Delhi District Court
State vs . (1) Ranjan on 14 January, 2015
IN THE COURT OF Dr. KAMINI LAU: ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
II (NORTHWEST): ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
Sessions Case No. 25/2013
Unique Case ID No.: 02404R0050932012
State Vs. (1) Ranjan
S/o Tribhuwan
R/o D143, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(2) Amit
S/o Murari Lal
R/o C249, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(3) Narad
S/o Mohar Pal
R/o C141, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(4) Babloo
S/o Dalip
R/o B282, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(5) Rakesh
S/o Harihar
R/o B292, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 1 of 136
(6) Nitesh
S/o Surender
R/o C310, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(7) Vikas @ Sonu
S/o Kallu
R/o C18, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
(8) Parvesh
S/o Pancham Lal
R/o C73, Lal Bagh Azadpur,
Delhi
(Acquitted)
FIR No.: 289/2012
Police Station: Adarsh Nagar
Under Sections: 302/307/34 Indian Penal Code
Date of committal to session court: 28.2.2013
Date on which orders were reserved: 8.1.2015/ 14.1.2015
Date on which judgment pronounced:14.1.2015
JUDGMENT (Oral):
(1) As per the allegations on the intervening night of 1314.11.2014 at about 1:00 AM in Gali No.3, near Ayurvedic Aushadhalaya, Public Gali, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi all the accused namely Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh in furtherance of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 2 of 136 their common intention committed the murder of Manish @ Sonu S/o Tilak Raj by giving brick blows on his head. Further, as per the allegations the accused Vikas @ Sonu and Parvesh in furtherance of their common intention gave brick and danda blows on the head of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana S/o Ali Hassan with such intention and knowledge and under such circumstanced if they by that act had caused the death of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana, then they both would have been guilty of culpable homicide amounting to murder.
BREIF FACTS/ CASE OF THE PROSECUTION:
(2) The case of the prosecution is that on the intervening night of 1314.11.2012 at about 2:05 AM DD No.6B was received at Police Station Adrash Nagar pursuant to which SI Afaque Ahmed alongwith Ct. Satish reached the spot i.e. Gali No.3, near Dispensary, Lal Bagh, Delhi where a person was found lying dead in a pool of blood. The dead body was having black colour shirt, white banyan, cream colour pant and sport shoes and no eye witness was found at the spot. In the meantime ASI Ompal and Ct. Krishan also reached the spot and ASI Ompal identified the dead body as of Manish a resident of IBlock, Jahangir Puri. Near the head of the body, three black colour buttons of shirt of deceased, one artificial locket of OM and bricks which were blood stained and cemented on one side with other side of pink colour were lying. There was injury on the head of deceased and at a distance of ten to twelve steps i.e. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 3 of 136 between the gali no. C147 and C194, blood was lying there and six joined cemented bricks which were blood stained were also lying. From the spot SI Afaq Ahmed came to know that there was one more injured in this incident who had been taken to BJRM Hospital by the PCR on which Ct. Kishan and ASI Ompal were left at the spot whereas SI Afaq alongwith Ct. Satish went to BJRM Hospital where the Duty Constable informed that one injured namely Raju had come to hospital who was having injury on his head and after taking first aid, he absconded from hospital. Thereafter they tried to locate the said injured/ eye witness but could not locate him after which they returned to the spot. The Crime Team also reached the spot and inspected the spot. In the meantime Inspector Rajesh Sinha also came at the spot. SI Afaque Ahmed made his endorsement on DD No.6B and prepared the rukka after which the case was got registered through Ct. Satish. After the registration of the case the investigations were marked to Inspector Rajesh Sinha who lifted the various exhibits from the spot and seized the same after which the dead body was removed to Mortuary of BJRM Hospital. The place where the body was lying, fifty (50) playing cards were lying in a scattered condition out of which twenty five (25) cards were coloured printed and on twenty two (22) playing cards there were sign of heart and on back side of three (3) playing cards there was a sign of 'S', which were also taken into possession. In the meantime Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was also injured in the incident came to the spot and was again sent to BJRM hospital through St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 4 of 136 Ct. Krishan for his medical examination. The Investigating Officer then prepared the site plan at the instance of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana and in the meantime the alleged eye witnesses Hardev and Krishan Nepali also came at the spot and the Investigating Officer also recorded their statements.
Thereafter the postmortem examination on the dead body was got conducted after which it was handed over to his relatives. (3) During investigations on 16.11.2012 the Investigating Officer and other staff reached at Lal Bagh petrol pump where witness Satender @ Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali were joined. Pursuant to a secret information the accused Vikas, Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad were apprehended from near Shalimar Bagh Flyover and all four accused persons were identified by Satender @ Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali. Thereafter the above four accused persons were arrested and in their disclosure statements they admitted their guilt. Pursuant to his disclosure statement, the accused Vikas got recovered a danda from the roof of his house, which danda was taken into possession.
(4) Thereafter on the basis of a secret information the accused Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit were apprehended from Kaushal Puri Railway Lines and the accused were identified by the witness Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali. Thereafter all the above accused were arrested and their disclosure statements were recorded wherein they admitted their involvement in the present case. After completion of investigations charge sheet was filed against all the accused persons.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 5 of 136 CHARGES:
(5) Charges under Sections 302/34 Indian Penal Code were settled against the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Further, charges under Sections 307/34 Indian Penal Code were settled against the accused Vikas @ Sonu and Parvesh to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(6) Before coming to the testimonies of individual witnesses, the details of the witnesses examined by the prosecution and the documents proved by them are hereby put in a tabulated form as under:
List of the witnesses:
Sr. PW No. Name of the Details of the witness
No. witness
1. PW1 Ct. Vinod Kumar Police Witness who has taken the exhibits to the
FSL
2. PW2 Ct. Ashraf Police Witness - DD Writer
3. PW3 SI Manohar Lal Police Witness - Draftsman
4. PW4 Ct. Satish Kumar Police Witness who had gone to the spot with SI
Afaque Ahmed
5. PW5 Ct. Bijender Police Witness - Beat Constable
6. PW6 Ct. Krishan Gopal Police Witness - Special Messenger
7. PW7 Ct. Somveer Police Witness - Driver of official TATA 407
8. PW8 HC Karanveer Police Witness - Duty Officer
9. PW9 SI Sanjeev Verma Police Witness - Crime Team Incharge
10. PW10 HC Sudhir Police Witness - Crime Team Photographer
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 6 of 136
Sr. PW No. Name of the Details of the witness
No. witness
11. PW11 HC Rakesh Kumar Police Witness - MHCM
12. PW12 Ct. Mahipal Police Witness CPCR
13. PW13 Dr. Bhim Singh Official Witness - Autopsy Surgeon
14. PW14 Ms. Madhu Public Witness - Sister of the deceased who had
identified the dead body of the deceased
15. PW15 Mahender Public Witness - Brother of the deceased who
had identified the dead body of the deceased
16. PW16 Ajaj @ Kana @ Public Witness - Injured/ alleged eye witness to
Raju the incident
17. PW17 Sh. D.S. Paliwal FSL Expert who has proved the DNA Report
18. PW18 Hardesh Public Witness - Alleged eye witness to the
incident
19. PW18A Dr. R.S. Mishra Official Witness who has proved the MLCs of
the injured Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana
20. PW19 Krishna @ Nepali Public Witness - Alleged eye witness to the
incident who has turned hostile
21. PW20 Satender @ Public Witness - Alleged eye witness to the
Sikander incident who has turned hostile
22. PW21 Ct. Surjeet Police Witness who had joined investigations
with Inspector Rajesh Sinha on 17.11.2012
23. PW22 Ct. Krishan Kumar Police Witness who had reached the spot with
ASI Om Pal
24. PW23 ASI Ompal Police Witness who had reached the spot on
receiving the information
25. PW24 SI Afaque Ahmed Police Witness - Initial Investigating Officer
who had reached the spot
26. PW25 Inspector Rakesh Police Witness - Second Investigating Officer
Chand
27. PW26 ASI Shashi Police Witness who had joined the
investigations with Inspector Rajesh Sinha on
17.11.2012
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 7 of 136
Sr. PW No. Name of the Details of the witness
No. witness
28. PW27 SI Praveen Police Witness who had joined the
investigations with Inspector Rajesh Sinha on
16.11.2012
29. PW28 Inspector Rajesh Police Witness - Subsequent Investigating
Sinha Officer
List of documents:
Sr. Exhibit No. Details of documents Proved by
No.
1. PW1/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Vinod Kumar Ct. Vinod Kumar
2. PW1/A RC No. 139/21/12
3. PW1/B FSL Receipt
4. PW1/C RC 138/21/12
5. PW1/D FSL Receipt
6. PW2/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Ashraf Ct. Ashraf
7. PW 2/A DD No. 6B
8. PW 3/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Manohar Lal SI Manohar Lal
9. PW3/A Scaled Site plan
10. PW 4/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Satish Kumar Ct. Satish Kumar
11. PW 5/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Bijender Ct. Bijender
12. PW 6/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Krishan Gopal Ct. Krishan Gopal
13. PW 7/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Sohanveer Ct. Sohanveer
14. PW 8/1 Affidavit of evidence of HC Karanveer HC Karanveer
15. PW 8/A DD No. 10A
16. PW 8/B FIR
17. PW 8/C Endorsement on rukka
18. PW 9/1 Affidavit of evidence of SI Sanjeev Verma SI Sanjeev Verma
19. PW 9/A Crime Team Report
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 8 of 136
Sr. Exhibit No. Details of documents Proved by
No.
20. PW 10/1 Affidavit of evidence of HC Sudhir HC Sudhir
21. PW 10/A1 to Photographs of scene of crime
13
22. PW 10/B Negatives of photographs
23. PW 11/1 Affidavit of evidence of HC Rakesh Kumar HC Rakesh Kumar
24. PW 11/A Copy of Reg. No. 19 Sr. No. 4209/12
25. PW 11/B Copy of Reg. No. 19 Sr. No. 4216
26. PW 11/C Copy of Reg. No. 19 Sr. No. 4217
27. PW 12/1 Affidavit of evidence of Ct. Mahipal Ct. Mahipal
28. PW 12/A PCR Form
29. PW 13/A Postmortem Report of the deceased Dr. Bhim Singh
30. PW 13/B Subsequent Opinion
31. PW 14/A Statement of Madhu Madhu
32. PW 15/A Statement of Mahender @ Sunny under Mahender @ Sunny
Section 161 Cr.P.C.
33. PW 16/PX1 Statement of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana Ajaj @ Raju
34. PW 17/A DNA Report Sh. D.S. Paliwal
35. PW 18/PX1 Statement of Hardesh under Section 161 Hardesh
Cr.P.C.
36. PW 18A/A MLC of Ajaj @ Raju Dr. R.S. Mishra
37. PW 18A/B MLC of Ajaj @ Raju
38. PW 19/A Seizure memo of clothes of Nitesh Krishna @ Nepali
39. PW 19/B Seizure memo of clothes of Narad
40. PW 19/C Seizure memo of clothes of Rakesh
41. PW 19/D Seizure memo of clothes of Babloo
42. PW 19/E Seizure memo of clothes of Parvesh
43. PW 19/F Seizure memo of clothes of Amit
44. PW 19/G Seizure memo of clothes of Ranjan
45. PW 19/H Seizure memo of clothes of Vikas
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 9 of 136
Sr. Exhibit No. Details of documents Proved by
No.
46. PW 19/J Arrest memo of Vikas
47. PW 19/J1 Arrest memo of Ranjan
48. PW 19/J2 Arrest memo of Nitesh
49. PW 19/J3 Arrest memo of Narad
50. PW 19/J4 Arrest memo of Rakesh
51. PW 19/J5 Arrest memo of Babloo
52. PW 19/J6 Arrest memo of Pravesh
53. PW 19/J7 Arrest memo of Amit
54. PW 19/K Personal search memo of Vikas
55. PW 19/K1 Personal search memo of Ranjan
56. PW 19/K2 Personal search memo of Nitesh
57. PW 19/K3 Personal search memo of Narad Kumar
58. PW 19/K4 Personal search memo of Rakesh Kumar
59. PW 19/K5 Personal search memo of Babloo
60. PW 19/K6 Personal search memo of Pravesh
61. PW 19/K7 Personal search memo of Amit
62. PW 19/PX1 Statement of witness Krishna @ Nepali
under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
63. PW20/PX1 Statements of witness Satender @ Sikander Satender @
& PX2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Sikender
64. PW23/A Seizure memo of NOKIA Mobile Phone ASI Om Pal
and Rs.440/
65. PW23/B Seizure memo of Earth Control
66. PW23/C Seizure memo of Playing Cards
67. PW23/D Seizure memo of Bricks
68. PW24/A DD No. 6B SI Afaque Ahmed
69. PW24/B Endorsement on DD No. 6B
70. PW24/C1 to Disclosure statements of accused Vikas, PW24/C4 Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 10 of 136 Sr. Exhibit No. Details of documents Proved by No.
71. PW24/D Seizure memo of Danda
72. PW24/D1 to Disclosure statements of accused Rakesh, PW24/D4 Babloo, Parvesh and Amit
73. PW24/E1 to Pointing Out memos PW24/E5
74. PW28/A Request for Postmortem Examination Inspector Rajesh Sinha
75. PW28/B Brief Facts
76. PW28/C Death Report
77. PW28/D Seizure memo of exhibits preserved by the Autopsy Surgeon
78. PW28/E Application for Subsequent Opinion EVIDENCE:
(7) In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined as many as Twenty Nine Witnesses as under:
Public Witnesses:
(8) PW14 Ms. Madhu is the sister of the deceased. She has deposed that on 14.11.2012 she identified the dead body of her brother Manish @ Sonu in the Mortuary of the BJRM Hospital vide her statement Ex.PW14/A. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. Defence counsels, despite being given an opportunity in this regard.
(9) PW15 Mahender @ Sunny is the brother of the deceased. He has deposed that on 14.11.2012 he identified the dead body of his brother St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 11 of 136 Manish @ Sonu at mortuary of BJRM Hospital vide his statement Ex.PW15/A. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. Defence Counsels, despite being granted an opportunity in this regard.
(10) PW16 Ajaj @ Kana @ Raju is stated to be an eye witness/ injured in the incident. He has deposed that he used to work as a Sweeper and labour and on the day of Deepawali in the last year at about 11:00 PM12:00 Midnight, he alongwith Krishna @ Nepali, Hardesa and Satender were eating and drinking in the Dhaba behind the petrol pump at Moziwala Bagh. According to the witness at about 12:00 midnight 1:00 AM, Sonu also came to him who was having four quarter bottles liquor with him and told him to celebrate Diwali as he had met him long time and thereafter they also consumed the four quarter bottles. Witness has further deposed that thereafter he alongwith the above said Krishna @ Nepali, Hardesa, Satender and Manish @ Sonu proceeded behind the Lal Bagh where they found that gambling by playing cards was going on, at the chabootra and five persons were playing cards. He has deposed that he knew them by their faces but he does not know their names. According to the witness, Manish @ Sonu also sat with the above said persons for gambling during which the above said five persons were winning the money by cheating from Manish and thereafter a verbal quarrel took place between the said five persons and Manish and the said persons also called their three associates from the nearby Mandir. Witness has further deposed that he knew all the said persons by their faces but is not aware St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 12 of 136 their names and thereafter all the said eight persons started beating him and Manish. He has further deposed that Satender, Krishna @ Nepali and Hardes were seeing the incident after concealing themselves at a distance.
He has testified that Rakesh and Sonu were in the above said assailants. Witness has further deposed that the assailants gave beating to him by danda on his body and on his head and also gave stone blows to him on his head on which he became unconscious due to beatings. The witness has also deposed that the said eight assailants also gave beatings to Manish @ Sonu by danda and stones but he is not aware who caused injuries to him. According to the witness, thereafter he regained consciousness after one or two days in the hospital and after one or two days of the incident, he was taken to the Police Station and his statement was recorded by the police. According to the witness Manish @ Sonu had expired due to injuries inflicted by said eight assailants. The witness has pointed out towards the accused i.e. Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Praveen in the Court as the assailants who gave beating to him and deceased Manish @ Sonu.
