Delhi District Court
Sc No.56312/16 State vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 1/14 on 27 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF DR. SHAHABUDDIN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/ SPECIAL JUDGE: (NDPS)
WEST DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF
SESSIONS CASE NO.56312/16
FIR NO.46/13
P.S. RANJIT NAGAR
UNDER SECTIONS 306/506/34 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
1. DHARAM PAL YADAV,
S/O MR. GAYNI RAM,
R/O WZ-103, SHADIPUR VILLAGE, DELHI.
2. PRAVEEN YADAV,
S/O MR. DAYANAND YADAV,
R/O PLOT NO.96, GARHI HARSWAROO,
RAILWAY STATION ROAD, BASANT VIHAR COLONY,
GURGAON, HARYANA.
3. PRINCE YADAV,
S/O MR. DAYANAND YADAV,
R/O PLOT NO.96, GARHI HARSWAROO,
RAILWAY STATION ROAD, BASANT VIHAR COLONY,
GURGAON, HARYANA.
.....ACCUSED.
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 15.10.2013.
DATE OF CONCLUSION OF ARGUMENTS : 20.04.2018.
DATE OF DECISION : 27.04.2018.
JUDGMENT
(27.04.2018) SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 1/14
1. As per the case of prosecution, on 04.03.2013, in between 08:45 AM to 06:45 PM, at second floor of House no. WZ-105E, Shadipur Village, Main Bazar, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of police station Ranjit Nagar, Delhi, Smt. Nirmala @ Vimla W/o Sh. Gaj Raj Yadav (in short referred to as deceased hereinafter) had committed suicide and above mentioned accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, abetted the commission of suicide by deceased, and also, in furtherance of their common intention, prior to 04.03.2013, all accused criminal intimidated her, by demanding money from her and by way of threatening to kill her only son, if she did not return the money, which she had allegedly taken on interest from accused persons.
CHARGE
2. After hearing arguments on charge from both sides, a charge was framed against all the three accused persons for the offences punishable under sections 306 & 506 IPC, both read with section 34 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
3. For discharging the onus placed upon it, the prosecution tendered as many as following 14 witnesses, who deposed mainly to the following effect :-
PW-1 Mr. Gajraj Yadav is the husband of deceased. PW-2 SI Dhan Singh, the Mobile Crime Team Incharge, has proved his report Ex.PW2/A. PW-3 ASI Inderjeet Singh, the photographer had clicked the photographs Ex.PW1/1 to Ex./PW1/14 at the SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 2/14 spot and negatives thereof are Ex.PW3/A-1 to Ex.PW3/A-14.
PW-4 HC Ashok Kumar, the duty officer, has proved the DD No.36A as Ex.PW4/X, the copy of the FIR as Ex.PW4/A, the endorsement on rukka as Ex.PW4/B and the certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872(in short Evidence Act) as Ex.PW4/C. PW-5 Mr. Vipin Yadav is the son of deceased. PW-6 Mr. Ved Prakash Yadav, cousin of PW-1, helped him to open the door of the room where the deceased was found hanged and he also informed the police on 100 number.
PW-7 Mr. Dharambir Singh is the brother of deceased. PW-8 Constable Vijay joined the investigation with the IO in this case.
PW-9 HC Jagdish, the MHC(M), has proved the entries made in register no.19 & 21 of malkhana.
PW-10 HC Deen Dayal had joined the investigation with the IO.
PW-11 Constable Neeraj reached the spot on receiving information from Control Room and also took rukka to police station for registration of FIR. PW-12 Dr. Komal Singh had conducted the postmortem of deceased vide report Ex.PW12/A. PW-13 Mr. Alok Kumar Mehta, the FSL Expert, has proved his report Ex.PW13/A. PW-14 ASI Jai Chand is the IO of the case and proved various documents prepared during the course of investigation.
