending them back on the ground that either the counsel for the accused was not available or accused was not there. Hence the case of the prosecution cannot be rejected on the ground of non examination of public witness or on account of non joining of public witness. (Reliance placed on judgment titled as Appabhai & Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat, IR 1988 SC 696) 14.5 The fact that Azharuddin died due to cut throat injury has been well proved through postmortem report as per which the cause of death is "shock as a result of cut throat injury and multiple stab injuries to the chest and abdomen". The subsequent opinion on the weapon of offence further cemented the fact that those injuries were caused by the weapon submitted for examination which is knife in the present case. The subsequent opinion is an admitted document which is Ex.A-1 vide which IO sought opinion on the following aspect:
"Question: Whether it is possible for injuries found on Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 51 of 73 16:40:53 +0530 the body of deceased Ahruddin Golden were caused by recovered knife or otherwise?
Opinion: After perusal of PM report and examination of the submitted weapon, we are of the considered opinion that injury numbers 1-13 mentioned in the Post-Mortem Report (i.e. PM report no. 969/2019), except injury no. 9, could be caused by the weapon submitted for examination."
14.6 Apart from recovery of the weapon of offence i.e. knife and clothes of the accused persons, some more evidence were lifted from the place from where dead body was recovered from sand dunes near Yamuna Khadar. In this regard PW-21 IO/Inspector Jitender Kashyap has deposed that "on 05.08.2019 at about 12:12 PM on the receipt DD No. 26B Ex. A-4 (colly) he alongwith Insp/ATO Sanjay Neolia, Abbas (brother of deceased) and Aslam (relative of deceased) left the PS for spot i.e. Canal Colony, Near Yamuna Khadar, Reit Ka Tila where they met SI Gaurav Chaudhary, HC Ravinder, Ct. Surender and members of Crime team; that he saw a dead body lying downwards to the reit ka tila and Crime team was inspecting the spot; that he observed that animals had eaten the flesh of the dead body due to which the bones of leg were visible; that he also observed stab wounds on the chest and neck of the dead body; that he also observed that some blood stains on the reit (sand); that he also observed one broken belt nearby the dead body; that he also observed huge blood on the reit (sand) at a distance of about 37-40 steps from the dead body, one Digitally signed SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 52 of 73 16:40:57 +0530 pair of sleepers make Flite and two empty beer bottles of Kingfisher brand." He has further deposed that "he sealed and seized two empty beer bottles in the presence of public witnesses namely Abbas and Aslam vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW1/B; that he sealed and seized broken belt vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW1/E; that he sealed and seized one pair of sleepers vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW1/F; that he lifted blood stained sand/ reit from the place where dead body was found lying and also earth control without blood and sealed and seized the same in the presence of public witnesses namely Abbas and Aslam vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/C; that he lifted blood stained sand/ reit from the aforesaid place where huge blood was found on the sand/ reiti and also earth control without blood and sealed and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/D; they all returned in the PS and all the case properties were deposited in Malkhana". 14.7 He has further deposed that he got sent the exhibits in sealed condition to the FSL, Rohini for their scientific examination. The FSL report qua exhibits lifted from the place of recovery of the dead body is Ex.A-18 is an admitted document. The description of articles as per the FSL report is as under:-
Parcel-Z: stated to be containing, "blood-grey sand stained knife" and on opening, one bent metallic knife was found and it was found marked as Exhibit-Z; Exhibit-Z: One bent metallic knife having wooden handle and adhered sand.
Parcel-C: stated to be containing, "blood stained sand Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: 2026.03.27 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh 16:41:00 +0530 State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 53 of 73 lifted beneath dead body" and on opening, sand was found and it was found marked as Exhibit-C; Exhibit-C: Sand Parcel-D: stated be containing, "earth Control lifted near the dead body" and on opening, sand was found and it was marked as Exhibit -D;
Exhibit-D: Sand Parcel-E: stated to be containing, "blood stained sand lifted from the top of sand dune" and on opening, sand was found and it was found marked as Exhibit-E; Exhibit-E: Sand.
RESULTS OF EXAMINATION/OPINION: Sand of Exhibit-Z, Exhibit-C, Exhibit-D, Exhibit-E, Exhibit-F, Exhibit-1 and Exhibit-J were examined physically, under magnification, using density gradient comparison method and X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer and it was found that these were similar in respect of colour. microscopic appearance, density gradient and elemental composition."