(11) Leading questions were put to the witness by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State, wherein the witness has admitted that he had shown the place of incident to the police and that he along with Satender, Krishna and Hardes were present in the petrol pump wali gali, Lal Bagh where Manish @ Sonu met. He has also admitted that they consumed liquor near the Dhaba of Gopal and at about 01:00 AM they reached at the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 13 of 136 dispensary wali gali. He has also admitted that five assailants were gambling with playing cards in front of the iron cloth shop (press karne wala) near the gate of dispensary. He has however denied the suggestion that Rakesh, Parvesh, Vikas @ Sonu, Amit and Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld. Addl. PP) were gambling there with the playing cards. Witness has also admitted that he knew these persons before the day of the incident and he along with Hardes, Satender and Krishan started watching them gambling with the playing cards. The witness has also admitted that Manish @ Sonu lost the money in gambling and thereafter he started abusing to them and started quarreling with them and has voluntarily explained that the above said persons were cheating with him. Witness has admitted that Manish @ Sonu told to above said persons that they committed cheating with him. However, he has denied the suggestion that Manish caught hold the collar of accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) and tried to snatch his money or that Manish @ Sonu slapped the accused Rakesh. Witness has admitted that thereafter accused persons became aggressive and were saying "aaj hum teri dadagiri khatm kar denge". He has denied the suggestion that thereafter due to shouting of quarrel other three accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad also came at the spot from Mata ki Chowki. He has admitted that all the eight assailants were saying that 'teri dadagiri khatm kar denge". He has denied the suggestion that thereafter Manish @ Sonu caught hold accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) by his collar and he started slapping St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 14 of 136 him and then all the accused assailants gave beating to Manish @ Sonu. Witness has denied the suggestion that Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) was the one who caught Manish by his neck to save accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) and Nitesh (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) came from behind and struck with Manish and thereafter Manish fell down on the ground. He has admitted that all the accused persons thereafter gave beatings to Manish @ Sonu by leg and fist blows. Witness has denied the suggestion that accused Rakesh caught hold Manish from the left side of his hand and Nitesh (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) caught hold him from the right side of his hand and Amit, Narad and Vikas (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) caught hold him by his legs and meanwhile accused Ranjan (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) lifted one brick from there and give brick blows on the head of Manish. The witness has also denied the suggestion that accused Parvez (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) was saying loudly that "aj saale ko khatam kar do" and thereafter Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) also gave same brick blows on the head of Manish @ Sonu and blood was oozing out from his head. Witness has further denied the suggestion that accused Parvez (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) after seeing towards him said "aaj kaane ko bhi khatm kar do". He has however admitted that after hearing this he ran from there and accused Parvez and Vikas @ Sonu (accused pointed out by the Ld. PP) chased him and someone from them St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 15 of 136 had thrown brick on which he received the brick blows and fell down on the ground and thereafter he received the danda blows on his head after which he became unconscious. According to the witness, he is not known to the accused persons by their names but he knew them by faces as they are the residents of his neighbourhood/ locality.
(12) In his cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, witness has deposed that police only inquired about the facts but did not record his statement. Witness has denied the suggestion that he had stated to the police that the accused Rakesh, Parvez, Vikas @ Sonu, Amit and Babloo who were known to him before the day of incident were playing cards and gambling there; that Manish caught hold Rakesh by his collar and started snatching his money and slapped him or that the other assailants were saying that "teri dadagiri khatam kar denge" and after hearing the shouting the other three accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad who were known to him before the incident, also said "teri dadagiri khatam kar denge"; that Manish caught hold Rakesh by his collar and slapped him and thereafter all the assailants gave beating to Manish @ Sonu or that Babloo caught hold neck of Manish to save Rakesh and Nitesh struck with him and thereafter Manish fell down on ground; that when Manish started to stand up then accused Rakesh caught hold from his left side while Nitesh caught hold him from the right side and Amit, Narad and Vikas caught hold him by his legs and accused Ranjan gave a brick blow on the head of Manish and Parvez was saying that "aaj saale ko khatam kar do" and St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 16 of 136 Babloo also gave same brick blows on the head of Manish after which blood was oozing out from the head of Manish; that after seeing towards him the assailants said"aaj kaane ko bhi khatam kar do" and after hearing the same he ran away from there but Parvez and Vikas chased him and thrown bricks upon him on which he received injuries on his head by said bricks. The witness was confronted with his statement Ex.PW16/PX1 where the above facts were found so recorded. He has denied the suggestion that the accused persons known to him before the incident and he named them in his statement to the police in detail with specific role of the accused persons. He has also denied the suggestion that he has been pressurized by the locality persons not to depose true facts before the Court and also not to identify the accused with their specific roles.
(13) In his cross examination by the Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has admitted that the incident was on the night of Diwali and people were bursting crackers on the road. He has further deposed that the distance between petrol pump wali gali/ Hans cinema and Ayurvedic Aushdhalya is approximately ten minutes by foot. Initially the witness has also admitted that the rough site plan was prepared at his instance by the Investigating Officer but thereafter in the same go, he stated that the rough site plan was not prepared at his instance as he was lying unconscious in the hospital. According to the witness the Gopal Dhaba was closed at the time when they were drinking there and the place where he was assaulted alongwith St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 17 of 136 deceased Manish @ Sonu is covered with residential houses. Witness has admitted that none of his associates namely Krishna @ Nepali, Satender and Hardes came forward to save him from the clutches of the accused persons. He has also admitted that his associates are his good friend and he is having cordial relationship with them since many years. Witness has further deposed that he alongwith his three friends namely Hardes, Satender and Krishna Nepali called PCR 100 when Manish @ Sonu was being assaulted by the accused persons at the spot and has again clarified that he did not make any call at 100 number. He is unable to tell the distance between the place where Manish @ Sonu was assaulted and where Mata ki Chowki was being organized and has voluntarily explained that Mata ki chowki was organized at some distance. Witness has admitted that since there was lot of noise due to bursting of crackers, the loud speaker/ voice of Mata ki Chowki was not audible. He is unable to tell as to where he was lying or whether he was lying adjacent to Ruchi Clinic in Dispensary Wali Gali and has voluntarily explained that he was drunkard and unable to tell. Witness has admitted that he was heavily drunk and he was not knowing the place where he was assaulted or the area where he was assaulted. He has also admitted that the place where Mata ki Chowki was being performed was not visible from the place where he was being assaulted and he was left and has voluntarily explained that it was completely dark. Witness has admitted St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 18 of 136 that when Manish @ Sonu was being assaulted by the accused persons he screamed very loudly for help towards him. He has also admitted that when Manish @ Sonu was being beaten up by the accused persons neither him nor any of his associates namely Hardes, Satender and Krishna Nepali came forward to help. He has also deposed that Hardes and Krishna Nepali dialed PCR 100 number and called for help when he received injuries. According to the witness, he was taken to the hospital in PCR van but he did not narrate the factum of injuries to PCR police officials and has voluntarily explained that he was unconscious. He has admitted that his all the clothes were blood stained due to injury received by him on his head. The witness has also admitted that he remained unconscious in the Hospital for two days and also admitted that he remained unconscious in the Hospital from 14.11.2012 to 16.11.2012.
(14) According to the witness, he was discharged by the hospital officials on 16.11.2012 and thereafter he reached his house in an injured condition. Witness has admitted that he was neither on talking terms nor in cordial relationship nor ever studied with any of the accused persons in the present case. He is unable to tell the distance between Lal Bagh Azad Pur from his house Mozi Wala Bagh, Azad Pur. Witness has further deposed that he himself did not hand over his blood stained clothes to the Investigating Officer or any other police official in the present case. He has testified that he was never read over his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. dated 14.11.2012 by the Investigating Officer. He has admitted that St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 19 of 136 he cannot say as to what has been written in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer on 14.11.2012. Witness has also admitted that his statement was written one or two days after his discharge i.e. 16.11.2012 from the hospital. Witness has further admitted that till then the Investigating Officer tried to inquire and investigate regarding the factum of injury received by him from his friends but they were unable to tell the factum of the present case. He has denied the suggestion that his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was written by the Investigating Officer after 18.11.2012 after due deliberation, consultation with senior police officials. Witness has further denied the suggestion that there was a fight between him and deceased Manish @ Sonu in which he got injured and Manish @ Sonu died. He has also denied the suggestion that he or his associates namely Hardes, Satender and Krishna Nepali did not make a PCR 100 Number call as they were the assailants in the present case and they killed Manish @ Sonu due to the fight on gambling. He has also denied the suggestion that he is falsely implicating the accused persons as he was having the enmity with them. Witness has denied the suggestion that no Mata ki Chowki was being performed near the area or that his statement was forged and fabricated by the Investigating Officer to boost the present false case. Witness has denied the suggestion that Investigating Officer asked him to identify the accused person in the Court so as to succeed in the present case or that he alongwith his associates had beaten/ assaulted Manish @ Sonu with bricks and danda at the spot or that the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 20 of 136 fight started from petrol pump wali gali and ended near Ruchi clinic. He has also denied the suggestion that the deceased Manish @ Sonu also gave him a single brick blow on his head or that he was falsely pretending to be a eye witness in the present case where as he should be one of the accused persons. Witness has further deposed that his statement was not recorded by the police, however, police made inquiries from him at Police Station. He has admitted that he had not named any of the accused persons to the Investigating Officer at the time when Investigating Officer was making inquiries from him. The witness has also admitted that he had not told to the Investigating Officer in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as to the manner of assault and specific role of the accused persons. Witness has further deposed that he had not told to the Investigating Officer in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. which is Ex.PW16/PX1 that Hardes, Satender and Krishna Nepali have seen the occurrence while concealing themselves. He has also admitted that due to the blows given by accused persons, he sustained severe injuries on his head. The witness has further admitted that Manish @ Sonu has many criminal cases against him due to which he was detained in the local Police Station on several occasions. According to him, the distance between the place of incident and Hans Cinema is about 15 minutes by foot. He has denied the suggestion that some rehris were parked there at the place of incident. Witness has further deposed that at present there is no case against him but earlier he was involved in two criminal cases of physical assault. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 21 of 136 (15) PW18 Hardesh a conductor in TATA 407 has deposed that in the night of 14.11.2012, at 12:00 midnight he was consuming liquor alongwith Raju Kana, Krishna Nepali and Satender near the Gopal Dhaba in petrol pump wali gali. Witness has further deposed that at about 12:30 AM, Manish @ Sonu came there who was having four quarter bottles with him and then they also consumed the same and thereafter they reached in front of dispensary where three - four persons were gambling by playing cards but he does not know their names. Witness has further deposed that Manish also joined them and he also joined gambling by playing cards but the above said persons committed cheating with Manish in gambling and Manish caught hold collar of one of the persons. According to the witness, many public persons gathered there and Manish also gave beatings to said persons and those seven to eight 8 assailants started beating Manish and they also gave beating to Raju Kana. He has testified that he, Krishna Nepali and Satender ran away from there due to fear and locality persons also came there and they stopped in the next gali. According to the witness Satender went to the house of Raju @ Kana and after sometime, he alongwith Krishna @ Nepali again reached at the spot when they saw that Raju @ Kana was lying in injured condition and was unconscious whereas Manish was found lying dead. Witness has further deposed that Raju Kana was moaning at that time and he was having mobile and Krishna Nepali made call from his phone No. 8447105504 at Number 100. According to the witness after some time, PCR van reached at the spot and St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 22 of 136 he alongwith Krishna Nepali took the injured Raju Kana to BJRM Hospital in PCR van. He has testified that after medical examination and stitching on the person of Raju Kana, he was taken to his house and he was unconscious at that time and due to the fear they slept on the terrace of house of his friend.
(16) The witness pointed out towards the accused Narad and Vikas as the assailants whom he had identified in the Police Station. On a specific Court Question the witness has explained that there were about eight to ten boys in all but on account of darkness he could not identify anybody and it was in the Police Station when he was shown Narad and Vikas as the assailants.
(17) In his cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, witness has admitted that police has made inquiries from him and recorded his statement. He has however denied the suggestion that he has stated to the police that Rakesh, Parvez, Vikas @ Sonu, Amit and Babloo were gambling with playing cards in front of main gate of dispensary or that he know them before the incident; that he alongwith Satender, Krishna Nepali and Raju Kana were seeing the gambling proceedings. However, when confronted with his statement Ex.PW18/PX1 the above facts were not found so recorded. He has also admitted that Manish was abusing the assailants and Raju Kana was also abusing. He has denied the suggestion that Manish caught hold Rakesh by his collar and started snatching money from him and slapped him; that due to the hearing of quarrel three other St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 23 of 136 accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad also reached at the spot and they were saying to Manish that "tumhari dadagiri khatam kar denge" and thereafter all the assailants gave beatings to Manish; that accused Babloo caught hold Manish by his neck and Nitesh struck him and thereafter Manish fell down on the ground and all the assailants gave beatings to him and the accused Rakesh caught hold him by left shoulder and Nitesh caught him by right shoulder and Amit, Narad and Vikas caught hold him by legs or that Ranjan gave brick blows on the head of Manish; that accused Parvez was shouting/ exhorting that "aaj is saale ko khatam kar do"or that Babloo gave some brick blows on the head of Manish and blood was oozing out from his head; that Parvez saw Raju @ Kana and he shouted/ exhorted that "aaj kane ko bhi khatam kar do" or that after hearing this Raju @ Kana started running from there and Parvez and Vikas @ Sonu chased him and Vikas @ Sonu had thrown a joint of six bricks towards Raju @ Kana and he received head injury and he fell down on the ground; that Parvez took a danda from the gali and gave danda blow on the head of Raju @ Kana and thereafter Vikas @ Sonu also gave danda blows on the head of Raju @ Kana. However, when confronted with his statement Ex.PW18/PX1 where the above facts were found so recorded. He has, however, admitted that he alongwith Krishna Nepali and Satender were sitting on nearby pulia and seeing the incident from there. Witness has further deposed that the above said mobile number was in the name of his uncle Vijay.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 24 of 136 (18) The statement Ex.PW18/PX1 was read over to the witness and was confronted to the witness but he denied having deposed the same to the police. Witness has denied the suggestion that he knew all the accused persons by names and faces before the incident and they are resident of his locality. The accused Ranjan, Amit, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh and Parvez were shown to the witness but the witness has not identified the accused persons as the assailants and has voluntarily explained that he has not seen the faces of the assailants at the spot as there was darkness. He has denied the suggestion that the accused Narad and Vikas were among the assailants who caused injuries to Manish @ Sonu and Raju @ Kana or that he was not identifying all the accused persons due to fear or because accused persons are residents of his locality or due to the pressure of locality persons he was not deposing true facts. This witness was not cross examined by the Ld. Defence Counsels, despite being granted an opportunity in this regard.
(19) PW19 Krishna @ Nepali has deposed that on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 he alongwith his friend Satender @ Sikandar and Hardesh was sleeping in the lane in the Lal Bagh area and they all had taken the liquor before sleeping. According to the witness, the police personnel of Police Station Adarsh Nagar took them to the Police Station for interrogation and in the Police Station they made inquiry from them about Raju @ Kana who was taken by the PCR personnels to the hospital, on his call when he had seen him in injured condition lying in front of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 25 of 136 dispensary. Witness has further deposed that the PCR personnels had taken injured Raju @ Kana at about 12.30AM. According to the witness he, Hardesh and Satender brought back injured Raju @ Kana from the hospital to his house and when the police personnels lifted him, Hardesh and Satender, brother of Raju @ Kana whose name he is not present, was present. Witness has further deposed that in the Police Station police personnel made inquiries from all three of them as to how Raju @ Kana suffered injuries and he showed ignorance for the same and told the police personnel that he had only seen him in injured condition and only called the police. According to him, the police personnel allowed them to sleep thereafter and in the morning police brought all the accused persons whom the witness has identified in the Court. He has also deposed that Satender identified the accused persons in the Police Station and he (witness) identified them out of fear. He has testified that they all had been detained in the Police Station for about six to seven days and were allowed to leave the Police Station thereafter. According to him, Satender had identified all the accused persons that i.e. Ranjan, Vikas, Amit, Nitesh, Pravesh, Narad, Rakesh and Babloo as the persons who were the assailant "usne kaha tha, yehi sab thay. He has clarified that Satender had stated that these persons had inflicted injuries on Raju @ Rana. Witness has further deposed that police often called him for investigation on many occasion and on one occasions he was made to sign St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 26 of 136 several documents the details of which he is unable to tell but can identify his signatures. He has identified his signatures on the seizure memo of clothes of accused Nitesh which is Ex.PW19/A; seizure memo of clothes of accused Narad which is Ex.PW19/B; seizure memo of clothes of accused Rakesh which is Ex.PW19/C; seizure memo of clothes of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW19/D; seizure memo of clothes of accused Pravesh which is Ex.PW19/E; seizure memo of clothes of accused Amit which is Ex.PW19/F; seizure memo of clothes of accused Ranjan which is Ex.PW19/G; seizure memo of clothes of accused Vikas which is Ex.PW19/H. He has also identified his signatures on the arrest memo of of accused Vikas which is Ex.PW19/J; arrest memo of of accused Ranjan which is Ex.PW19/J1; arrest memo of of accused Nitesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J2; arrest memo of accused Narad Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J3; arrest memo of accused Rakesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J4; arrest memo of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW19/J5; arrest memo of accused Pravesh which is Ex.PW19/J6 and arrest memo of accused Amit which is Ex.PW19/J7. The witness has also identified his signatures on personal search memo of accused Vikas which is Ex.PW19/K; personal search memo of accused Ranjan which is Ex.PW19/K1; personal search memo of accused Nitesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/K2; personal search of accused Narad Kumar which is St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 27 of 136 Ex.PW19/K3; personal search memo of accused Rakesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/K4; personal search memo of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW19/K5; personal search memo of accused Pravesh which is Ex.PW19/K6 and personal search memo of accused Amit which is Ex.PW19/K7.