STATEMENTS OF ACCUSED
4. After completion of prosecution evidence, statements of all three accused persons under section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded wherein they have denied the case of prosecution and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case; that they have not SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 3/14 abetted the deceased to commit suicide nor they threatened her; that the deceased used to run a chit fund in the name of 'Parmeshwar Lucky Draw' and she was under heavy financial burden due to which she might have committed suicide.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
5. Accused persons have examined only one witness i.e. DW-1 Smt. Chandrakanta in their defence, who has deposed mainly to the effect that the deceased used to run a committee in the name of Parmeshwar Lucky Draw, which was for a period of 30 months and there were 200 members in that committee. DW-1 has further deposed that she(DW1) had made her three children as members of that committee and the membership cards of her children are Ex.DW1/A, Ex.DW1/B and Ex.DW1/C respectively, having writings the terms and conditions of the committee/ draw on the back side. DW-1 has further deposed that after completion of installments of the committee, when she demanded her money in sum of Rs.5,40,000/- from the deceased, the deceased told her that she was facing hardships and was not in a position to repay the amount. DW-1 has further deposed that when she insisted the deceased return her money, she i.e., deceased told that she would call the police as she was under great mental pressure due to financial crisis. DW-1 has further deposed that the husband of deceased namely Mr. Gajraj was also one of the members of that committee and when DW-1 had asked husband of deceased to make payment, he also threatened her. DW-1 further deposed that the deceased was under pressure/ tension as she was running many committees and embezzled money of various committee members. DW-1 has SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 4/14 also deposed that 2-3 day of her death, the deceased promised to return her money but she died without making such payments.
6. During the course of her cross-examination, DW-1 has admitted that the membership cards Ex.DW1/A to Ex.PW1/C did not bear any signature. She has also admitted that in these three cards, only the entries in sum of Rs.1,500/- each have been made. DW-1 has also admitted that she did not obtain any receiving from the deceased qua payment of installments of committee. She has deposed that these cards were for the period of 30 months and the money was demanded after completion of 30 months.
FINAL ARGUMENTS
7. I have carefully heard the rival submissions advanced on behalf of prosecution as well as accused persons. I have also perused the entire material placed before me, including written synopsis of final arguments, filed on behalf of accused persons.
8. The main submissions of Ld. Addl. P.P for the State were to the effect that the case of the prosecution is crystal clear and it stands fully proved against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt for offences for which charge framed against the accused; that all the prosecution witnesses have fully corroborated the story of prosecution; that they have clearly narrated about the individual role played by the accused persons in the crime and as such there is no reason to disbelieve their testimonies; that the medical evidence and the scientific evidence are in consonance to the testimony of ocular witnesses; that the accused persons are liable to suffer an order of conviction against them.
SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 5/149. On the other hand, as per the contentions of Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, the accused persons are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case; that there are material contradictions in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, which create doubt about the story of prosecution; that the accused persons are entitled for an order of acquittal.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS OF THE COURT
10. PW-1 has deposed that on 04.03.2013, he left his house at about 08:45 AM for office and at about 04:00-04:30 PM, he received a telephone call of Santra W/o Daya Nand. The said phone call was made by Santra from the phone of her son/accused Parveen Yadav. On phone, Santra told that she wanted to meet CHACHI (deceased Nirmla @ Bimla, the wife of PW-1 Gajraj Yadav) hence, she had called her but neither Nirmla(deceased) had picked the phone nor she was present at the shop. Santra further told PW-1 to make a call on the phone of his wife. PW-1 made a telephonic call to his wife on her phone no.9213112952 from his mobile no.9871389260 but she did not respond. PW-1 left his office at about 05:30 PM and reached his residence at about 06:45 PM. He opened the lock of the kitchen and put his bag there. Thereafter, PW-1 found that the room was locked from inside and there was no lock on the door. PW-1 knocked the door and when it was not opened, PW-1 called his cousin/PW- 6 Ved Prakash and in the meanwhile the neighbours also gathered there. They all broke open the door of room and found that Smt. Nirmala @Bimla was hanging from the ceiling fan with saree around the neck. PW-6 called the police on 100 number.