14.8 The FSL report qua blood sample and the clothes of the accused is Ex.A-20 which is an admitted document. The description of articles as per the FSL report is as under: ????
"Parcel: X found containing exhibit described as "blood gauze of deceased".
Exhibit X: Brown gauge cloth piece described as 'Blood gauze of deceased'.
Parcel: Y found containing exhibits described as "clothes of deceased" :-
Exhibit Y-1: One pants (Jeans) having brown stains; Exhibit Y-2: One banian having brown stains;
Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 54 of 73 16:41:05 +0530 Exhibit 'Y-3: One underwear having brown stains; Exhibit Y-4: One cloth piece having brown stains; Exhibit Y-5: One T-shirt having darker stains; Parcel : Z found containing Exhibit Z i.e. one knife made up of wooden handle and metallic blade having brown stains Exhibit C: Sand material described as 'Blood stained sand'.
Exhibit D: Sand material described as 'Earth control"
Parcel E: found containing exhibit described as "blood stained sand".
Exhibit E: Foul smelling sand material described as "Blood stained sand".
Exhibit F: Sand material described as 'Earth control'. Exhibit G: Two pieces of belt described as 'broken belt of deceased.
Exhibit H: A pair of slippers.
Parcel I: found containing exhibit described as "blood- cum-sand stained t-shirt and jeans (pant) of accused Sanaullah.
Exhibit I-1: One pants (jeans) having darker stains. Exhibit I-2: One T-shirt having darker stains. Exhibit J-1: One dirty pants.
Exhibit J-2: One T-shirt.
BIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION 14.9 As per biological examination "blood was detected on exhibits X (blood gauze of deceased), Y-1 (one jeans pant having brown stains), Y-2 (one banian having brown stains), Y-3(one underwear having brown stains), Y-4(one cloth piece having brown stains), Y-5(one t-shirt having darker stains), Z (one knife made up Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 55 of 73 2026.03.27 16:41:10 +0530 of wooden handle and metallic blade having brown stains), C (blood stained sand), E (blood stained sand), H (one pair of slippers), I-1 (one jeans pant having darker stains) and I-2 (one t-shirt having darker stains)".
RESULTS OF EXAMINATION:
"The DNA profile generated from the source of exhibits 'E' (sand material) and 'I-1' (jeans pant of accused Sanaullah) is matching with the DNA profile generated from the source of exhibit 'X' (blood gauze of deceased)"
14.10 From the above said FSL report it has been proved that all the exhibits were lifted from the place of incident i.e. Khadar area since the FSL report says that all the exhibits contained same element i.e. sand. The FSL report regarding biological examination further indicted accused Sanaullah in the present case since blood of the deceased was found on his pant which he was wearing on the day of incident.
14.11 The mobile phone of the deceased was not recovered at instance of accused Sanaullah and this goes with his disclosure statement as per which he along with co-accused Bapi Das left Azharuddin there considering him to be dead and while going from there he took out the mobile phone of Azharuddin and threw the same in the bushes after taking out the sim from the same. The said mobile phone was picked by some passerby for his personal use. The said passerby was examined as PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin who has deposed that "on 05.08.2019 at about 07.00 to 07.30 AM when he Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh 2026.03.27 State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 16:41:14 Page no. 56 of 73 +0530 was going towards CNG station to fill the CNG at Sharan Vihar in front of Shaheen Bagh, Kalandi Kunj Road, he saw one golden coloured mobile phone make Techno lying in the bushes when he stepped down for urinating; that the said mobile was without SIM card; that on 12.08.2019 he inserted Airtel sim number issued in the name of his wife Roshan Ara; that in the month of September 2019 he received a call from officials of PS Shaheen Bagh to produce the said mobile at PS and on 21.09.2019 he handed over the said mobile phone to IO/ Jitender who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW 4/A and the SIM card is Mark X-1". Ld. defence counsel fails to elicit anything during the cross examination which may falsify the fact that PW-4 picked up the phone from near the place of incident and it was indeed due to this reason he did not inform the police about the same. PW-12 Ms. Roshan Aara Khatoon corroborated the testimony of her husband PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin that her husband found the phone and it was not purchased by hi. In her words "that her husband found the aforesaid mobile phone मेरे पति को मोबाइल फ़ोन पाया था." The fact that the mobile phone found by PW-4 Kamaluddin belonged to the deceased has been proved by his brother PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder in his testimony since he identified the same as Ex.P-1.