(20) Witness has further deposed that he had not seen the accused persons assaulting Raju @ Kana at any point of time. According to the witness he is not known to any person by the name of Manish @ Sonu and the accused persons had not assaulted on any person in his presence at any point of time and his statements were recorded by the police and the same were read over to him but he could not understand the same. (21) The witness was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State wherein statement Ex.PW19/PX1 was read over to the witness who denied having made such statement to the police. He has denied the suggestion that he stated to the police that on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 on the eve of Diwali he alongwith his friends Raju @ Kana, Hardesh and Satender @ Sikandar were present in the gali of Petrol Pump Lal Bagh and at about 12.00 midnight Manish @ Sonu @ Mota R/o Jahangir Puri who was in a state of intoxication and was friend of Raju @ Kana came alongwith four quarters of liquor and offered Raju @ Kana to have liquor after which both of them sat in the same lane at Gopal Dhaba which was closed at that time take liquor by sitting in front of that Dhaba. He has further denied the suggestion that he has told the police that after St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 28 of 136 about 3045 minutes they both while talking went towards dispensary lane; that at about 1.00AM there accused Rakesh, Pravesh, Vikas @ Sonu, Babloo and Amit whom he knew previously were gambling there; that Manish @ Sonu also started playing gamble with them; that Raju @ Kana and they all other three started seeing them; that when Manish @ Sonu started loosing in the gamble, he started quarreling with the aforesaid accused persons and blaming them for cheating. Witness has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that Raju @ Kana helped Manish in the said quarrel and also involved himself in that quarrel and was abusing and helping Manish and taking side of Manish; that Manish started snatching money from accused Rakesh; that when accused Rakesh objected Manish gave him three to four slaps; that the others amongst the aforesaid accused persons became angry and started abusing Manish but Manish continued holding the collar of Rakesh and continued to giving him slaps. He has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that after hearing the voices of quarrel accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad to whom he knew previously came there in the aid of other accused persons; that all the accused persons exhorted "Aaj Manish @ Sonu ki dadagiri khatam kar denge" after which all the accused persons grappled with Manish @ Sonu. However, when confronted with portion A to A1 of the statement Ex.PW19/PX1 the above facts were found so recorded. (22) The witness has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that accused Babloo caught hold the neck of Manish @ Sonu St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 29 of 136 from behind, accused Nitesh gave push to Manish @ Sonu as a result of which he had fallen down and thereafter all the accused persons had given him kick and fists blows and also gave danda blows; that when Manish tried to stand up, accused Rakesh caught hold of him from left side and the accused Nitesh caught hold of him from right side shoulders and grabbed him; the accused Amit, Narad and Vikas @ Sonu grabbed his legs; that accused Ranjan lifted a brick lying there and assaulted on the head of Manish @ Sonu with the same; that accused Pravesh was exhorting by saying "Aaj iska kaam tamam kar do"; that accused Babloo again lifted the same brick and assaulted on the head of Manish @ Sonu @ Mota with the said brick. However, when confronted with portion B to B1 of the statement Ex.PW19/PX1 the above facts were found so recorded. The witness has also denied the suggestion that he had told the police that the accused Pravesh at that time by seeing Raju @ Kana exhorted "aaj Raju @ Kana ka bhi Kaam tamam kar do"; that accused Pravesh and Vikas @ Sonu by chasing Raju @ Kana assaulted on him whereby Vikas @ Sonu threw joined bricks on Raju @ Kana which hit him as a result of which Raju @ Kana had fallen down; that accused Pravesh gave danda blow on the head of Raju @ Kana; that accused Vikas @ Sonu also thereafter with the same danda, also hit the head of Raju @ Kana. However, when confronted with portion C to C1 of the statement Ex.PW19/PX1 the above facts were found so recorded.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 30 of 136 (23) The witness has also denied the suggestion that he had told the police that he alongwith Satender and Hardesh had seen the aforesaid incident; that out of fear after seeing the aforesaid incident for saving themselves they went to the another lane to hide themselves; that Satender informed at the house of Raju @ Kana; that after 15 minutes when he with Hardesh returned to the spot, a crowd was found gathered there; that Manish @ Sonu @ Mota was found dead and blood was found in the lane near to him; that Raju @ Kana was in pain; that he (witness) called at 100 number after taking the phone from Hardesh on which PCR arrived there within ten minutes and the PCR officials shifted injured Raju @ Kana to BJRM Hospital with their help and Satender accompanied them; that Raju @ Kana was treated at the hospital but out of fear as the murder had taken place they brought back Raju @ Kana from hospital and left Raju @ Kana to his house. However, when confronted with portion D to D1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX1 the above facts were found so recorded. (24) Further, the statement dated 16.11.2012 Ex.PW19/PX2 was read over to the witness who denied to having made such statement to the police. He has denied the suggestion that he had told the police that on 16.11.2012 he alongwith Satender joined the investigation in search of accused persons who murdered Manish @ Sonu and assaulted on Raju @ Kana; that on the information of secret informer they both alongwith police officials reached under the Shalimar Bagh bridge and reached on the railway line by foot where accused Vikas @ Sonu, Rajan, Nitesh and St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 31 of 136 Narad were apprehended at their instance at about 2.00PM; that they were brought to the Police Station and were arrested and their personal search were carried out vide Ex.PW19/J to Ex.PW19/J3 and PW19/K to Ex.PW19/K3 respectively. However, when confronted with portion A to A1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX2 the above aspects were found so recorded. Witness has denied the suggestion that he had told the police that thereafter he alongwith Satender and accused persons namely Nitesh, Narad and Ranjan remained at the Police Station and police official alognwith accused Vikas @ Sonu left the Police Station and returned after an hour; that he alongwith Satender alongwith one person and police official went in search of other accused persons and at the instance of said person reached across the railway line at Railway Phatak no.4, Lal Bagh, Azadpur; that accused Rakesh, Babloo, Pravesh and Amit were apprehended and were taken to the Police Station and were arrested and their personal search were carried out vide memos Ex.PW19/J4 to Ex.PW19/J7 and Ex.PW19/K4 to Ex.PW19/K7. However, when confronted with portion B to B1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX2 where the above facts were found so recorded.
(25) Another statement dated 17.11.2012 which is Ex.PW19/PX3 was read over to the witness who denied having made such statement to the police. He has denied the suggestion that he had told the police that on 17.11.2012 he joined the investigation with the police and all the eight St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 32 of 136 accused persons were asked to get recover their wearing clothes being worn by them at the time of incident murder of Manish and at the time of assaulting by them on Raju @ Kana; that the accused Vikas @ Sonu led the police party to his house and produced his clothes which he wore at the time of the incident which clothes were turned into a pullanda after keeping the same in a polythene bag and were sealed and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/H. However, when confronted with portion A to A1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX3 the above facts were found so recorded. He has also denied the suggestion that he had stated to the police that other seven accused persons in the similar fashion got recovered their wearing clothes which they wore at the time of the incident from their respective houses which were taken into possession after turning the same into a pullanda vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/A to Ex.PW19/G. However, when confronted with portion B to B1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX3 the above facts were found so recorded. (26) According to the witness he cannot identify the case property if shown to him as he had not seen the incident and no recovery was effected in his presence. Witness has denied the suggestion that he had seen the incident; that all the accused persons on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 at about 1.00AM at gali no.3 near Ayurvedic Aushadhayala, public gali, Lal Bagh, Delhi committed the murder of Manish @ Sonu by giving brick blows on his head; that accused Vikas @ Sonu and Pravesh gave brick and danda blows on the head of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana with St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 33 of 136 intention to kill him. He has further denied the suggestion that he is intentionally deposing falsely to save the accused persons from penal consequences. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel, despite being granted an opportunity in this regard. (27) PW20 Satender @ Sikandar has deposed that on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 he alongwith his friend Krishna @ Nepali and Hardesh was sleeping in the lane in the Lal Bagh area under influence of liquor and the police personnel of Police Station Adarsh Nagar took them to the Police Station for interrogation. According to the witness in the Police Station they made inquiry from them about Raju @ Kana who was taken by the PCR personnel to the hospital on the call of Krishna @ Nepali from the mobile phone of Hardesh. Witness has further deposed that Krishna after seeing Raju @ Kana in an injured condition lying in front of dispensary had called the PCR persons and he and Hardesh with him at that time. He has testified that the PCR personnel had taken the injured Raju @ Kana at about 12.30AM and thereafter he, Hardesh and Krishna brought the injured Raju @ Kana back from the hospital to his house. According to the witness, in the Police Station police personnel made inquiries from all three of them as to how Raju @ Kana suffered injuries and he showed his ignorance for the same and told the police personnel that he had only seen him in injured condition. He has also deposed that the police personnel in the morning brought all the accused persons and he identified them out of fear as he was being St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 34 of 136 apprehended by the police. Witness has further deposed that they all had been detained in the Police Station for about four to five days and were allowed to leave the Police Station thereafter. He has identified all the accused persons that i.e. Ranjan, Vikas, Amit, Nitesh, Pravesh, Narad, Rakesh and Babloo in the Court.
(28) Witness has further deposed that later on police called him and asked him to stand witness in this case being an eye witness and to escape torture from the police, under protest he agreed for the same though he had not seen any incident. According to him, he had seen only Raju @ Kana in injured condition and no other incident took place in his presence. He has testified that he was made to sign several documents details of which he is unable to tell. He has identified his signatures on the arrest memo of accused Vikas which is Ex.PW19/J; arrest memo of of accused Ranjan which is Ex.PW19/J1; arrest memo of of accused Nitesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J2; arrest memo of accused Narad Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J3; arrest memo of accused Rakesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/J4; arrest memo of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW19/J5; arrest memo of accused Pravesh which is Ex.PW19/J6 and arrest memo of accused Amit which is Ex.PW19/J7. The witness has also identified his signatures on personal search memo of accused Vikas which is Ex.PW19/K; personal search memo of accused Ranjan which is Ex.PW19/K1; personal search memo of accused Nitesh Kumar which is St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 35 of 136 Ex.PW19/K2; personal search of accused Narad Kumar which is Ex.PW19/K3; personal search memo of accused Rakesh Kumar which is Ex.PW19/K4; personal search memo of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW19/K5; personal search memo of accused Pravesh which is Ex.PW19/K6 and personal search memo of accused Amit which is Ex.PW19/K7.
(29) He has however deposed that he had not seen the accused persons assaulting Raju @ Kana at any point of time and he is not known to any person by the name of Manish @ Sonu. According to the witness the accused persons had not assaulted on any person in his presence at any point of time and his statements was not recorded by the police. (30) In his cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, witness has denied the suggestion that his statements were recorded by the police which were read over to him. Statement Ex.PW20/PX1 was read over to the witness who denied having made such statement to the police. Confronted with statement Ex.PW20/PX1. He has denied the suggestion that he had stated to the police that on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 on the eve of Diwali he alongwith his friends Raju @ Kana, Hardesh and Krishna @ Nepali were present in the gali of Petrol Pump Lal Bagh and at about 12.00 midnight Manish @ Sonu @ Mota R/o Jahangir Puri who was in an intoxicated state and was friend of Raju @ Kana came alongwith four quarters of liquor and offered Raju @ Kana to have liquor St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 36 of 136 and both of them had liquor together. He has also denied having told the police that after about 3045 minutes they both while talking went towards dispensary lane and at about 1.00AM accused Rakesh, Pravesh, Vikas @ Sonu, Babloo and Amit were gambling there to whom he knew previously; that Manish @ Sonu started playing gamble with them; that Raju @ Kana and they all other three started seeing them or that when Manish @ Sonu started loosing in the gamble, he started quarreling with the aforesaid accused persons and blaming them for cheating. Witness has also denied the suggestion that he had told the police that Raju @ Kana helped Manish in the said quarrel and also got himself involved in that quarrel and started abusing and helping Manish by taking side of Manish; that Manish started snatching money from accused Rakesh or that when accused Rakesh objected Manish gave him three to four slaps; that other aforesaid accused persons became angry and started abusing Manish but Manish continued holding the collar of Rakesh and continued to giving him slaps; that after hearing the voices of quarrel accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad to whom he knew previously came there in the aid of other accused persons or that all the accused persons exhorted "Aaj Manish @ Sonu ki dadagiri khatam kar denge" or that all the accused persons grappled with Manish @ Sonu. However, when confronted with portion A to A1 of his statement Ex.PW20/PX1 the above aspects were found so recorded. He has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that accused Babloo caught hold the neck of Manish @ Sonu from behind, accused Nitesh gave St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 37 of 136 push to Manish @ Sonu as a result of which he fell down; that thereafter all the accused persons had given him kick and fists blows and also gave danda blows; that when Manish tried to stand up, the accused Rakesh caught hold of him from left side whereas the accused Nitesh caught hold of him from right side shoulders and grabbed him; that accused Amit, Narad and Vikas @ Sonu grabbed his legs; that accused Ranjan lifted a brick lying there and assaulted on the head of Manish @ Sonu with the same; that accused Pravesh was exhorting by saying "Aaj iska kaam tamam kar do" and the accused Babloo after again lifting the same brick assaulted on the head of Manish @ Sonu @ Mota with the said brick. However, when confronted with portion B to B1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX1 the above aspects were found so recorded. (31) He has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that accused Pravesh at that time by seeing Raju @ Kana exhorted "aaj Raju @ Kana ka bhi Kaam tamam kar do"; that accused Pravesh and Vikas @ Sonu by chasing Raju @ Kana assaulted on him whereby Vikas @ Sonu through joint bricks on Raju @ Kana which hit him as a result of which Raju @ Kana had fallen down and that accused Pravesh gave danda blow on the head of Raju @ Kana or that accused Vikas @ Sonu also thereafter with the same danda, also hit the head of Raju @ Kana. However, when confronted with portion C to C1 of his statement Ex.PW19/PX1 where the above facts were found so recorded. The witness has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 38 of 136 he alongwith Krishna and Hardesh had seen the aforesaid incident but after seeing the aforesaid incident, out of hear and for saving themselves they went to another lane to hide themselves; that he informed at the house of Raju @ Kana and on return hide himself in the lane and after 1520 minutes the PCR vehicle arrived in the lane of patrol pump; that he also followed the PCR vehicle which stopped in front of lane of dispensary and when police started moving in the dispensary lane, he followed them and reached at the spot with them; that PCR personnels shifted injured Raju @ Kana to BJRM Hospital with their help; that Manish @ Sonu was found dead at the spot or that Raju @ Kana was treated at the hospital but out of fear as the murder had taken place they brought back Raju @ kana from hospital and left Raju @ Kana to his house. However, when confronted with portion D to D1 of his statement Ex.PW20/PX1 the above facts were found so recorded.