11. PW-1 also deposed that 4-5 days prior to the incident, when he was worshiping in evening, the deceased was talking on phone with someone and PW-1 had heard that she was saying "2-3 din men paise bhijwa SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 6/14 dungi". PW-1 further deposed that deceased did not tell him(PW-1) about that conversation and due to which he(PW-1) became suspicious as accused Parveen Yadav used to visit the street near their house. PW-1 asked accused Parveen to give his phone number and also told him to send his mother Santra, as PW-1 wanted to talk to her. On 02.03.2013 at about 10:00/10:30 AM, accused Parveen along with his mother Santra came to residence of PW-1. PW-1 had asked accused Parveen and his mother Santra about any financial transaction between them and deceased. Accused Praveen replied that there was no heavy money transaction between accused and deceased but "10-20 hajar hai jo hota rahta hai".
12. On receipt of DD No.36A regarding commission of suicide by a lady, PW-14 ASI Jai Chand along with PW-8 Ct. Vijay reached the spot i.e. WZ- 105E, First Floor, Village Shadi Pur, Main Bazar, Delhi where they found the latch of the door of the room was broken and the door was found open. PW-11 Ct. Neeraj, who was on patrolling duty in the area also reached the spot on receipt of information from District Control Room. After entering the room, they found deceased hanging with ceiling fan with the help of yellow and brownish colour dhoti. They checked that lady and she had already died. PW-14 ASI Jai Chand found the husband of deceased/PW-1 and other public persons present outside that room. In the meantime, the SHO P.S. Ranjit Nagar, along with the staff, also reached the spot. PW-14 had called the Crime Team.
13. PW-2 SI Dhan Singh, the Incharge Crime Team along with PW-3 ASI Inderjeet Singh and other staff reached the spot and inspected the spot and prepared the detailed report Ex.PW2/A. PW-3 took photographs EX.PW1/1 to Ex.PW1/14 and the negatives thereof are Ex.PW3/A-1 to Ex.PW1/A-14.
14. One suicide note(Ex.P-3) and a pen(Ex.P-4) were also found lying on a table and photographs of the same were also taken. The dead body of SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 7/14 deceased was removed from ceiling fan by cutting the dhotti from upper side and the same was sent to DDU Hospital through PW-8 Ct. Vijay Kumar who got the same preserved.
15. PW-14 had sealed the remaining portion of dhoti(Ex.P-3) after opening the knot from the ceiling fan in a cloth pullanda by using seal of JC and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/D. PW-14 had also seized the suicide note(Ex.P-2) and pen(Ex.P-4) found at the spot vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. The suicide memo was found written in Hindi.
16. PW-11 had also recorded the statement of Gajraj Singh Ex.PW1/A and prepared rukka Ex.PW14/A and handed over to PW-11 Ct. Neeraj for registration of the FIR. PW-4 HC Ashok Kumar registered the FIR Ex.PW4/A and made endorsement Ex.PW4/B on rukka. The certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW4/C. After registration of the FIR, PW-11 Ct. Neeraj reached the spot and handed over the copy of the FIR and original rukka to PW-14.
17. PW-14 prepared the site plan Ex.PW1/C at the instance of PW-1. PW- 14 had recorded the statement of PW-11 Ct. Neeraj and Crime Team officials. PW-14 came back to police station and deposited the pullandas/case property including suicide note and pen in malkhana.
18. In Mortuary, DDU Hospital, PW-1 Gajraj Yadav, the Husband of deceased and PW-5 Mr. Vipin Yadav, the son of deceased, had duly identified the dead body of deceased. PW-14 had recorded their statements as Ex.PW1/F and Ex.PW14/B respectively.
19. PW-14 prepared the brief facts Ex.PW14/C and inquest proceedings Ex.PW14/D. PW-14 had moved an application for conducting the postmortem on the dead body of deceased which is Ex.PW14/E. The postmortem on the dead body of deceased was conducted by PW-12 Dr. Komal Singh vide postmortem report Ex.PW12/A. After postmortem the SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 8/14 dead body was handed over to PW-1 vide receipt, Ex.PW1/G. The doctor had handed over three sealed parcels duly sealed with the seal of DFMT DDU HOSPITAL along with three samples seals to PW-14 and he had seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/L. PW-14 came back to police station and got the case property deposited in malkhana.