15. The crux of the matter is that in the present case dead body of Azharuddin was found in sand dunes at Canal colony near Khadar area on 05.08.2019. The dead body was identified by his brother as that of deceased Azharuddin who was missing since Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 57 of 73 16:41:19 +0530 04.08.2019 and missing report was registered with the concerned police station vide DD no. 21-B. The needle of suspicion turns towards the accused persons on the basis of last seen evidence of PW-1, PW-2 and the CCTV footage. It was further strengthened qua accused Sanaullah with the recovery of weapon of offence and the clothes of the accused Sanaullah on whose clothes i.e. pant DNA of the deceased was found. The recovery of mobile phone of the deceased from one passerby from the place of incident i.e. PW-4 Kamaluddin further provides a connecting link in the chain of events leading to the culpability of accused Sanaullah in the present murder. Now the question is that whether accused Bapi Das was acting in concert to the common object with the accused Sanaullah to commit murder of Azharuddin.
15.1 The underlying basic assumption or foundation in criminal law is the principle of personal culpability. A person is criminally responsible for act or transactions in which he is personally engaged or in some other way had participated. Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 recognizes the principle of vicarious liability in criminal jurisprudence. It makes a person liable for action of an offence not committed by him but by another person with whom he shared the common intention. To attract applicability of Section 34 IPC, the prosecution is under an obligation to establish that there existed a common intention before a person can be vicariously convicted for the criminal act of another. The ultimate act should be done in furtherance of common intention. Common intention requires a pre-Digitally signed by GEETANJALI
SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 58 of 73
16:41:23 +0530
arranged plan, which can be even formed at the spur of the moment or simultaneously just before or even during the attack. The use of words "in furtherance" suggests that Section 34 is applicable also where the act actually done is not exactly the act jointly intended by the conspirators to be done, otherwise, the words would not be needed at all. The common intention can be to do one act and another act can be done in furtherance of the common intention. The aforesaid quotation emphasizes that it is essential that each co-
perpetrator should have necessary intent to participate or otherwise have requisite awareness or knowledge that the offence is likely to be committed in view of the common design. It also follows that in some cases merely accompanying the principal accused may not establish common intention. A co-perpetrator, who shares a common intention, will be liable only to the extent that he intends or could or should have visualized the possibility or probability of the final act. If the final outcome or offence committed is distinctly remote and unconnected with the common intention, he would not be liable. Reliance placed on Judgment titled 'Krishnamurthi @ Gonodu Vs. State of Karnataka', passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 16.02.2022.
16. Applying the said principles relating to applicability of Section 34 IPC to the facts of present case, the Prosecution has failed to prove any circumstance that accused Bapi Das committed the murder of Azharuddin in pursuance to the common intention with accused Sanaullah. The common intention or the intention of Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 59 of 73 16:41:27 +0530 individual concerned in furtherance of common intention could be proved either from direct evidence or by the inference from the act or attending circumstances of the case and conduct of the parties. It has already been said that there is no direct evidence in the present case and the whole case is based on circumstantial evidence. The Prosecution has failed to prove the chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the murder was committed by accused Bapi Das under the common object with accused Sanaullah.
MOTIVE
17. The motive behind the present murder is shown to be love relationship between the deceased and accused Sanaullah's sister namely Hanifa as deposed by PW-1 Abbas Golder. He has deposed that his deceased brother was in love with sister of accused Sanaullah which the family member of accused did not like. He has also deposed that "accused Sanaullah had been extending threats since year 2016-17 to his deceased brother saying that 'tere ko dubara dekheja to jaan se maar dunga'; that after receiving the threats, my brother and I had gone to Hydrabad around 2018 where we had worked for one year. In the year 2019, we came to Delhi and started working." During cross examination suggestion was given to the witness thereby denying any love affair between his deceased brother and sister of accused Sanaullah. The said Hanifa was examined as PW-9 who did not support the case of the Prosecution regarding the said motive. Though the Prosecution is not able to Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 60 of 73 16:41:33 +0530 prove the motive, that will not be a ground to throw away the Prosecution case. Absence of proof of motive only demands careful scrutiny and deeper analysis of evidence adduced by the prosecution. In the present facts and scenario, the Prosecution has proved the entire chain of events in which the accused Sanaullah killed Azharuddin. It has been well proved that deceased Azharuddin was lastly seen alive with the accused Sanaullah. The fact that the deceased was with accused Sanahullah has been well proved by the CCTV footage produced by PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena and PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar. The weapon of offence i.e. knife was recovered at the instance of accused Sanaullah and the penultimate circumstance which sealed the case against accused Sanaullah is recovery of his DNA sample from his clothes. In that eventuality the irresistible inference has to be drawn against him. During the examination of the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C, he stated nothing except the denial of the facts put to him. He did not give any plausible explanation to discharge the obligation as settled by Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.
DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED.
18. In his statement u/s. 313 Cr.PC, accused Sanaullah has stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant in connivance with the IO and he opted to lead defence evidence. Accused Sanaullah examined DW-3 and DW-4 in his defence. DW-3 Sh. Akbar Ali has deposed that "he used to live near house of accused Sanaullah; that he worked as Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 61 of 73 2026.03.27 16:41:43 +0530 a painter at Hazi ji shop; that on 04.08.2019 Sunday at around 04:00
- 04:30 PM, he met accused Sanaullah and remained with him till 07:00 - 08:00 PM at Hazi ji shop; that there was one more person with us namely Zul and they had lunch together; that after 07:00 - 08:00 PM all went to their respective homes; that there was no quarrel happened between them till now; that there is no CCTV camera in the Hazi ji shop; that he knew accused Sanaullah since 2015". During cross examination he has denied the suggestion that on 04.08.2019 accused was present at the Jasola Mall in between 4.15 - 4.20 p.m., the fact which has been well proved by the CCTV footage produced by PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena and PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar. He is speaking white lie which is quite apparent from his said denial. Secondly, this line of defence is no where taken by the accused prior to leading defence evidence since no such suggestion was given to any of the Prosecution witnesses nor such plea was taken by him in his statement u/s. 313 Cr.PC. Thirdly, DW-3 has admitted in his cross examination that he knew accused prior to the happening of the incident and has good relationship with him which cast shadow on the veracity of his testimony.
18.1 DW-4 Ms. Shanaz is the sister of accused Sanaullah and she has deposed that "accused Sanaullah used to reside with her; that on on 04.08.2019 Sunday, accused Sanaullah was having a headache; that at around 03:30 - 04:00 PM accused Sanaullah said that he was going to buy medicines and went outside; that he came back home at around 07:00 - 08:00 PM and after coming back he Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 62 of 73 2026.03.27 16:42:21 +0530 slept; that on 05.08.2019 he woke up in the morning and went to the work; that in the night of 05.08.2019 at around 11:30 PM - 12:00 midnight police officials came at her house and asked her about Azharuddin to which she replied that Azharuddin is son of her mausi (khala); that after that police officials asked her about her father and then she took them to the house of her father; that after that police officials took her husband and father to the PS; that in the PS police officials asked about Azharuddin from her father and husband and after that police officials came back at her house at around 01:00 - 01:30 AM and took her and her mother to the PS; that after reaching the PS they asked them about Azharuddin again and they answered that they do not know where Azharuddin was; that after that police officials beaten her mother, father and husband; that police officials took their mobile phones and switched them off; that after some time police officials gave their phone back and asked them to call accused Sanauallah and ask him to come to PS; that thereafter accused Sanaullah came to the PS at around 02:00 AM; that in the morning police officials told them that Azharuddin has been murdered and brother of Azharuddin namely Abbas is blaming them for the murder; that in the morning at around 05:00 AM police officials released her, her father, mother and husband but kept accused Sanaullah with them by saying that they will ask him questions; that brother of Azharuddin namely Abbas is blaming them because of earlier quarrel of property between her mother and mother of Azharuddin were taking place". Henceforth DW-4 has Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 63 of 73 2026.03.27 16:42:29 +0530 deposed that accused Sanaullah went outside the house in between 3.30 to 4.00 p.m. and returned in between 7.00-8.00 p.m. However this line of defence was also not taken by the accused prior to leading defence evidence since no such suggestion was given to any of the Prosecution witnesses nor such plea was taken by him in his statement u/s. 313 Cr.PC wherein he simply denied all the facts and took the plea of false implication. Secondly, though DW-4 has deposed about some quarrel on property between her mother and that of deceased but she has not deposed that, that is the cause of false implication of the accused in the present case. Further she has not elaborated about particulars of property which was in dispute between the two families nor she has deposed of any previous confrontation regarding the same. Hence the defence taken by the accused Sanaullah appears to be bald one. Thirdly, DW-4 has admitted in her cross examination that she did not know where accused Sanaullah remained between 4.00 - 7.00 p.m. neither she knew whom he met in between the said period and this in a way confirms the case of the Prosecution that accused Sanaullah was with deceased Azharuddin at around 4.00 p.m. on 04.08.2019.