(32) He has denied the suggestion that his statement dated 16.11.2012 was also recorded. The said statement dated 16.11.2012 Ex.PW20/PX2 was read over to the witness who denied having made such statement to the police. He has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that on 16.11.2012 he alongwith Krishna @ Nepali joined the investigation in search of accused persons who murdered Manish @ Sonu and assaulted on Raju @ Kana; that on the information of secret informer they both alongwith police officials reached under the Shalimar Bagh bridge and reached on the railway line by foot accused St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 39 of 136 Vikas @ Sonu, Rajan, Nitesh and Narad were apprehended at their instance at about 2.00PM; that they were brought to the Police Station and were arrested and their personal search were carried out vide Ex.PW19/J to Ex.PW19/J3 and PW19/K to Ex.PW19/K3 respectively. However, when confronted with portion A to A1 of his statement Ex.PW20/PX2 the above facts were found so recorded. He has further denied the suggestion that he had told the police that thereafter he along with Krishna and accused persons namely Nitesh, Narad and Ranjan remained at the Police Station and police official along with accused Vikas @ Sonu left the Police Station and returned after an hour; that he along with Krishna along with one person and police official went in search of other accused persons and at the instance of said person reached across the railway line at railway phatak no.4, Lal Bagh, Azadpur where accused Rakesh, Babloo, Pravesh and Amit were apprehended; that they were taken to the Police Station where they were arrested and their personal search were carried out vide memos Ex.PW19/J4 to Ex.PW19/J7 and Ex.PW19/K4 to Ex.PW19/K7 and that police personnels with the accused persons left for Lal Bagh and returned thereafter. However, when confronted with portion B to B1 of his statement Ex.PW20/PX2 the above facts were found so recorded.
(33) The witness has further denied the suggestion that he had seen the incident or that all the accused persons on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 at about 1.00AM at gali no.3 near Ayurvedic Aushadhayala, St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 40 of 136 public gali, Lal Bagh, Delhi committed the murder of Manish @ Sonu by giving brick blows on his head; that accused Vikas @ Sonu and Pravesh gave brick and danda blows on the head of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana with intention to kill him. He has also denied the suggestion that he is intentionally deposing falsely to save the accused persons from penal consequences. This witness was not cross examined by the Ld. Defence counsel, despite an opportunity being granted in this regard. Witnesses of Medical Record:
(34) PW13 Dr. Bhim Singh has deposed that on 14.11.2012 at about 3:00 PM, he conducted postmortem on the dead body of Manish @ Sonu, S/o Tilak Raj, male, 30 years on the request of Insp. Rajesh Sinha of Police Station Adarsh Nagar with alleged history of being found dead on 14.11.2012 at about 2.05AM (midnight). According to the witness on examination he found following external injuries.
1. Lacerated wound 4cm x 1.5cm x bone deep middle of forehead.
2. Lacerated wound 3cm x 1cm x 1cm over left eye brow.
3. Lacerated wound 3cm x 1cm x bone deep over right occipital region of head.
(35) He has proved that on internal examination of Head Extravassation of blood was present in frontal region of scalp in an area of 8cm x 6cm and right occipital region 6cm x 4cm; Skull was intact, brain St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 41 of 136 showed patchy Subdural Haemorrhage, Subarchnoid haemorrhage all over the brain with contusions below injury no.1, 2 and 3. According to the witness, the stomach contained about 400 ml brownish liquid having strong alcoholic smell. He has proved having opined that the death was due to head injury consequent upon injury no. 1, 2 and 3 which were ante mortem, fresh and could be caused by hard blunt object and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and time since death was about 12 to 14 hours. He has deposed that after postmortem he handed over clothes of the deceased, blood and viscera in salt solution and blood sample in gauze piece in sealed condition with the seal of the hospital i.e. FMT BJRM HOSPITAL, JAHANGIR PURI, DELHI with sample seal to the police. He has proved having prepared the detailed Postmortem Report which is Ex.PW13/A. The witness has testified that on 11.12.2012 he received an application from Inspector Rajesh Sinha of Police Station Adarsh Nagar with copy of Postmortem Report, MLC and three sealed pullandas with the seal of RS for subsequent opinion. According to the witness, on opening the pullanda no.1 one brick having cemented portion on one side and blood stains on one side measuring 9"
and 4.5" in size was taken out; on opening the pullanda no.2 six bricks joined with cement and having blood stains were taken out and on opening the pullanda no.3 one old bamboo stick having one end square shape measuring 5 feet and 6½ inches in length and diameter was approximately 7 inch and 6½ inches respectively having blood stains on St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 42 of 136 one end having 7 knots, was taken out. He has proved that after examining the above said articles he opined that the injuries no.1 to 3 mentioned in the Postmortem Report No.1147/12 and MLC No. E131539 could be possible by exhibit No.1 i.e. brick and exhibit no.3 i.e. bamboo stick. According to the witness, after examination the exhibits were again sealed with the seal of FMT, BJRM Hospital and handed over to the police. He has proved the subsequent opinion which is Ex.PW13/B. (36) He has correctly identified a bamboo stick 5 feet and 6½ inches in length and approximately 7 inch and 6½ inches in diameter having seven knots as the same which was produced before him for examination, which wooden stick is Ex.P1. It has been observed by tis Court that the bamboo stick matched with the description given in the postmortem report and also containing brown spots appearing to be blood stains at point which is marked A and it also had a slip bearing the signatures of Dr. Bhim Singh.
(37) The witness has also identified six bricks joined with cement containing brown stains appearing to be blood stains and the signatures of the witness as the same which were produced before him for examination, which six bricks joined with cement are collectively Ex.P2 and one brick containing brown stains appearing to be blood stains and the signatures of the witness as the same which was produced before him for examination which brick is Ex.P3. It has been observed by this Court that the bricks joined with cement tallied with the description given by the doctor on the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 43 of 136 postmortem report.
(38) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has denied the suggestion that the head injury could have been caused on account of a fall from a height and has voluntarily explained that injuries on the head are both present on front/frontal region and back/occipital region which shows that the said injuries were not on account of a fall. He has denied the suggestion that he had given the opinion on the cause of death and with regard to the weapons on the instructions/ directions of the Investigating Officer. He has admitted that the injuries as observed by him herein above could have been caused by danda and bricks. (39) PW18A Dr. R.S. Mishra has deposed that on 14.11.2012 he was posted as CMO BJRM Hospital and on that day at 2:00 AM patient Raju S/o unknown, aged about 25 years, male was brought to the hospital by PCR Officials for medical examination, however, the patient Raju absconded from the casualty without medical examination, thumb impression and treatment. According to the witness the patient was not available for MLC till 6:25 AM and thereafter Dr. Manoranjan prepared the MLC under his supervision which MLC is Ex.PW18A/A. He has further deposed that on the same day i.e. 14.11.2012 at about 8:15 AM the patient Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana S/o Ali Hassan, aged 25 years, male was brought by Ct. Krishan for medical examination with a history of physical assault and the patient was examined by Dr. Manoranjan under his supervision. According to the witness, on local examination a CLW of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 44 of 136 size 3 x 0.5 cm was present on the right parital region and one CLW of 1 x 0.5 cm was present on forehead, which MLC is Ex.PW18A/B. Witness has further deposed that he opined the nature of injuries as Simple vide his endorsement on the MLC at Point X. (40) In his cross examination by the Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has deposed that it is possible that the injuries mentioned in the MLC caused due to a sudden fall on a hard surface. He has denied the suggestion that the MLCs were prepared at the instance of the Investigating Officer.
Forensic Expert:
(41) PW17 Sh. D. S. Paliwal has deposed that on 20.12.2012 sealed parcels were received in the case section of FSL Rohini which parcels were marked to him on 18.3.2013. According to the witness on receipt of sealed parcels he examined all the sealed parcels containing exhibits except parcel no.2, 6 and parcel no.8 which were returned unexamined. Witness has further deposed that on examination of the said exhibits blood was detected on exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, & 10. He has testified that the source of exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10 were subjected to DNA isolation and DNA was isolated from the source of exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10 and DNA Profiles were generated by using AmpF1 STR Identifier PCR Amplification Kit. The witness has further deposed that STR analysis was used for each of the sample and data was analysed by using St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 45 of 136 Gene Mapper IDX Software. Witness has further deposed that after examining he opined that the alleles from the source of exhibit 9 (blood sample of the deceased Manish @ Sonu) were accounted in the alleles from the source of exhibit 1 (blood stained earth taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 3 (blood sample in gauze taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 4 (brick), exhibit 5 (blood sample in gauze taken from the street in front of House No. C147 and C194, Lal Bagh) and exhibit 10 (wooden danda). Witness has further deposed that the DNA profiling (STR analysis) performed on the exhibits was sufficient to conclude that DNA profile generated from the biological stains i.e. blood stains present on the source of exhibit 1 (blood stained earth taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 3 (blood sample in gauze taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 4 (brick), exhibit 5 (blood sample in gauze taken from the street in front of House No. C147 and C194, Lal Bagh) and exhibit 10 (wooden danda) is similar with DNA profile from the source of exhibit 9 (blood sample of the deceased Manish @ Sonu). He has proved his detail report in this regard which is Ex.PW17/A (running into four pages) along with the Annexure1A and Annexure 1B (i.e. Genotype Data of exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10).
(42) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has denied the suggestion that he did not apply standard procedures and practices while examining the various exhibits or that he had given the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 46 of 136 report on DNA profiling on the instructions of the Investigating Officer. Police/ Official Witnesses:
(43) PW1 Ct. Vinod Kumar is a formal witness who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW1/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C. wherein he has proved having taken the exhibits from the MHCM and deposited the same with the FSL. He has proved the entry in register no.21 vide RC No.139/21/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/A (running into three pages); receipt issued by FSL which is Ex.PW1/B; RC No.138/21/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/C and receipt issued by FSL copy of which is Ex.PW1/D. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels but nothing much has come out of the same and the witness stood by his version.
(44) PW2 Ct. Asraf MT is a formal witness being the DD Writer who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW2/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved having recorded the DD No.6B copy of which is Ex.PW2/A. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. DefencevI Counsels but nothing much has come out of the same and the witness stood by his version.
(45) PW3 SI Manohar Lal is a formal witness being the Draftsman who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW3/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 47 of 136 proved having visited the spot of incident and having prepared the scaled site plan which is Ex.PW3/A. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels but nothing much has come out of the same and the witness stood by his version.
(46) PW4 HC Satish Kumar is a formal witness who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW4/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved having visited the spot along with SI Afaque Ahmed. According to the witness, ASI Ompal along with Ct. Kishan reached the spot who were deputed for safety and preservation of the spot and he along with SI Afaque reached BJRM Hospital where neither the injured nor the eye witness was found present. He has stated that thereafter they reached back to the spot where Crime Team also reached and inspected the scene of crime. He has proved that SI Afaque ahmed handed over to him a rukka which he took to the Police Station and got the FIR registered.
(47) In his crossexamination by the Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has denied the suggestion that they received information that two persons were lying in unconscious condition in the gali of petrol pump. He has admitted that injured Raju did not meet them at the spot when they reached there. According to the witness they received PCR messages that one injured had already been taken to the hospital. He has also admitted that Raju did not meet them in the hospital. The witness has further admitted that there were total six bricks found at the spot. According to St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 48 of 136 the witness he did not meet Raju at any time. He has testified that they reached at the spot at about 2:05 AM to 2:10 AM according to the DD No. 6B. Witness has admitted that the place of incident is a residential area and number of shops were present there. He has also admitted that the said place was generally crowded and the Investigating Officer SI Afaque Ahmad knocked the door of nearby residential houses and inquired about the incident. He has further deposed that the Crime Team officials reached the spot at about 3:003:30 AM and remained there for about one or one and a half hour. According to the witness, the Crime Team officials were present at the spot when he took rukka to Police Station but he is not aware about the officials who lifted the exhibits from the spot.
Witness has further deposed that at about 6:30 AM he again reached at the spot and he went to Police Station on foot and SHO was not present at the Police Station when he reached there with rukka and has voluntarily explained that SHO was present at the spot. He has denied the suggestion that the neighbors were not made witness by the Investigating Officer in the present case as they were not supporting the false and fabricated case of the injured Ajaj @ Raju or that he did not join the investigation at any point.
(48) PW5 Ct. Bijender is a formal witness who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW5/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved that on the intervening night of 1314.11.2012 while he was on patrolling duty he came to know about the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 49 of 136 incident on which he reached the spot where he found the dead body of a male lying there. He has further proved that on the directions of SI Afaque Ahmed he got preserved the dead body the mortuary of BJRM Hospital.
(49) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has admitted that the place of incident is in the area of Beat No.13 of Police Station Adarsh Nagar and he is not the Beat Constable of Beat No.13 and states that he was patrolling in the area near the Mall near GT Karnal Road. He does not remember who gave information to him about the incident of murder. He has denied the suggestion that he did not join investigation at any time.
(50) PW6 Ct. Krishan Gopal is a formal witness being the special Messenger who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW6/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved that on 14.11.2012 he delivered the copies of the FIR at the resident of Ld. Illaka MM, DCP (NorthWest), Joint CP and Addl. DCP. (51) In his cross examination by the Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has deposed that he did not made any separate DD for his departure while he was taking the copy of FIR to the Ld. Ilaka MM and higher police officials. He has admitted that the copy of FIR registered was shown to the Ld. MM within one - one and a half hour of its registration. He has denied the suggestion that FIR was shown to concerned Ld. MM after 15.11.2012. According to the witness he had made entry of his returning St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 50 of 136 back but he is unable to tell the arrival DD number.
(52) PW7 Ct. Sohanveer is also a formal witness being the Driver of TATA 407 who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW7/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved that at about 5:00 AM he drove the vehicle i.e. TATA 407 to the mortuary of BJRM Hospital where the dead body was got preserved by Ct. Bijender.
(53) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has admitted that the entry is made in log book while the official TATA 407 is taken for investigation. Witness has further deposed that he did not make any DD regarding the departure and the arrival of the said official TATA 407. Witness has denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigation at any time.
(54) PW8 HC Karamveer is a formal witness being the Duty Officer who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW8/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved having recorded DD No. 10A copy of which is Ex.PW8/A, FIR No.289/12 copy of which is Ex.PW8/B and his endorsement on rukka which is Ex.PW8/C. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels but the witness stood by his version.
(55) PW9 SI Sanjeev Verma is a formal witness being the Crime Team Incharge who has been examined by way of affidavit which is St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 51 of 136 Ex.PW9/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved having visited the spot of the incident and having prepared the Crime Team Report which is Ex.PW9/A. (56) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has deposed that he reached at the spot at about 3:30 AM and Investigating Officer and other police staff were also present at the spot when he reached there. He has admitted that SHO was not present at the spot when he reached there. The witness has also admitted that there was no injured present at the spot except one dead body and has stated that he is not aware about any injured person. He has also admitted that the place the of incident is a residential area and there are many houses. Witness has further deposed that the Investigating Officer lifted playing cards from the spot. He is not aware whether such playing cards were blood sustained or not and has stated that the Investigating Officer did not inquire any public persons from the nearby houses in his presence. Witness has denied the suggestion that he had not visited the spot at any point of time or that he prepared the Crime Team Report while sitting in his office at the instance of the Investigating Officer.
(57) PW10 HC Sudhir is a formal witness being the Crime Team Photographer who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW10/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved having visited the spot of incident and having taken the photographs of the scene of crime which are Ex.PW10/A1 to St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 52 of 136 Ex.PW10/A13 and negatives of the the same which are collectively Ex.PW10/B. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels but the witness has stood by his version.
(58) PW11 HC Rakesh Kumar is a formal witness being the MHCM who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW11/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved the entry in register no. 19 vide S. No. 4209/12 copy of which is Ex.PW11/A (running into five pages), entry at S. No. 4216 copy of which is Ex.PW11/B (running into two pages) and entry at S. No. 4217/12 copy of which is Ex.PW11/C (running into four pages). He has also proved entry in register no. 21 vide RC No. 138/21/13 copy of which is ExPW1/C, RC No. 139/21/13 copy of which is Ex.PW11/A and receipts issued by FSL which are Ex.PW1/D and Ex.PW1/B. He has been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels but the witness has stood by his version. (59) PW12 Ct. Mahipal is a formal witness being the CPCR official who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW12/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved the PCR Form which is Ex.PW12/A. He has not been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels despite being granted an opportunity in this regard. (60) PW21 Ct. Surjeet has deposed that on 17.11.2012 at about 9.30PM he along with Inspector Rajesh Sinha, ASI Shashi Kumar, HC Bhagat, HC Ved, HC Karambeer, HC Kalyan, HC Bal Kishan, Ct. Rahul, St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 53 of 136 Ct. Jai Bhagwan, Ct. Krishan Gopal, Ct. Krishan Kumar, Ct. Kamlesh and other police official and all the eight accused persons reached at Petrol Pump, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi where Krishna @ Nepali was joined in the investigation of this case. According to the witness, the accused Vikas took the police officials to his house from where he got recovered his clothes i.e. T Shirt and Brown Printed and grey colour pant and Krishna @ Nepali identified the clothes as were worn by the accused Vikas at the time of incident when Manish was murdered and Raju @ Kana was assaulted by him. He has proved that Inspector Rajesh Sinha put the clothes in a polythene and converted the clothes into a pullanda of white cloth and sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide memo Ex.PW19/H. The witness has testified that accused Nitesh, Narad, Rakesh, Babloo, Pravesh, Amit and Ranjan similarly took the police officials to their respective houses from where they got recovered their clothes and Krishna @ Nepali identified the clothes as were worn by them at the time of incident in which Manish was murdered and Raju @ Kana was assaulted by them. According to the witness Inspector Rajesh Sinha put the aforesaid clothes in separate polythenes and converted the clothes into separate pullanda of white cloth and sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide memo Ex.PW19/A to Ex.PW19/G respectively. He has also deposed that the seal after its use was handed over to ASI Shashi Kumar. (61) The witness has correctly identified the accused persons in the Court and also identified the clothes recovered at the instance of accused St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 54 of 136 Vikas i.e. one brown and grey pant and yellow T Shirt which clothes are collectively Ex.P4. He has however explained that he cannot identify the clothes of other accused persons as he did not give much attention to them at the time of recovery.