20. On 05.03.2013, accused persons Dharam Pal Yadav, Prince Yadav and Praveen Yadav were apprehended from House no.WZ-105, Shadi Pur Village, Delhi. PW-14 had interrogated all three accused persons and arrested them vide arrest memos Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D and their personal search was conducted vide memos Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/E and Ex.PW8/F. PW-14 had also recorded the disclosure statements of accused persons Ex.PW8/J, Ex.PW8/H and Ex.PW8/G. In pursuance of disclosure statement, accused Praveen Yadav got recovered one stamp paper and four cheques(three cheques of HDFC Bank and a cheque of Punjab & Sind Bank) and PW-14 had seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/K.
21. On 07.03.2013, PW-14 along with PW-10 HC Deen Dayal went to the house of PW-1/ husband of deceased and he had handed over three registers to PW-14 stating that these registers were having the handwriting of deceased Nirmala and their son Vipin/PW-5. PW-14 had sealed those three registers in a pullanda with seal of JC and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/E. PW-14 had recorded the statement of PW-10 HC Deen Dayal and supplementary statement of PW-1. Thereafter, PW-14 came back to police station and got the case property deposited in malkhana.
22. On 02.04.2013, PW-14 had taken the suicide note & pen along with the pullanda of registers and all sealed pullandas to FSL, Rohini to deposit the same for opinion, however, at the time of receiving the FSL official had directed PW-14 to open the pullanda containing registers and he had de-sealed the same. The pen was returned to PW-14 at that time and the SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 9/14 remaining articles were got deposited in FSL. PW-14 came back to police station and deposited the pen in malkhana. During the trial, PW-14 had collected the FSL result and filed in court along with the suicide note Ex.PW5/A, four cheques Ex.PW5/C to Ex.PW5/F, the stamp paper Ex.PW5/B and three registers Ex.P-1(colly).
23. PW-13 Mr. Alok Kumar Mehta has deposed in respect of FSL result which is Ex.PW13/A.
24. PW-5 Mr. Vipin Yadav, the son of deceased has deposed that at about one year prior to the incident, accused Praveen Yadav, who is his uncle in relation, visited the shop of his mother in his presence and he handed over a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to his mother. His mother counted that amount and kept with her and thereafter, the accused Praveen Yadav left from there. PW-5 asked his mother about that cash amount and his mother told him that she had to give that money to someone who will return that amount to her within 5-6 months. After 3-4 months, PW-5 had asked his mother whether that person had returned that money to which his mother told him that that person had returned the money and she had also returned that money to accused Praveen Yadav. After about ten days of receiving the said cash amount, his mother had obtained signatures of PW-5 on some stamp papers and some blank cheques. PW-5 has also deposed that on 01.03.2013 he had seen accused Praveen Yadav talking to his mother at their shop situated at Village Khampur and after seeing PW-5, his mother and accused Praveen Yadav stopped talking and thereafter accused Praveen Yadav left from there. PW-5 has further deposed that on the day of incident, the names of accused persons were found mentioned in suicide note and due to this, he came to know that his mother had committed suicide due to some money dispute with accused persons Dharam Pal Yadav, Prince Yadav and Praveen Yadav respectively.
25. PW-9 HC Jagdish, the MHC(M), has proved various entries Ex.PW9/A SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 10/14 to Ex.PW9/E made in register no.19 & 21 of malkhana.
26. PW-7 Mr. Dharambir Singh has deposed that he was running a milk dairy at Nangli Dairy and having 15 buffaloes. Deceased Nirmala Devi was his elder sister. PW-7 was a member of Chit Fund Company in the locality and his sister Nirmala used to deposit the monthly installments of that committee on his behalf. However, after sometime, the person who was running the Chit Fund Company had disappeared without making payment to anyone. Thereafter, his sister demanded the chit fund amount from PW-7, which was deposited by her on behalf of PW-7 and PW-7 told that he was not having money at that time. His sister/ deceased had sold all buffaloes from dairy of PW-7 in his absence without his permission in lieu of cash in sum of Rs.1,75,000/- due towards him. Thereafter, PW-7 shifted to his native place and started residing there and since then he had no relation with the family of his sister Nirmala.