18.2 In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the Prosecution has successfully proved the chain of events and evidence which clearly and unequivocally points only to the guilt of the accused Sanaullah @ Imran in the murder of deceased Azharuddin. However the Prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of the accused Bapi Das u/s. 302/34 IPC.
Digitally signedSC No. 574/2019 by
GEETANJALI
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh
State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 64 of 73
2026.03.27
16:42:34 +0530
Accordingly, accused Sanaullah @ Imran is convicted u/s. 302/34 IPC and u/s. 27 Arms Act and Bapi Das is acquitted under section 302/34 IPC.
18.3 Let copy of this judgment be sent to Ld. Secretary, DSLA, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi for necessary compliance.
Digitally signed by Typed to the direct dictation and GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
announced in the open court 2026.03.27 16:42:40 on this 27th day of March, 2026 +0530 (Geetanjali) Addl. Session Judge (FTC)-03 South East District,Saket Courts New Delhi/27.03.2026 Annexure: Appendix in compliance of Judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2973/2023 titled as "Manojbhai Jethabhai Parmar (Rohit) Vs. State of Gujarat".
SC No. 574/2019 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 65 of 73 Appendix CHART OF WITNESSES EXAMINED Prosecution Name of the Description.
witness no. witness
PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder He is the complainant and brother of
the deceased Azharuddin.
PW-2 Mr. Aslam Golder He is the witness to the fact that he
had lastly seen the accused Sanaullah with the deceased.
PW-3 Shri Veer Pal @ He is the person who seen dead body Birender for the first time and informed one guard namely Rahim about the same.
PW-4 Mr. Kamalluddin He is the person who found the mobile phone, make Techno golden color near Sharan Vihar in front of Shaheen Bagh and handed over the same to the police.
PW-5 Mohd. Raju He is deceased brother-in-law's brother and called at 100 number regarding missing of the deceased.
PW-6 Mr. Abdul Wahab He did not support the case of the Prosecution.
PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena He provided the CCTV footage of the camera installed at his Wine and Beer Shop, Living Style Mall, Jasola Village to the police in a pen drive.
PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar He provided the CCTV footage of the camera installed at his office at Fast Track Realcon, Living Style Mall, Pocket 6, Jasola Village to the police in a pen drive.
PW-9 Ms. Hanifa She did not support the case of the Prosecution.
PW-10 Mr. Abdul Rehman He did not support the case of the Prosecution.
Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 66 of 73 2026.03.27 16:42:48 +0530 PW-11 Smt. Sakina @ She did not support the case of the Sabila @ Sabi Prosecution.
PW-12 Ms. Roshan Aara She is the wife of PW-4 Kamalludin and she is the person who was using mobile phone which was found by PW-4 and thereafter handed over the same to the police.
PW-13 Shri Deepak He identified accused Bapi Das.
Manshramani PW-14 Mr. Subhan Khan He is the landlord of the premises where family of accused Sanaullah used to reside.
PW-15 HC Roshan He is the messenger who delivered the copy of FIR at the office of ACP, DCP, Joint CP as well as Ilaka Magistrate.
PW-16 ASI Rakesh Singh He is the police official who along with Abbas and two other persons went in search of Azharuddin upon receipt of DD no. 2A however he could not be traced out.
PW-17 HC Ravinder He joined the IO during the investigations, got registered the present FIR and was part of the team who arrested, personally searched and recorded disclosure statement of accused namely Sanaullah and Bapi Das.
PW-18 Inspector Gyan He got the postmortem of dead body Prakash conducted and prepared the handing over memo of the same. He further handed over the five sealed parcels and four samples seals to the IO.
PW-19 HC Surender He was the beat constable to whom Kumar the information was given about the dead body near rait ka teela by one Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date:
FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 67 of 73 16:42:52 +0530 security guard. Thereafter he informed about the same to duty officer as well as SHO and Crime team was and he also took the dead body to Mortuary, AIIMS.