(62) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has deposed that the seizure memo Ex.PW19/J was prepared by the Investigating Officer in the hand writing of ASI Shashi Kumar. He has admitted that there is ab overwriting on the date of Ex.PW19/J. Witness has also deposed that the seizure memos of clothes were prepared in his presence and he is aware of the contents of the same. According to the witness he can only identify the clothes recovered at the instance of the accused Vikas and cannot identify the clothes of other accused persons and has explained that the accused Vikas got recovered his clothes form his residential house i.e. C18, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi. He has also admitted that Krishna @ Nepali was present at the time of said recovery. The witness has however denied the suggestion that Krishna @ Nepali was not present at the time of recovery of clothes or that accused Ranjan and Vikas had not got recovered their wearing clothes. Witness has further deposed that the blood was present on the front portion of the T Shirt of accused Vikas and the blood spots were present on the T Shirt on different portion of the T Shirt but he cannot tell their exact number. He has also denied the suggestion that no blood was present on the clothes or that the clothes were planted on accused Vikas by purchasing the same from the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 55 of 136 open market and after smearing it with blood falsely planted upon the accused Vikas or that due to which reason T Shirt is shown recovered at the instance of accused Vikas. Witness Krishna Nepali signed the seizure memo in his presence. Witness has denied the suggestion that neither he went to the house of Vikas nor any clothes were recovered at the instance of accused Vikas.
(63) He is not aware the number of house of accused Ranjan nor can he tell about the location of the house of Ranjan and the distance between houses of Vikas and Ranjan. Witness has denied the suggestion that all the documents were prepared while sitting in the Police Station and he merely signed the same at the instance of the Investigating Officer or that all the documents were prepared on 16.11.2012. Witness has further denied the suggestion that the blood stained clothes were planted, on the accused persons later, only to connect them with the present case. He has admitted that when they reached the house of Vikas the family members as well as the neighbour were present during the entire proceedings. Witness has also deposed that he, himself including the Investigating Officer had not asked the family members the neighborer to join the same. He is unable to tell about the width of street in front of the house of accused Vikas and also about the stories of the house of Vikas. He has denied the suggestion that he was taking the plea of not recognizing the clothes of other accused persons as no clothes were recovered in front of him or that his signatures were obtained later on by St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 56 of 136 the Investigating Officer while sitting in the Police Station. Witness has denied the suggestion that nothing was recovered at the instance of the accused persons.
(64) PW22 Ct. Krishan Kumar has deposed that in the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and on that day at about 2:40 AM he along with ASI Ompal went to the spot i.e. Dispensary Wali Gali, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi where they met Ct. Satish and SI Afaque Ahmad. According to the witness on inquiry SI Afaque Ahmad came to know that one injured in the present case had been shifted to BJRM Hospital by the PCR officials on which SI Afaque Ahmad along with Ct. Satish left for BJRM Hospital whereas he and ASI Ompal were directed to preserve the scene of crime. Witness has further deposed that they also found the dead body of a male person aged around 3032 years and black shirt, white baniyan, cream color pant and sports shoes on the dead body. He has testified that they also found injury marks on the left side of head of the dead body and blood was oozing out from there. He has explained that they found the shirt of the dead body in torn condition and black buttons of the shirt were also torn. According to him , they also found one artificial locket of Om, one blood stained brick near the dead body and blood stained six bricks pieces connected jointly in front of house No. C147 and C194, Ayurvedic Dispensary. Witness has further deposed that the distance between the dead body and the brick pieces was about 1012 steps and after about one hour SI Afaque Ahmed St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 57 of 136 and Ct. Satish returned back to the spot and informed them that they could not find any injured or any eye witness in the BJRM Hospital. According to the witness, Crime Team reached the spot and inspected the spot and took the photographs. He has explained that the Investigating Officer Insp. Rajesh Sinha came to the spot at about 4:15 AM and recorded the statement of the Crime Team Incharge and the photographer. Witness has further deposed that SI Afaque Ahmad prepared a tehrir and handed over to Ct. Satish for getting the FIR registered after which the Investigating Officer Inspector Rajesh Sinha searched the dead body and found Rs. 440/ and one NOKIA mobile phone from the pocket of the dead body. Witness has further deposed that some playing cards were also found lying near the dead body and thereafter the Investigating Officer Inspector Rajesh Sinha send the dead body to BJRM Hospital for conducting the postmortem through Ct. Vijender in government vehicle Tata 407 which was being driven by Ct. Somvir. Witness has further deposed that thereafter Investigating Officer Insp. Rajesh Sinha converted Rs.440/ and NOKIA phone into two separate pullandas with the help of white cloth and sealed the same with the seal of RS and thereafter Investigating Officer Insp. Rajesh Sinha also lifted blood, blood stained earth, earth control with the help of cotton. According to the witness Ct. Satish returned back to the spot along with copy of the FIR and the original tehrir which he handed over to the Investigating Officer Insp. Rajesh Sinha. Witness has further deposed that at about 7:30 AM Raju @ Kana St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 58 of 136 came to the spot and he took the injured Raju @ Kana to BJRM Hospital for getting his medical examination conducted on the directions of the Investigating Officer and thereafter at about 10:00 AM he returned back to the spot along with Raju @ Kana after getting him medically examined. Witness has further deposed that the site plan was prepared by the Investigating Officer on the pointing out of Raju @ Kana after which his statement was also recorded and thereafter his (i.e. witness's) statement was recorded and he was relived. The witness has also deposed that on 13.01.2013 he again joined the investigations in the present case and on that day he along with SI Manohar Lal, Draftsman and Inspector Rakesh went to the spot and at his instance SI Manohar Lal prepared the scaled site plan and his statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. (65) The witness has correctly identified the case property i.e. clothes of deceased i.e. one cream color pant, one white color baniyan, one black shirt, one underwear and one pair of sports shoes as the same which were worn by the deceased, which clothes and shoes are collectively Ex.P5; three buttons colour black as the same which were found near the dead body of Manish @ Sonu which buttons are collectively Ex.P6; one artificial locket of Om as the same which were found near the dead body of Manish @ Sonu which locket is Ex.P7. (66) In his cross examination by the Ld. Defence counsel, the witness has admitted that there were residential houses at the place of incident. Witness has further deposed that Investigating Officer had asked St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 59 of 136 some public persons to join the investigations but they refused to join and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses but the Investigating Officer did not serve any legal notice to them. He is not aware whether the Investigating Officer had asked the public persons to join investigations at the time of seizing the articles from the spot. The witness has also admitted that he did not sign any of the memos prepared by the Investigating Officer. Witness has further deposed that the writing work was done while sitting on chairs in the said gali and the seal after use was handed over to SI Afaque Ahmad but no handing over to taking over memo was prepared at that time. He has denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigations of this case that is why his signatures are not present on any of the documents. Witness has also denied the suggestion that all the writing work was done while sitting in the Police Station or that he had never visited the spot at any point of time.
(67) PW23 ASI Om Pal Singh has deposed that in the intervening night of 1314.11.2012 he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and was on Reserve Duty from 8:00 PM to 8:00 AM when at around 2:40 AM on 14.11.2012 he and Ct. Kishan received an information regarding murder at Lal Bagh, Ayurvedic Dispensary Wali Gali on which they went to the spot where they found SI Afaq Ahmed along with Ct. Satish present there and they also found a dead body lying there. According to the witness, he told SI Afaq Ahmed that the body is of one Manish @ Sonu of Jahangir Puri who had already been booked in the Police Station. He has further St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 60 of 136 deposed that the deceased was wearing sports shoes, black colour shirt, cream colour pant and white colour vest and he and Ct. Kishan were left at the spot for guarding the spot and thereafter SI Afaq and Ct. Satish went to BJRM Hospital for the inquiry of another injured. According to the witness after sometime SI Afaq came at the spot and in the meantime Inspector Rajesh Sinha came at the spot and Crime Team also reached the spot. He has also deposed that the Incharge of the Crime Team inspected the spot at the instance of Inspector Rajesh Sinha and photographer of the Crime Team took the photographs of the scene of crime from different angles. Witness has further deposed that thereafter Investigating Officer prepared the rukka and handed it over to Ct. Satish for registration of the case and after registration of the case Ct. Satish came to the spot and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to Inspector Rajesh and thereafter Inspector Rajesh took the formal search of the body of the deceased form which Rs.440/ and one Nokia mobile phone were recovered. Witness has also deposed that Investigating Officer converted the belongings of the deceased and sealed the same with the seal of RS and took into possession the same vide memo Ex.PW23/A. Witness has further deposed that the dead body was thereafter removed to Mortuary of BJRM Hospital through Ct. Bijender. He has deposed that near the dead body three black coloured buttons and one artificial locket were lying, which were kept in a plastic dibbi and sealed with the seal of RS and the Investigating Officer then lifted the blood stained piece of brick which St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 61 of 136 was lying near the body and one side of the brick was cemented which brick was also converted into a pullanda and sealed with the seal of RS. Witness has further deposed that the Investigating Officer also lifted the blood control from the spot and kept it in a plastic dibbi and sealed the same with the seal of RS and the Investigating Officer also lifted the earth control after breaking the same from the spot where the head of Manish was spotted and was converted into a pullanda which was sealed with the seal of RS after which all the above pullandas were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/B. (68) Witness has also deposed that where the body was lying about fifty (50) playing cards were lying in a scattered condition out of which twenty five (25) cards were coloured and twenty two (22) playing cards were having sign of heart on back side and on three (3) playing cards were having a sign of 'S'. Witness has further deposed that all the playing cards were converted into a pullanda and sealed with the seal of RS and were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/C. He has proved that the Investigating Officer lifted blood sample and earth control sample which were kept in two separate plastic dibbis and were sealed with the seal of RS; that the Investigating Officer lifted six bricks which were lying near the blood which were lying in between gali C147 and C194 gali from where the Investigating Officer lifted the blood sample and earth control. He has testified that the said bricks were also converted into pullanda and sealed with seal of RS and all three above bricks were taken into single St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 62 of 136 memo Ex.PW23/D on the bricks SKB were mentioned and were having blood spots. He has also deposed that in the meantime one person namely Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was injured also came at the spot and he was sent to BJRM hospital through Ct. Krishan for his medical examination. He has further deposed that Ct. Krishan came at the spot after getting the medical examination of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana and handed over the MLC of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana to Investigating Officer. According to the witness thereafter the Investigating Officer prepared the site plan at the instance of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana. He has also deposed that in the meantime one person namely Hardev and Krishan Nepali also came at the spot and thereafter the Investigating Officer interrogated those persons and recorded their statements and Investigating Officer also recorded statement of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana. He has testified that thereafter they all, alongwith case property returned to the Police Station and the Investigating Officer deposited the case property with MHCM after which he alongwith the Investigating Officer SI Afaq went to mortuary of BJRM Hospital for postmortem of body of deceased and after reaching in mortuary of BJRM Hospital, Investigating Officer prepared the inquest proceedings and after postmortem the body of the deceased was handed over to his relatives and thereafter they returned back to Police Station and thereafter his statement was recorded by Investigating Officer. (69) The witness has correctly identified the case property i.e. one black colour phone Make Nokia and Rs.440/ out of which four notes are St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 63 of 136 of Rs.100/ denomination and two notes are of Rs.20/ denomination which currency notes are collectively Ex. P8 and mobile phone is Ex. P9 which was recovered from personal search of accused; fifty playing cards which were lying scattered near the body out of which 25 are coloured printed, 22 are heart printed and three are 'S' printed which are collectively Ex.P10; three black colour buttons which are Ex.P6 which were lifted from the spot by the Investigating Officer; an artificial locket lifted from the spot which is Ex.P7; half piece of brick blood stained which was lifted from the spot which is Ex.P3; six bricks joined together with cement which is collectively Ex.P2 which were lifted from the spot by the Investigating Officer. It has been observed by this Court that the above six bricks were joined with cement tallies.
(70) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has denied the suggestion that the spots present on the brick are not the blood stains. According to the witness the deceased Manish @ Sonu was known to him previously since several criminal cases were pending against deceased. Witness has further deposed that he reached the spot at about 2.40 AM. He has admitted that the Investigating Officer did not obtain the signatures of public persons on seizure memo of exhibits. Witness has aslo deposed that Investigating Officer had made inquiries from Ajaj, Hardesh and Krishan Nepali who came there on the spot after some time. Witness has admitted that the spot is surrounded by residential houses and that till the Investigating Officer remained at the spot, he accompanied him. He St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 64 of 136 does not remember whether the Investigating Officer went to the houses situated near the spot to make inquiry and Investigating Officer did not put any specific mark of identification black colour buttons and artificial locket. He has admitted that it is not feasible to identify the buttons recovered at the spot, if the same were mixed with similar type of buttons. He has also admitted that no specific mark or identification was not put on the Ex.P2 & Ex.P3 by the Investigating Officer. Witness has admitted that the bricks like Ex.P2 & Ex.P3 are easily found at the construction sites. Witness has denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigation of this case or that all the writing work was done while sitting at the Police Station or that he had signed the same on the asking of Investigating Officer.