27. Before proceeding further, I refer to provisions of law relevant qua the accused herein to the following effect:-
Section 306 IPC reads as under :-
"306 abetment of suicide - If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
Section 506 IPC provides as under :-
"506 punishment for criminal intimidation -
Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.- and if the threat be to casue death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 11/14 any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or(imprisonment for life), or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute unchasity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both".
28. Having heard the rival submissions of both the sides and carefully perusing the entire material placed on record, including oral as well as documentary evidence produced on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of any of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt for any of the offences for which charge was framed against them in this case. In coming to such conclusion, this Court also finds support from the following infirmities coming on record.
29. It is undisputed that the suicide note Ex.PW5/A is in the handwriting of deceased and it mentions the name of accused persons but no direct and specific role has been assigned to any of the accused herein, in such suicide note, being responsible for abetting the alleged suicide committed by the deceased.
30. During the course of his cross-examination, PW-1 Mr. Gajraj Yadav, the husband of deceased, has admitted that he did not know whether the deceased was running a chit fund company in the name of 'Parmeshwar Lucky Draw' at WZ-113, Shadi Kham Pur, New Delhi. He has further deposed that they were having cordial relations with the accused persons and accused persons never came to their house for quarrel. PW-1 has further deposed that accused persons never threatened him and no complaint regarding SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 12/14 threatening by the accused persons was ever lodged by deceased or by his(PW-1) son against any of the accused herein.
31. PW-5, in his cross-examined, admitted that he had not stated to police in his statement that accused Praveen Yadav visited his house after ten days of handing over a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to deceased or that he had asked deceased to obtain his(PW-5) signature as well as asked to sign her on some stamp papers and some blank cheques. He has further deposed that he did not state to police in his statement that deceased had told him that she had to hand over the blank cheques and blank stamp papers to accused Praveen.
32. During the course of his cross-examination, PW-5 Mr. Vipin Yadav, the son of deceased, has deposed that SHO P.S. Ranjit Nagar had informed them that his mother committed suicide under the pressure of all three accused persons. PW-5 has admitted that after suicide of his mother, when he was interrogated by the IO, he told that he did not have doubt on any person regarding suicide of his mother and his statement Ex.PW5/A was recorded by the IO.
33. PW-5 has failed to identify the signature of his mother/ deceased on four cheques and stamp papers Ex.PW5/B to Ex.PW5/F. On the other hand, he has admitted that he had purchased the stamp paper in question on 03.02.2012 on asking of his mother and he had also purchased 2-3 stamp papers as per the instruction of his mother. PW-5 has deposed that he has no knowledge whether his mother was running the chit fund company. PW-5 has further deposed that accused persons had not threatened him ever as he had not talked to them and his mother used to deal with them. PW-SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 13/14
5 has deposed that account no.01441530009846 of HDFC Bank, East Patel Nagar, Delhi does not belong to him(PW-5).
34. In view of the abovesaid discussion, coupled with entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record, this court is of the considered view that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against any of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt for offences punishable under sections 306 & 506 IPC, both read with section 34 IPC. Accordingly, all three accused are hereby acquitted for these offences. All three accused persons are on bail in this case. They have already furnished their bail bonds as per provisions of section 437A Cr.P.C. Case property of this matter, if any, be disposed of as per rule after expiry of period of appeal or subject to outcome of appeal, if so filed.
35. Judicial file be consigned to record room as per rules after necessary compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
ON : 27th April, 2018 (DR. SHAHABUDDIN)
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
SPECIAL JUDGE : NDPS(WEST)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
SC No.56312/16 State Vs Dharam Pal Yadav & Ors. Page 14/14