PW-20 Inspector Gaurav He is the police officials who Chaudhary conducted initial proceedings in the present case and also recovered the dead body of Azharuddin.
PW-21 Inspector Jitender He is the IO of the present case.
Kashyap Documents produced on behalf of the Prosecution. Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/ attested by Ex.PW1/A Complaint PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Ex.PW1/B Seizure memo of two beer PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder bottles Ex.PW1/C an Seizure memos of two blood PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Ex.PW1/D stained sand Ex.PW1/E Seizure memo of belt PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Ex.PW1/F Seizure memo of chappal PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Ex.PW1/G Arrest memo of accused PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Sanaullah Ex.PW1/H Personal search memo of PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder accused Sanaullah Ex.PW1/I Arrest memo of accused PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Bapi Das Ex.PW1/J Personal search memo of PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder accused Bapi Das Ex.PW1/K and Disclosure statements of PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder Ex.PW1/L accused Sanaullah and Bapi Das Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 68 of 73 2026.03.27 16:42:57 +0530 Ex.PW1/M Handing over memo of dead PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder body.
Ex. PW1/DX-1 Statement/complaint given PW-1 Mr. Abbas Golder by PW-1 to the police Ex.PW4/A Seizure memo of mobile PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin phone make Techno of golden colour Ex.PW6/A Seizure memo of mobile PW-6 Abdul Wahab phone make Samsung Ex.PW6/DX1 Statement of PW-6 Abdul PW-6 Abdul Wahab Wahab recorded u/s. 161 Cr.PC Ex.PW7/A Seizure memo of pendrive PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena containing relevant CCTV footage Ex.PW7/B Certificate u/s. 65-B of the PW-7 Shri Sachin Saxena Indian Evidence Act qua genuineness of CCTV footage Ex.P-7 Seizure memo Scandisk PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar pendrive containing CCTV footage Ex.PW8/A Certificate u/s. 65-B of the PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar Indian Evidence Act qua genuineness of CCTV footage Ex.PW10/DX1 Statement of PW-10 Abdul PW-10 Abdul Rehman Rehman u/s. 161 Cr.PC Ex.PW11/DX1 Statement of PW-11 Smt. PW-11 Smt. Sakina @ Sakina @ Sabila @ Sabi u/s. Sabila @ Sabi 161 Cr.PC Ex. PW17/A, Sketch memo of weapon of PW-17 HC Ravinder Ex.PW17/B and offence i.e. knife, its handle Ex.PW17/C and blade Ex.PW17/D Seizure memo of knife PW-17 HC Ravinder Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 16:43:02 Page no. 69 of 73 +0530 Ex. PW17/E Seizure memo of clothes PW-17 HC Ravinder having blood stained i.e. grey coloured t-shirt and one saleti coloured pant of accused Bapi Das Ex. PW17/F Seizure memo of clothes PW-17 HC Ravinder having blood stained i.e. shirt and pant of accused Sanaullah Ex.PW17/G Seizure memo of mobile PW-17 HC Ravinder make Oppo Ex.PW18/A and Statement qua identification PW-18 Inspector Gyan Ex.PW18/B of dead body by brother and Prakash brother-in-law of deceased Ex.PW18/C Seizure memo of 5 sealed PW-18 Inspector Gyan parcels and 4 sample seal Prakash handed over by the concerned doctor who conducted postmortem Ex.PW20/A Tehrir/rukka PW-20 Inspector Gaurav Chaudhary Ex.PW20/B and Site plans PW-20 Inspector Gaurav Ex.PW20/B-1 Chaudhary Ex.PW20/C Pointing out memo of place PW-20 Inspector Gaurav of incident prepared at the Chaudhary instance of accused persons.
Ex.PW20/D Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector Gaurav recovery of knife. Chaudhary Ex.PW20/E Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector Gaurav recovery of clothes of Chaudhary accused Bapi Das Ex.PW20/F Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector Gaurav recovery of clothes of Chaudhary accused Sanaullah Ex.PW20/G Site plan of the place of PW-20 Inspector Gaurav recovery of mobile phone Chaudhary make Oppo.
Digitally signed by SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 70 of 73 2026.03.27 16:43:07 +0530 Ex. A1 (colly) Subsequent opinion dated Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 03.12.2021 (3 pp).