(71) PW24 SI Afaque Ahmed has deposed that on the intervening night of 1314.11.2012 he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and was on emergency Duty from 8:00 PM to 8:00 AM. According to the witness at around 2:05 AM he received a DD No.6B true copy of which is Ex.PW24/A he alongwith Ct. Satish reached the spot Gali No.3, near Dispensary, Lal Bagh, Delhi where he found a person lying dead in a pool of blood. Witness has further deposed that the dead body was having black colour shirt, white banyan, cream colour pant and sport shoes and no eye witness was found at the spot. Witness has further deposed that in the meantime ASI Ompal and Ct. Krishan also reached at the spot and ASI Ompal told him that the body was of Manish a resident of IBlock, St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 65 of 136 Jahangir Puri and he informed the senior officer. He has also deposed that he inspected the spot and near the head of the body, huge blood was lying, three black colour buttons of shirt of deceased, one artificial locket of OM and bricks which were blood stained and cemented on one side with other side of pink colour were also lying there. He has explained that the shirt of deceased was in torn condition and there was injury on the head of deceased and at a distance of ten to twelve steps i.e. between the gali no. C147 and C194, blood was lying there and six joined cemented bricks which were blood stained were also lying there. The witness has further deposed that from the spot he came to know that there was one more injured in this incident who had been taken to BJRM Hospital by the PCR on which he left Ct. Kishan and ASI Ompal at the spot to guard where the blood and body was lying while he alongwith Ct. Satish went to BJRM Hospital. According to the witness, when he reached at the BJRM Hospital, Duty Constable posted in the BJRM Hospital told him that one injured namely one Raju had come to hospital who was having injury on his head and after taking first aid, he absconded from hospital. He has further deposed that the tried to locate the injured in the hospital but he could not be located and no eye witness was also found available in the hospital upon which he returned to the spot. According to him, the Crime Team also reached the spot and Incharge of the Crime Team inspected the spot and in the meantime Inspector Rajesh Sinha also came at the spot. He has testified that the photographer of the Crime Team took the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 66 of 136 photographs of the Scene of Crime from different angles. He has proved having made his endorsement on Ex.PW24/A which endorsement is Ex.PW24/B and he prepared the rukka and handed it over to Ct. Satish for registration of the case. He has also deposed that in the meantime inspector Rajesh Sinha recorded statement of members of Crime Team. (72) The witness has further deposed that after the registration of the case Ct. Satish came to the spot and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to Inspector Rajesh who took the formal search of the body of the deceased from which Rs.440/ and one Nokia mobile phone were recovered. According to the witness, Investigating Officer converted the belongings of the deceased and sealed the same with the seal of RS and took into possession the same vide memo Ex.PW23/A after which the dead body was removed to Mortuary of BJRM Hospital through Ct. Bijender. He has also deposed that near the dead body the said black coloured buttons and one artificial locket were lying which were picked up and kept in a plastic dibbi separately and sealed with the seal of RS. The witness has further deposed that the Investigating Officer then lifted the blood stained piece of brick which was lying near the body with one side cemented which brick was also converted into a pullanda and sealed with the seal of RS. He has proved that the Investigating Officer also lifted the blood control from the spot which was kept in a plastic dibbi and sealed with the seal of RS. He has deposed that thereafter the Investigating Officer lifted the earth control after breaking the same from the spot St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 67 of 136 where the head of Manish was spotted and converted the same into a pullanda which was sealed with the seal of RS after which all the above pullandas were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/B. (73) Witness has further deposed that the place where the body was lying, fifty (50) playing cards were lying in a scattered condition out of which twenty five (25) cards were coloured printed and on twenty two (22) playing cards there were sign of heart and on back side of three (3) playing cards there was a sign of 'S'. Thereafter all the playing cards were converted into a pullanda and sealed with the seal of RS and were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/C. He has also deposed that thereafter the Investigating Officer lifted blood sample, earth control sample and blood in gauze in between the Gali C147 and C194 which were kept in three separate plastic dibbis and were sealed with seal of RS. The witness has further deposed that thereafter the Investigating Officer also lifted six bricks which were lying near the blood which were lying in between gali C147 and C194 gali from where the Investigating Officer also converted into the said bricks which were joined with cemented tallies and sealed with seal of RS and all the bricks were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/D. He has testified that on the bricks, the words SKB were mentioned and the bricks were having blood spots. According to the witness, in the meantime one person namely Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was also injured came to the spot and he was sent to BJRM hospital through Ct. Krishan for his medical examination. After Ct. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 68 of 136 Krishan returned to the spot upon getting the medical examination of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana conducted, he handed over the MLC of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana to Investigating Officer. Witness has further deposed that thereafter the Investigating Officer prepared the site plan at the instance of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana. According to the witness, in the meantime one person namely Hardev and Krishan Nepali also came at the spot and the Investigating Officer made the interrogation from those persons and recorded their statements and also recorded statement of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana. He has further deposed that thereafter they all returned to Police Station alongwith case property where Investigating Officer deposited the case property with MHCM and thereafter, he alongwith Investigating Officer ASI Om Pal went to mortuary of BJRM Hospital for postmortem of body of deceased. According to the witness, after reaching in mortuary of BJRM Hospital, Investigating Officer prepared the inquest proceedings and after postmortem the body of deceased was handed over to his relatives and they returned back to Police Station where his statement was recorded by Investigating Officer.
(74) Witness has further deposed that on 16.11.2012 he again joined the investigation alongwith Investigating Officer of this case and he alongwith Investigating Officer and other staff reached at Lal Bagh petrol pump where witness namely Satender @ Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali met them there and both were joined in the investigation. When they reached in the gali adjoining petrol pump, a secret informer met St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 69 of 136 Investigating Officer who informed him that four persons wanted in the present case might be available near Shalimar Bagh Flyover railway line. He has testified that thereafter the police party alongwith secret informer and both witnesses reached there where they found four persons namely Vikas, Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad who were overpowered by police party at the instance of secret informer and all four accused persons were identified by Satender @ Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali and for the purpose of interrogation, they were brought to Police Station. According to the witness, all accused persons were interrogated in the Police Station and they made disclosure statements which are Ex.PW24/C1 to Ex.PW24/C4 respectively. He has proved that thereafter accused Vikas was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J; accused Ranjan was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J1; accused Nitesh was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J2; accused Narad was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J3; personal search of accused Vikas was carried out vide memo Ex.PW19/K; personal search of accused Ranjan was carried out vide memo Ex.PW19/K1; personal search of accused Nitesh was carried out vide memo Ex.PW19/K2; personal search of accused Narad was carried out vide memo Ex.PW19/K3. According to the witness, thereafter other accused persons were kept in lockup except accused Vikas as he had disclosed that he could get the danda recovered. He has also deposed that pursuant to his disclosure statement, accused Vikas got recovered with St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 70 of 136 danda from the roof of his house, the length of danda was 5 feet 9 inch of black colour and Investigating Officer converted the said danda into a pullanda which was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW24/D. Witness has further deposed that thereafter he alongwith accused Vikas and the Investigating Officer came to Police Station where the Investigating Officer got deposited the danda with MHCM. He has also deposed that in the meantime one secret informer came at Police Station and informed to the Investigating Officer that the remaining accused wanted in this case might be available at Kaushal Puri Railway Line, which information was passed over by Investigating Officer to him and PSI Parveen Kumar and thereafter he alongwith Investigating Officer, other staff proceeded towards Kaushal Puri Railway Line and other accused were kept in lockup at Police Station. The witness has testified that the police party and other staff and witnesses Satender @ Sikander and Krishna @ Nepali proceeded for Kaushal Puri Railway Line and they reached near Phatak no.4 where the accused Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit were assembled there. According to the witness, the secret informer pointed out towards those persons and the public witnesses who were with them also identified them. Witness has further deposed that those persons were apprehended and they were brought to Police Station for interrogation.
(75) He has testified that in the Police Station all the accused persons Rakesh Kumar, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit were interrogated one St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 71 of 136 by one. He has proved the disclosure statement of accused Rakesh which is Ex.PW24/D1; disclosure statement of accused Babloo which is Ex.PW24/D2; disclosure statement of accused Parvesh which is Ex.PW24/D3 and the disclosure statement of accused accused Amit which is Ex.PW24/D4. The witness has proved the arrest of the accused Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit vide memos Ex.PW19/J4 to Ex.PW19/J7 respectively and their personal search vide memos Ex.PW19/K4 to Ex.PW19/K7. He has testified that thereafter all accused persons took police party to the place of incident and they pointed out the place of incident. He has proved that the accused Vikas pointed out the place of incident vide memo Ex.PW24/E1; accused Ranjan pointed out the same vide memo Ex.PW24/E2; accused Nitesh pointed out the spot of incident vide memo Ex.PW24/E3; accused Narad pointed out the spot of incident vide memo Ex.PW24/E4; accused Rakesh pointed out the same vide memo Ex.PW24/E5; accused Babloo also pointed out the spot of incident vide memo Ex.PW24/E6; accused Parvesh pointed out the spot vide memo Ex.PW24/E7 and the accused Amit pointed out the spot vide memo Ex.PW24/E8. Witness has further deposed that thereafter all the accused persons were got medically examined from BJRM Hospital and thereafter they returned to Police Station and his statement was recorded by Investigating Officer.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 72 of 136 (76) The witness has correctly identified the accused persons and the case property i.e. one black colour phone Make Nokia and Rs.440/ out of which four notes are of Rs.100/ denomination and two notes are of Rs.20/ denomination as currency notes which are collectively Ex.P8, mobile phone is Ex.P9 which is recovered from personal search of accused; fifty playing cards which are collectively Ex.P10, which were lying scattered near the body out of which 25 were coloured printed 22 are heart printed and three were 'S' printed; three black colour button which were lifted from the spot by the Investigating Officer which is Ex.P6; an artificial locket lifted from the spot which is Ex.P7; a piece of brick blood stained lifted from the spot which is Ex.P3; six bricks joint together with cement lifted from the spot which is Ex.P2; blood sample which is Ex.P11; blood in gauze which is Ex.P12; earth control which is Ex.P13; blood in gauze which was lifted in between gali no. C147 and C194 which is Ex.P14; earth control sample which was lifted in between gali no. C147 and C194 which is Ex.P15; clothes of deceased and his shoes which are Ex.P5 and the Danda which is Ex.P1.
(77) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has deposed that the danda was measured by Investigating Officer but he is unable to tell as to how the danda was measured by the Investigating Officer. Witness has further deposed that Investigating Officer told him about the height of the danda to be 5 feet 9 inches but he had not St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 73 of 136 personally got measured the length of danda Ex.P1. He has also admitted that the danda was not measured in his presence by Investigating Officer. He does not remember if the marking of blood stains was carried out on danda at the spot and on which side there was blood stains on the danda. Witness has further deposed that the house of accused Vikas is a single storey having a single room on the roof. He is unable to tell the area of house of accused Vikas nor can he tell the distance of house of accused Vikas from place of incident. Witness has denied the suggestion that he never visited the house of accused or that no recovery was got effected from his house. Witness has denied the suggestion that no danda was recovered from house of accused. He has, however, admitted that the bamboo stick Ex.P1 is an item of common construction use and is also available in market. Witness has further admitted that when he reached the spot for the first time no eye witness was found present there. According to the witness, he did not make the inquiry from the person who made the PCR call as he did not meet him at the spot. The witness has testified that he tried to call the PCR net to find out the informant of PCR 100 number but mobile number of said person was not reachable. He has admitted that till the time the FIR was registered, they did not find any eye witness at the spot. According to the witness, he did not try to take the address of PCR 100 informant as he was in a hurry. Witness has also deposed that no PCR van was present at the spot when he reached for the first time at around 2.15 AM. Witness has admitted that SHO Police Station Adarsh St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 74 of 136 Nagar had reached within half an hour of his reaching at the spot and that he remained with the SHO at the spot till the time PCR van left the spot. He has also admitted that they did not call/ telephoned PCR van officials to know about the informant of PCR No.100 and his address. According to the witness, the SHO might have relayed back the information regarding the spot to the police control room after his coming on spot but he did not himself relay back the situation at the spot to PCR control room. Witness has denied the suggestion that he was taking a false plea of not relaying back the information as they had met the friend of injured Raju namely Krishan S/o. Ram Singh R/o. Jhuggi Lal Bagh who was not knowing about the incident.
(78) He has admitted that on the intervening night of 1314.11.2012 was a Diwali night and people were celebrating Diwali till late hours at night. According to the witness, none of the residents of adjoining houses came forward at the time when they reached at the spot. He has also admitted that none of them came out of their houses till the entire proceedings were conducted by them at the spot till registration of FIR. Witness has admitted that in the photograph Ex.PW10/A13, one person is seen wearing a sweater and some other one or two persons are seen who appear to be civilians. He is unable to tell the address of house situated in front of house where the murder was committed nor can he tell the name, address and physical description of persons from whom he made inquiry regarding the same and the name of person who at the spot regarding St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 75 of 136 shifting of one of injured to BJRM Hospital. He has stated that he did not personally made inquiry from PCR officials regarding the factum as to whether they had shifted any person from the spot to BJRM Hospital. Witness has admitted that he did not find any eye witness in the BJRM Hospital and came to know about the name of the injured as Raju. According to the witness he did not personally make any inquiry regarding the residence of injured Raju after coming back to spot and he did not make any inquiry regarding the whereabouts of deceased. He has also admitted that the rough site plan Ex.PW24/DA does not show/ depict the place of jagran and also admits that the injured Raju was resident of same vicinity where the incident took place. According to the witness, he did not make any investigation/ inquiry regarding the injured Raju as well as his friend after coming to the spot from BJRM Hospital. He has denied the suggestion that Krishan met them at the spot. He has denied the suggestion that after making inquiry from Krishan they came to know that it was a fight between Manish and Ajaj @ Raju. He has also denied that the statement of Ajaj @ Raju was recorded after 16.11.12 after due deliberation and consultation with senior officers. He has further denied the suggestion that Krishan alongwith injured Raju had murdered deceased and this is the reason Raju ran away from hospital or that Krishan alongwith Ajaj were falsely planted as a witness to solve present case. Witness has denied the suggestion that none of the residents of gali were made witness or their statement was recorded as they were not St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 76 of 136 supporting their false case and they have seen injured Ajaj as one of accused in the present case.
(79) Witness has admitted that the information received by him is regarding the presence of two injured were lying in front of Hans Cinema in an injured condition. He has also admitted that in the site plan Ex.PW24/DA no point is shown reflecting Hans Cinema. Witness has further deposed that Satender and Krishan Nepali met them at about 12.15/12.30 PM on 16.11.2012. He is unable to tell whether both of them were called there or they themselves were present at that time. Witness has admitted that he had mentioned in his statement that the Investigating Officer had called them to the spot. He has further deposed that the secret informer met them at about 1.00 PM. He does not remember if the secret information was conveyed to Police Station or to any senior officer. He has denied the suggestion that he was deliberately not answering about this fact as no information was ever received by them. He does not remember the distance from which the secret informer pointed out towards the accused persons. He has further stated that no public person or any traffic movement was there at the railway line when they reached there and all police officials were in police uniform. He is unable to tell as to which accused was apprehended by which of the police officials and does not remember whether the Investigating Officer had briefed them regarding their positions. He is also unable to tell the position of secret informer at the time of apprehension of accused persons and does not remember St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 77 of 136 whether the Investigating Officer had given any warning to accused persons or not. Witness has further deposed that they remained at railway line for about 1015 minutes and no public person came there during their stay at railway line. He does not remember by which mode of transportation the accused persons were brought to the Police Station and they returned back to Police Station at about 2.00 PM. According to the witness, no DD entry was made after their arrival at Police Station by the Investigating Officer showing apprehension of accused persons. Witness has further deposed that they again left Police Station at about 5.00 PM, but he does not recollect by which mode of transportation they reached the spot. He has testified that they reached at the house of accused Vikas within 1015 minutes. Witness has further deposed that accused Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit were apprehended at about 6.306.45 AM. He is unable to tell the distance from where the secret informer pointed out towards these above named accused persons. He has admitted that all accused persons were taken together to the place of incident. Witness has further deposed that they remained there for about 45 minutes and all the writing work was done while standing on the road at place of incident. Witness has denied the suggestion that he did not join investigation of this case or that accused persons were falsely implicated in this case after pressurizing the public witnesses or that the public witnesses were illegally detained at Police Station for 45 days. He has also denied the suggestion that accused persons had not pointed out the place of incident St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 78 of 136 or that the signatures of accused persons were obtained on blank papers which were later on converted into certain incriminating documents against all of them. Witness has also denied the suggestion that accused persons were lifted from their respective houses and falsely implicated in the present case or that accused persons did not make any disclosure statement or that the alleged disclosure statement was prepared by Investigating Officer of his own.
(80) PW25 Inspector Rakesh Chand has deposed that on 15.12.2012 he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and on that day the case file of the present case was handed over to him for investigations. According to the witness on 20.12.2012 he handed over the exhibits of the case to Ct. Vinod Kumar for depositing the same in the FSL for DNA fingerprinting examination. Witness has further deposed that on 29.12.2012 he collected the first attended school certificate of five accused namely Parvesh, Narad, Babloo, Vikas and Ranjan and came to know that they were major at the time of incident i.e. more than 18 years of age on which he filed the relevant documents in the court. He has also deposed that on 13.01.2013 he got the scaled site plan prepared from the draftsman at the instance of Ct. Krishan Kumar and thereafter he prepared the charge sheet and filed the same in the court.
(81) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has denied the suggestion that the case property was tampered before it was sent to FSL for examination. Witness has denied the suggestion that he St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 79 of 136 had prepared the charge sheet without application of mind in a routine manner.
(82) PW26 ASI Shashi has deposed that on 17.11.2012, he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and on that day he alongwith Inspector Rajesh Sinha were busy in the investigation of this case. According to the witness at about 9.30AM he alongwith Investigating Officer and other police staff and all eight accused persons reached at Lal Bagh patrol pump in various vehicles, where one witness namely Krishna @ Nepali met them who was joined in the investigation of this case. Witness has further deposed that all the accused persons were asked to get their clothes recovered and the accused Vikas took them at C18 Lal Bagh, Delhi and got recovered one T shirt of yellow colour and grey coloured pant which he was wearing at the time of incident. He has also deposed that the aforesaid clothes were having blood stains which clothes were converted into parcel and sealed with the seal of RS and the parcel was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/H. Witness has further deposed that all the remaining accused persons also took the police party to their respective houses and got recovered their clothes which they were wearing at the time of incident and the witness namely Krishna @ Nepali identified the clothes got recovered by the accused persons. He has testified that the aforesaid clothes were converted into separate parcels and duly sealed with the seal of RS. He has proved that the sealed parcels in respect of accused Nitesh was taken into possession vide memo St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 80 of 136 Ex.PW19/A, sealed parcels in respect of accused Narad was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/B, sealed parcels in respect of accused Rakesh was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/C, sealed parcels in respect of accused Babloo was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/D, sealed parcels in respect of accused Pravesh was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/E, sealed parcels in respect of accused Amit was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/F and the sealed parcels in respect of accused Ranjan was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW19/G after which the aforesaid parcels were taken to the Police Station and were deposited in the malkhana.