Ex. A-2 (colly) Copy of FIR along with Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC certificate u/s. 65-B Indian Evidence Act.
Ex. A-3 Scaled site plan. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC
Ex. A-4 DD no. 21B, 26B, 15A, 16A, Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC
2A, 14B all dated
05.08.2019.
Ex. A-5 DD No. 15A dated Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC
06.08.2019.
Ex. A-6 (colly) CDR, CAF of Mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 9643829390 (Vodafone/ Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA.
Ex. A-7 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 7065409361 (Vodafone/ Idea) along with certificate u/s. 65-B IEA.
Ex. A-8 (colly), CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 9810741658 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate u/s. 65- B IEA.
Ex.A-9 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 7428606582 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate u/s. 65- B IEA.
Ex. A-10 (colly) CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 8017691564 (Vodafone/ Idea) along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA Ex. A-11 (colly) Acknowledgment receipts of Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC FSL dated 29.08.2019, 11.09.2019 and 05.09.2019 Ex. A-12 (colly) Copy of RC no. 54/21/19, Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC RC No. 60/21/19 and RC No. 62/21/19 as Digitally signed by GEETANJALI SC No. 574/2019 GEETANJALI Date: FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. 2026.03.27 Page no. 71 of 73 16:43:11 +0530 Ex. A13 (colly) Photocopy of Register no. 19 Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC (16 pp) Ex. A-14 MLC of deceased Ex. A-15 Crime scene report dated Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 05.08.2019 Ex. A-16 DAD Notification dated Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 17.02.1979 Ex. A-17 (colly) Photographs of Crime scene Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC (31 in number) Ex. A-18 FSL Report dated 23.03.2021 Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC Ex. A-19 FSL Report dated 05.10.2020 Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC Ex. A-20 FSL Report dated 27.02.2020 Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC as Ex. A-21 FSL Report dated 27.11.2019 Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC Ex. A-22 (Colly). CDR, CAF of mobile no. Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC 9667717597 (Bharti Airtel) along with certificate U/S 65-B IEA Ex. A-23. Postmortem report of Admitted u/s. 294 Cr.PC deceased Azharuddin bearing no. 969-2019 dated 05.08.2019 List of Material Objects.
Material object Description of exhibit Proved by / attested by no.
Ex.P-1 Mobile phone of the PW-1 Abbas Golder deceased Ex.P-2 (Ex.PX-2) Slippers of the deceased PW-1 Abbas Golder/PW-17 HC Ravinder Ex.P-3 (colly.) Two beer bottles with PW-1 Abbas Golder/PW-17 (Ex.PX-5 and Ex. label Kingfisher HC Ravinder PX-6) Ex.P-4 (Ex.PX-4) Belt of the deceased PW-1 Abbas Golder Ex. P-5 (colly.) Eight photographs of the PW-1 Abbas Golder Digitally signed SC No. 574/2019 by GEETANJALI FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. GEETANJALI Date: Page no. 72 of 73 2026.03.27 16:43:16 +0530 deceased Ex.P-6 Pendrive "SanDisk PW-1 Abbas Golder Cruzer Blade 16GB"
Ex.P-7 Pendrive "SanDisk PW-1 Abbas Golder Cruzer Blade 8GB"
Mark PX-1 Sim card on which no. PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin 9667717597 is written Ex.PX2 Mobile phone make PW-4 Mr. Kamaluddin Techno of golden colour Ex.PX-2 Mobile phone make PW-6 Abdul Wahab/ Inspector (Ex.PX-20A) Samsung of blue colour Gaurav Chaudhary Ex.PX1 Scandisk pendrive PW-8 Shri Suresh Kumar Ex.PX-1 (colly.) Clothes of accused PW-17 HC Ravinder Sanaullah Ex.PX-3 (colly.) Clothes of accused Bapi PW-17 HC Ravinder Das Ex.PX-7 Mobile phone make PW-17 HC Ravinder Oppo Ex.PW17/X Knife. PW-17 HC Ravinder Digitally signed by GEETANJALI GEETANJALI Date:
(Geetanjali) 2026.03.27 16:43:21 +0530Addl. Session Judge (FTC)-03 South East District,Saket Courts New Delhi/27.03.2026 SC No. 574/2019 FIR No. 148/2019, PS Shaheen Bagh State. Vs. Sanaullah @ Imran & Anr. Page no. 73 of 73