(83) The witness has identified the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh. He has also identified the case property i.e. one black coloured pant and black and blue checkdar shirt as the same as belonging to accused Ranjan, which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P16; one black coloured pant and brown T Shirt belonging to accused Amit which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P17; one white lining pant and white shirt as the same as belonging to accused Pravesh which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P18; one black trouser/ pant and white shirt belonging to accused Babloo which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P19; one black jeans pant and check shirt belonging to accused Rakesh which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P20; one camel colour pant and yellow T Shirt belonging to accused St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 81 of 136 Narad which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P21; one brown and grey pant and yellow T Shirt belonging to accused Vikas which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P4; one black jeans pant and black and white check shirt belonging to accused Nitesh which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P22.
(84) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, witness has deposed that he left the Police Station at about 9.00AM on 17.11.2012 and they used about five to six vehicles including his Santro car, however he is unable to tell about the make or registration number of other vehicles. Witness has further deposed that no departure entry was made by the Investigating Officer in his presence. According to the witness he was not aware as to how Krishna @ Nepali was present at the petrol pump and states that the Investigating Officer did not serve any notice to Krishna @ Nepali to join investigation, in his presence. Witness has further deposed that they reached at the house of accused Vikas at about 9.309.45AM where family members of accused Vikas were present however he is unable to tell about their relations with accused Vikas. According to the witness they remained at the house of accused Vikas for about 15 to 20 minutes and all the seizure memos of clothes were prepared on 17.11.2012. Witness has admitted that there is an overwriting on the date mentioned on seizure memos Ex.PW19/A to Ex.PW19/H. He has denied the suggestion that the seizure memos were prepared by the Investigating Officer of his own.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 82 of 136 (85) It has been observed by this Court that there is an overwriting on the date mentioned on memos Ex.PW19/A to Ex.PW19/B encircled X where '16' appears to have been converted into '17'.
(86) Witness has further deposed that first of all they went to the house of Vikas, however he is unable to tell the sequence of visiting the houses of individual accused persons. According to the witness, all the proceedings were completed till 1.00PM and thereafter they returned back to the Police Station. He is, however, unable to tell the time when they returned back to the Police Station. Witness has further deposed that no arrival entry was made by the Investigating Officer in his presence showing the alleged recoveries and no handing over memo of the seal was prepared by the Investigating Officer at the time of preparation of pullandas. According to the witness, Investigating Officer took the seal back from him in the evening at about 7.30PM after depositing the pullandas in the malkhana. He has denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigation of this case or that no clothes were recovered at the instance of accused persons or that the alleged recoveries were planted to falsely implicate the accused persons. Witness has further denied the suggestion that he did not visit the residences of accused persons at any point of time or that he had signed the memos later on, on the asking of the senior officers at Police Station. Witness has further denied the suggestion that all the writing work was done while sitting in the Police Station after obtaining the signatures of accused persons on blank papers. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 83 of 136 (87) PW27 SI Parveen has deposed that on 16.11.2012 he was posted at Police Station Adarsh Nagar and on that day he along with the Investigating Officer Inspector Rajesh were busy in the investigation of this case and on that day at about 12.00 Noon he alongwith Inspector Rajesh Sinha, SI Afaque Ahmed, ASI Shashi Kumar, Ct. Gurjeet, Ct. Jai Bhagwan reached at Lal Bagh patrol pump where Sikandar @ Satender and Krishna @ Nepali met them. According to the witness they were also joined in the investigation and they all started the search for accused persons. Witness has further deposed that at about 1.00PM secret informer came to them and informed them that the accused persons wanted in this case were moving near Shalimar Bagh Fly Over after which they all reached at the place pointed out by the secret informer and at the instance of the secret informer, four accused persons were overpowered. Witness has further deposed that the accused were interrogated and their names were known as Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad who were duly identified by Krishna @ Nepali and Satender. According to the witness, they were brought to the Police Station where they were interrogated and arrested in this case. He has proved that the accused Vikas @ Sonu was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K; accused Ranjan was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J1 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K1; accused Nitesh was arrested vide memo St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 84 of 136 Ex.PW19/J2 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K2; accused Narad was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J3 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K3. According to the witness, all the four accused persons made their disclosure statements. He has proved that the disclosure statement of accused Vikas was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C1; disclosure statement of accused Ranjan was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C2; disclosure statement of accused Nitesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C3 and disclosure statement of accused Narad was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C4. Witness has further deposed that the accused persons namely Nitesh, Ranjan and Narad were kept in the Police Station under the custody of police staff after which the accused Vikas took them to his house at C18 Lal Bagh Azadpur and got recovered one danda from the roof of the house. According to the witness Investigating Officer converted the aforesaid danda into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and the sealed pullanda was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW24/B. Witness has further deposed that the aforesaid parcel containing danda was brought to the Police Station and got the same deposited with the MHC(M).
(88) The witness has testified that on the same day the secret informer had come to the Police Station and informed that the remaining four accused persons who are wanted in this case, were moving near Kaushalpur Railway Phatak. According to the witness, he alongwith SI St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 85 of 136 Afaque, ASI Shashi, Ct. Gurjeet, Ct.Jai Bhagwan, Inspector Rajesh and the secret informer left the Police Station and reached near railway crossing Kaushal Puri where the secret informer pointed out towards the remaining four accused persons who were overpowered and interrogated and their names were known as Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit after which they were also brought to the Police Station and thoroughly interrogated and arrested in this case. He has proved that the accused Rakesh Kumar was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J4 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K4; accused Babloo was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J5 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K5; accused Parvesh was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J6 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K6; accused Amit was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J7 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K7. He has also proved that the disclosure statements of the accused were also recorded and the disclosure statement of accused Rakesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D1; disclosure statement of accused Babloo was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D2; disclosure statement of accused Parvesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D3 and the disclosure statement of accused Amit was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D4.
(89) Witness has further deposed that all the accused persons namely Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh, Narad Kumar, Rakesh, Babloo, St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 86 of 136 Parvesh and Amit had pointed out the place of incident and Investigating Officer prepared the memos of pointing out of each accused vide Ex.PW24/E1 to Ex.PW24/E8 after which all the accused persons were taken to BJRM Hospital where their medical examination was got done and his statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. (90) The witness has correctly identified all the accused i.e. Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh, Narad Kumar, Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit in the Court. He has also identified the case property i.e. the danda got recovered by accused Vikas which danda is Ex.P1.
(91) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsels, witness has deposed that they left the Police Station at about 12.00 Noon in private vehicles but he is unable to tell the make or the registration number of the said vehicles. He has explained that out of the private vehicles one belonged to Inspector Rajesh Sinha but he is unable to tell about the ownership of the other vehicles. According to the witness, Investigating Officer did not make any departure entry in his presence and Investigating Officer did not give any notice to the public witness to join investigation in his presence. He is not aware if the Investigating Officer had conveyed the secret information to senior officers or to Police Station Adarsh Nagar and states that Investigating Officer did not brief them regarding their positions at the spot. Witness has further deposed that the Investigating Officer did not ask any public persons to join investigation in his presence nor any public person was present at the spot where accused persons were St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 87 of 136 apprehended. He is unable to tell as to which accused person was apprehended by which police officials and states that the disclosure statements of accused persons were recorded at Police Station at about 2.45PM in continuation. Witness has further deposed that there was only one raiding party for making the arrest and has voluntarily explained that it worked twice. Witness has further deposed that they returned back to the Police Station at about 2.00PM after apprehending the first four accused persons. He is not aware if any arrival entry showing the apprehension of accused persons was made by the Investigating Officer or not and it took about three hours in making arrest and making the disclosure statement of first four accused persons.
(92) Witness has further deposed that the secret informer came in the Police Station at about 6.006.30PM regarding the remaining four accused persons. He has testified that they left the Police Station immediately after receiving the secret information regarding the remaining four accused persons but no separate DD entry was made regarding their departure from the Police Station regarding the remaining four accused persons and they used the same vehicles on the subsequent occasion and the same persons were in the raiding party. He does not remember as to in which vehicle the secret informer sat and as to in which vehicle he was sitting while reaching to the spot of arrest of remaining four accused persons. Witness has admitted that no public persons except the secret informer was present with them. He has further deposed that St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 88 of 136 the accused persons were identified by the secret informer and they remained at the spot for about one hour and they came to the Police Station alongwith the remaining four accused persons at about 7.15PM. The witness has testified that the Investigating Officer and the other police officials remained busy in the proceedings of arrest and recording their statement till 10.00PM and the danda Ex.P1 was got recovered at about 5.30PM. Witness has further deposed that there was no separate DD recorded for purposes of going to the house of accused Vikas for effecting recovery of danda. Witness has further deposed that other family members were also present there at that time but he is not aware their names and details. According to the witness he was aware that the size of danda as 5.9 feet is mentioned in the seizure memo Ex.PW24/B. He has further deposed that the danda Ex.P1 was not measured in his presence by the Investigating Officer. Witness has admitted that such like dandas are easily available in the market. He has also deposed that no specific mark of identification was made on the recovered danda by the Investigating Officer. He has denied the suggestion that no danda was recovered from the residence of accused Vikas or that the alleged recovery of danda was shown only to falsely implicated him in the present case. He has also denied the various suggestions put to the witness by the Ld. Defence Counsels.
(93) PW28 Inspector Rajesh Sinha is the Investigating Officer of the present case who has deposed that on the intervening night of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 89 of 136 1314.11.2012 he reached at the spot of incident i.e. Gali no.3, near Ayurved Aushadhalaya, Lal Bagh, Delhi where SI Afaque, ASI Om Pal, Ct. Satish, Ct. Kishan met him. Witness has further deposed that he found a dead body lying at the place of incident and SI Afaque prepared the rukka Ex.PW24/B and send the same to the Police Station through Ct. Satish. According to the witness, the Crime Team was already present there and he recorded the statement of Crime Team officials. Witness has further deposed that the body was inspected and Rs.440/, one mobile phone of NOKIA were recovered from the personal search of the body after which the aforesaid belongings were converted into parcel and sealed with the seal of RS and the sealed parcel was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/A. Witness has further deposed that he send the dead body to the mortuary of BJRM Hospital for getting the same preserved and on inspection of the the spot of incident he found three buttons of black colour pertaining to the shirt of the deceased, one locket having the design of OM, one old blood stained brick having cement on one side and the same was of pink coloured on the other side. He has also deposed that he also lifted the blood sample with the help of cotton which he kept in a plastic jar and sealed the aforesaid articles in the plastic jar, blood stained earth and also lifted the earth control after breaking the floor with the help of hammer and chisel (Chhaini). He has proved that the aforesaid articles were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS after giving them the S. No. 1 to 6 and were taken into possession vide memo St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 90 of 136 Ex.PW23/B. Witness has further deposed that he also lifted the blood from the street in between house No. C147 and C194 and kept the same in a plastic jar. He has proved having lifted the sample of earth control and kept the same in a plastic jar and also lifted six bricks which were blood stained having the mark of SKB after which the aforesaid objects were also converted into separate parcels and he took the same into possession vide memo Ex.PW23/D. Witness has further deposed that he also lifted fifty playing cards which were found scattered between the shop of Harish and dispensary of Ruchi near the dead body and he converted the said cards into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and took the same in possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW23/C. According to the witness in the meantime Ct. Satish brought the copy of FIR and original rukka to the spot which he handed over to him. He has also deposed that at about 7.00AM one Aijaz @ Raju Kana came to the spot and disclosed that at about 1.00AM or 1.30AM on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2012 the incident had taken place with him and deceased Manish. Witness has further deposed that he sent Aijaz @ Raju Kana to the BJRM Hospital through Ct. Kishan. He has testified that Aijaz @ Raju Kana came to the spot at about 10.00 AM and he prepared the site plan at the instance of Aijaz vide Ex.PW24/D and recorded statement of Aijaz @ Raju Kana and relieved him. Witness has also deposed that thereafter one Hardesh came to the spot and had also given his statement after which they came to the Police Station and deposited the case property in the malkhana. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 91 of 136 (94) Witness has further deposed that at about 2.00PM he along with SI Afaque, Ct. Kishan and other police officials left for the mortuary of the BJRM Hospital. He has testified that he recorded the statement of Ms. Madhu Gupta vide Ex.PW14/A and Mahender @ Sunny vide Ex.PW15/A. He has proved having prepared the request for getting the autopsy on the body of deceased vide Ex.PW28/A and having prepared the brief facts vide Ex.PW28/B and the death report vide Ex.PW28/C. He has also deposed that the postmortem on the body of deceased Manish @ Sonu was got conducted vide Postmortem Report Ex.PW13/A after which the body was handed over to the relatives of the deceased and he left Ct. Vijender in the hospital and they came back to the Police Station. According to the witness, he recorded the statements of the police officials under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Ct. Vijender had come from the hospital along with the exhibits of the deceased Manish @ Sonu containing one viscera, one pullanda containing clothes and shoes of the deceased and the blood sample of the deceased all duly sealed with the seal of FMT,BJRM Hospital Delhi along with the sample seal. He has further deposed that he took the parcels into possession vide memo Ex.PW28/D and the said exhibits were deposited with the MHC(M). According to the witness efforts were made to trace the accused persons but they could not be traced till then. The witness has further deposed that on the same day i.e. on 14.11.2012 he along with the aforesaid police officials reached in the area of Lal Bagh, near Petrol Pump. Witness has further deposed that St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 92 of 136 firstly they had gone to the house of Satender @ Sitender and he recorded his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. after which they went to the house of Krishna @ Nepali who met them and he recorded his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C and thereafter they came back to the Police Station. (95) Witness has further deposed that on 16.11.2012 he alongwith SI Afaque, PSI Praveen and some constables left the Police Station for the search of accused persons and reached at Patrol Pump Lal Bagh where Satender and Krishna @ Nepali met them and they were joined in the investigation of this case. According to the witness, they all started in the search of accused persons and at about 1:00 PM, secret informer came to them and informed them that the accused persons wanted in this car were moving near Shalimar Bagh Fly Over. Witness has further deposed that they all reached at the place pointed out by the secret informer and at the instance of the secret informer, four accused persons were overpowered who were interrogated and their names were known as Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad who were duly identified by Krishna @ Nepali and Satender and they were brought to the Police Station where they were interrogated and arrested in this case. He has proved that the accused Vikas @ Sonu was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K; accused Ranjan was arrested vide memo Ex.PW19/J1 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K1; accused Nitesh was arrested in this case vide memo St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 93 of 136 Ex.PW19/J2 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K2; accused Narad was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J3 and was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW19/K3. He has further stated that all the four accused persons made their disclosure statements, the disclosure statement of accused Vikas was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C1; disclosure statement of accused Ranjan was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C2; disclosure statement of accused Nitesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C3 and disclosure statement of accused Narad was recorded vide Ex.PW24/C4. He has also deposed that the accused persons namely Nitesh, Ranjan and Narad were kept in the Police Station under the custody of police staff after which the accused Vikas took them to his house at C18 Lal Bagh Azadpur and got recovered one danda from the roof of the house. According to the witness, he converted the aforesaid danda into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and the sealed pullanda was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW24/B and the aforesaid parcel containing danda was brought to the Police Station and got the same deposited with the MHC(M).
(96) He has testified that on the same day the secret informer had come to the Police Station and informed that the remaining four accused persons who are wanted in this case, were moving near Kaushalpur railway Phatak on which he alongwith SI Afaque, ASI Shashi, Ct. Gurjeet, Ct.Jai Bhagwan, SI Praveen and the secret informer left the Police Station St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 94 of 136 and reached near railway crossing Kaushal Puri where the secret informer pointed out towards the remaining four accused persons. According to the witness the said persons were overpowered and interrogated and their names were known as Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit and they were also brought to the Police Station and thoroughly interrogated and arrested in this case. Witness has proved that the accused Rakesh Kumar was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J4 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K4; accused Babloo was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J5 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K5; accused Parvesh was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J6 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K6; accused Amit was arrested in this case vide memo Ex.PW19/J7 and was personally search vide memo Ex.PW19/K7. He has testified that the separate disclosure statements of the accused were recorded, disclosure statement of accused Rakesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D1; disclosure statement of accused Babloo was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D2; disclosure statement of accused Parvesh was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D3 and the disclosure statement of accused Amit was recorded vide Ex.PW24/D4. He has further deposed that all the accused persons namely Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh, Narad Kumar, Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit had pointed out the place of incident on which he prepared the memos of pointing out of each accused vide Ex.PW24/E1 to Ex.PW24/E8. The St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 95 of 136 witness has also deposed that thereafter the accused persons were taken to BJRM Hospital where their medical examination was got done and he recorded the statement of Sitender and Krishan @ Nepali U/s 161 Cr.P. C. after which the accused persons were sent to the lock up. (97) Witness has further deposed that on 17.11.2012 he along with ASI Shashi, Ct. Sarjeet and other staff were busy in the investigation of this case and at about 9.00AM he along with the aforesaid staff and all eight accused persons reached in front of Dispensary Wali Gali near Lal Bagh patrol pump in many vehicles, where one witness namely Krishna @ Nepali met them who was joined in the investigation of this case. According to the witness, all the accused persons were asked to get their clothes recovered after which all the accused persons took them to their respective houses and first of all they reached at the house of Vikas at C18 Lal Bagh, Azadpur where accused Vikas got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident. Witness has further deposed that the aforesaid clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/H. He has testified that they reached at the house of Narad at C141, Lal Bagh, Azadpur where accused Narad got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident after which the aforesaid clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/B. He has also deposed that the accused Rakesh took them to his house at B292 St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 96 of 136 Lal Bagh, Azadpur where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident after which the aforesaid clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/C. He has testified that accused Babloo took them to his house at B282 Lal Bagh, Azadpur where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident which clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/D. According to him, accused Parvesh took them to his house at C73 Lal Bagh, Azadpur where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident which clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/E. Witness has further deposed that the accused Amit took them to his house at C249, Lal Bagh, Azadpur from where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident which clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/F. He has further testified that the accused Ranjan took them to his house at D143 Lal Bagh, Azadpur where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident and the aforesaid clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/G. Witness has also deposed that the accused Nitesh took them to his house at B310, Lal St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 97 of 136 Bagh, Azadpur where he got recovered his blood stained clothes worn by him at the time of incident which clothes were converted into parcel and sealed the same with the seal of RS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW19/A. According to the witness, the accused persons were produced before the Ld. MM and thereafter he collected the MLC of Aijaz @ Raju from Ct. Kishan.
(98) He has also deposed that on 11.12.2012 he moved a request before the doctor at mortuary at BJRM Hospital for getting the subsequent opinion regarding weapon of offence vide his application Ex.PW28/E. According to the witness Dr. Bhim Singh had given his detailed report Ex.PW13/B and he recorded the statements of all the concerned witnesses under Section Cr.P.C.
(99) He has correctly identified the accused Vikas @ Sonu, Ranjan, Nitesh, Narad Kumar, Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit in the Court. He has also identified the case property i.e. a wooden danda got recovered by the accused Vikas which danda is Ex.P1; one brick having dark stains which is Ex.P3; three buttons of black colour of the shirt which are collectively Ex.P6; one locket lifted from near the body of the deceased which locket is collectively Ex.P7; Rs.440/ and one mobile phone of NOKIA lifted from near the body of the deceased which currency notes are Ex.P8 and the mobile phone is Ex.P9; fifty playing cards as the same lifted from near the body of the deceased which playing cards are St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 98 of 136 Ex.P10; one transparent plastic container (dibbi) which is having a piece of gauze cloth which is Ex.P14; a piece of gauze cloth as the same taken by him from in front of H.No. C147 and C194 Lal Bagh which is Ex.P12; six bricks joined together taken by him from the street in front of H.No. C147 and C194 Lal Bagh which is Ex.P2; one transparent plastic container (dibbi) having a small broken floor material piece which is Ex.P13; one black coloured pant and black and blue check shirt belonging to accused Ranjan which pants and shirt are collectively Ex.P16; one black coloured pant and brown T Shirt belonging to accused Amit which pants and the shirt are collectively Ex.P17; one white lining pant and white shirt belonging to accused Pravesh which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P18; one black trouser/ pant and white shirt belonging to accused Babloo which pants and the shirt are collectively Ex.P19; one black jeans pant and check shirt belonging to accused Rakesh which pants and the shirt are collectively Ex.P20; one camel colour pant and yellow T Shirt belonging to accused Narad which pant and the shirt are collectively Ex.P21; one brown and grey pant and yellow T Shirt belonging to accused Vikas which pants and the shirt are collectively Ex.P4 and one black jeans pant and black and white check shirt as the same as belonging to accused Nitesh which pants and the shirt are collectively Ex.P22. (100) In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsel, witness has deposed that he himself went to the Ayuverdic Aushdhalya and checked if St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 99 of 136 there is any staff were available to join the investigations but none was present. According to the witness, he requested the owner of house bearing No. C147 and C194 to join the investigations but they refused the same for their personal reason but he does not remember the names and addresses of those persons and he did not take any legal action against those persons. Witness has admitted that he did not obtain the DNA report of the said blood samples which he lifted from the spot. He has further deposed that the shop of Sh. Harish was closed, therefore he did not take any step to join the owner of the said shop in the investigations as he is not aware the address of the said owner of the shop and his answer is the same in respect of owner of Ruchi clinic. The witness has also admitted that spot of occurrence is densely populated area. He does not remember how many persons he requested to join the investigations in the present case and also does not remember the particulars of the same and state that he did not take any action against those persons. Witness has denied the suggestion that he never visited the spot at any point of time or that he did not record the statement of Aizaz @ Raju Kana. He has also denied the suggestion that on 14.11.2012 he did not visit the house of Satender @ Sitender or that he did not prepare the arrest memo of accused and other memos. He has admitted that he did not request the owner of C18, Lal Bagh, Azadpur to join the investigations at the time of seizing one danda because the owner of the said house was not present or available at that time but he requested a few passerby to join the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 100 of 136 investigations but they refused the same on their personal grounds. He has claimed that he did not give them any legal notice. Witness has also deposed that he went to Kaushal Pur railway Phatak on 16.11.2012 and did not make any separate DD entry in this regard. According to him, Kaushalpur railway phathak is a lonely place therefore there was no question in joining anyone in the investigations. He has also deposed that he made a DD entry in respect of his departure to Lal Bagh petrol pump on 17.11.2012 but he does not remember the number of the same and also does not remember the names and particulars of the petrol pump. He has testified that he also did not request the owner of the petrol pump at Lal Bagh to join the investigations in the present case. Witness has denied the suggestion that the clothes were not recovered at the instance of the accused persons. He does not remember the exact time when he reached C73, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, the house of Parvesh and also does not remember the name and particulars of the nearby residents. He also does not remember the name and address of the family members of Parvesh. Witness has denied the suggestion that nothing was recovered at the instance of accused Parvesh or that he planted the blood stained clothes upon the accused Parvesh.
(101) The witness has admitted that DD No. 6B is regarding the lying of two boys in unconsciousness state at petrol pump wali gali in front of Hans Cinema. Witness has further deposed that he had shown the petrol pump in the site plan and he had not shown the Hans Cinema in the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 101 of 136 site plan prepared by him. According to the witness, he did not make inquiry from Vijay Singh who was the informant of PCR and has voluntarily explained that PCR call was made by Krishna Nepali. Witness has further deposed that he did not collect the call details of phone used by Krishna Nepali and had collected the PCR Form. He has admitted that in the PCR form it is mentioned that friend of injured namely Krishan S/o Ram Singh was also accompanying the injured who told them that he did not know anything about the incident. According to the witness, he did not make any inquiry from Krishan S/o Ram Singh. He has also admitted that one of the injured Raju had absconded from the hospital. He has testified that he had recorded the statement of public witnesses namely Hardesh, Krishna Nepali and Satender regarding Jagran which was going on at the place of incident. He has also deposed that he did not make any inquiry as to who organized the Jagran at the place of incident. He has further admitted that he had not shown the place where Jagran was going on at the time of incident in the rough site plan. He does not remember as to disclosure statements of which accused was recorded by him and also does not remember whether any of the accused persons had disclosed about the blood stains which came on their clothes at the time of alleged incident. He has denied the suggestion that he had fabricated evidence by smearing the blood of the deceased on the clothes of the accused Ranjan, Amit, Babloo, Narad, Rakesh, Nitesh, Parvesh and Vikas @ Sonu only to connect them with the case and to work out the same or that signatures of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 102 of 136 accused persons were obtained on blank papers forcibly which documents were later converted into various memos against the accused persons to incriminate the accused. Witness has admitted that deceased Manish is involved in a large number of criminal cases. He has however denied the suggestion that public witnesses namely Satender, Krishna @ Nepali, Raju @ Kanha of the present case were detained in the Police Station who were compelled to depose falsely against the accused persons. He has also denied the suggestion that the said public witnesses were also beaten up on their refusal or that he deliberately kept Vijay Singh and Krishan S/o Ram Singh away from the investigations as they would have exposed the false evidence created by him as they were not supporting the version put forth by him.
(102) Witness has further deposed that he reached at the spot for the investigations of the present case at around 4:15 AM on 14.11.2012 and none of the persons from the public were present at the spot when he reached at the spot at 4:15 AM. According to the witness he throughly investigated and tried to inquire about the any clue or eye witness in the present case and the distance between the Shutter Wali Shops and C147194 is approximately 1012 minutes. Witness has further deposed that he made inquiries from the occupants of C147 and C194 regarding the incident and he did not mention this fact regarding the inquiries made from the occupants of C147 and C194. Witness has also denied the suggestion that he did not make any inquiry from the occupants of C147 St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 103 of 136 and C194 and this is the reason he have not mentioned this fact any where including the case diaries. He has also deposed that when he first reached the spot he did not find any eye witness in the street i.e. dispensary wali gali and the street/ gali in which C147 and C194 are situated and he did not make any inquiry regarding the factum as to who was organizing the Jagran. Witness has further deposed that he had sent the dead body for preservation in BJRM hospital at around 5 AM on 14.11.2012 and submitted the inquest papers in the BJRM hospital at around 2:303PM on 14.11.2012. Witness has admitted that at 7:30 AM in the morning of 14.11.2012 injured eye witness Raju met him and he narrated the incident as well as the names of the assailants. According to the witness, he has not mentioned the names of the assailants as well as the manner in which deceased received the injury in the brief facts Ex.PW28/B. He has denied the suggestion that Raju was planted as a false witness in the present case after 14.11.2012 and this is the reason that the factum and manner in which deceased received the injury is not mentioned in the brief facts Ex.PW28/B. Witness has further deposed that he did not make any inquiry or investigations from Vijay Singh who was the informant to PCR 100 number call. He has also admitted that the SHO Police Station Adarsh Nagar, reached the spot at 2:56 AM, one hour prior to his reaching at the spot and this fact is also reflecting in the PCR form and has voluntarily explained that SHO was already present at the spot when he reached there. He has also denied the suggestion that he was present at the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 104 of 136 spot with the SHO around 2:30 AM or that he was gaining the time as no eye witness could be found at the spot. He has admitted that the allegedly recovered danda is available in homes situated at JJ Clusters. The witness has denied the various suggestions put by the Ld. Defence Counsels to him.
STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED/ DEFENCE EVIDENCE:
(103) After completion of prosecution evidence the statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein all the incriminating material was put to them which they have denied. All of the accused have stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated by the Investigating Officer. They have denied having made any disclosure statement to the Investigating Officer.
FINDINGS:
(104) I have heard the arguments advanced before me by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State and the Ld. Defence Counsels. I have also gone through the written memorandum of arguments filed by the parties and the material on record. My findings are as under:
Medical Evidence:
(105) The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Manish @ Sonu had been killed by giving him repeated brick and danda blows on his head in the incident which took place and the witness Ajaj @ Raju @ St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 105 of 136 Kana had also been given brick and danda blows on his head. According to the prosecution, an information had been received that two boys were lying unconscious and when the police reached the spot they found one person lying there with injuries on his head and when they took the injured to the hospital he was declared brought dead whereas the other injured had been shifted to BJRM hospital by the PCR. However, when the local police reached BJRM hospital they came to know that injured Raju was brought to the PCR at around 2:00 AM but he absconded the hospital without treatment. Again in the morning the police was able to trace out the injured Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana after which his MLC was conducted and he was provided treatment by the doctors and his injures were opined to be simple in nature. In this regard the prosecution has placed its reliance on the testimonies of Dr. Bhim Singh (PW13) and Dr. R.S. Mishra (PW19) and the reports proved by them.
(106) Coming first to the testimony of Dr. Bhim Singh (PW13) who has proved that on 14.11.2012 at about 3:00 PM, he conducted postmortem on the dead body of Manish @ Sonu, S/o Tilak Raj vide postmortem report which is Ex.PW13/A. He has proved that he found following external injuries.
1. Lacerated wound 4cm x 1.5cm x bone deep middle of forehead.
2. Lacerated wound 3cm x 1cm x 1cm over left eye brow.
3. Lacerated wound 3cm x 1cm x bone deep over right St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 106 of 136 occipital region of head.
(107) He has further proved that the cause of death was due to head injury consequent upon injury no. 1, 2 and 3 which were ante mortem, fresh and could be caused by hard blunt object and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and time since death was about 12 to 14 hours.
(108) Dr. Bhim Singh has also proved that on 11.12.2012 he received an application from Inspector Rajesh Sinha of Police Station Adarsh Nagar with copy of Postmortem Report, MLC and three sealed pullandas with the seal of RS for subsequent opinion. He has proved that on opening the pullanda no.1 one brick having cemented portion on one side and blood stains on one side measuring 9" and 4.5" in size was taken out; on opening the pullanda no.2 six bricks joined with cement and having blood stains were taken out and on opening the pullanda no.3 one old bamboo stick having one end square shape measuring 5 feet and 6½ inches in length and diameter was approximately 7 inch and 6½ inches respectively having blood stains on one end having 7 knots, was taken out. He has proved that after examining the above said articles he opined that the injuries no.1 to 3 mentioned in the Postmortem Report No.1147/12 and MLC No. E131539 could be possible by exhibit No.1 i.e. brick and exhibit no.3 i.e. bamboo stick, which subsequent opinion is Ex.PW13/B. (109) The Medical Evidence establishes that the cause of death of Manish @ Sonu was due to head injury consequent upon injury no. 1, 2 St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 107 of 136 and 3 which were ante mortem, fresh and could be caused by hard blunt object and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. (110) Coming next to the testimony of Dr. R.S. Mishra (PW19) who had examined the other injured Raju @ Kana who account to the prosecution is an eye witness to the incident. Dr. R.S. Mishra has proved that on 14.11.2012 at 2:00 AM patient Raju S/o unknown, aged about 25 years, male was brought to BJRM Hospital by PCR Officials for medical examination, however, the patient Raju absconded from the casualty without medical examination, thumb impression and treatment. He has also proved that this patient was not available for MLC till 6:25 AM and thereafter Dr. Manoranjan prepared the MLC under his supervision which MLC is Ex.PW18A/A. He has further proved that on 14.11.2012 at about 8:15 AM this patient Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana S/o Ali Hassan, aged 25 years, male was brought by Ct. Krishan for medical examination with a history of physical assault and the patient was examined by Dr. Manoranjan under his supervision. He has also proved that on local examination a CLW of size 3 x 0.5 cm was present on the right parital region and one CLW of 1 x 0.5 cm was present on forehead, which MLC is Ex.PW18A/B. He has further proved that he opined the nature of injuries as Simple vide his endorsement on the MLC at Point X. In his crossexamination Dr. R.S. Mishra has explained that the above injuries on the body of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana could be St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 108 of 136 possible due to sudden fall on a hard surface. This witness has also established that at the time when the injured Ajaj @ Raju was examined in the morning at about 8:15 AM he was still under the influence of alcohol. The nature of the injuries and the place where the injures were caused i.e. forehead are possible on account of sudden fall.
(111) Here, I may observe that this above version of the Medical Expert is coming into conflict with the testimony of the injured Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana. When this witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana was examined in the Court he took a stand that he did not see the assailant. While on the one hand Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was in an inebriated state at the time of the incident claimed that he was hit on the forehead with a danda which could only have been possible when the person who hit him with a danda was in front of him and under the given circumstances he would have seen the said assailant, whereas on the other hand the doctors claimed that the said injury was equally possible on account of a fall. In case of a fall, which is possible since the witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana being in a state of intoxication, he could not have seen the persons around him and the happenings around him being hit on his forehead with a danda from the front side. It is this which creates a dent in his version. I may also note that according to Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana in his testimony in the court, he was unconscious and remained unconscious for two days and it was only thereafter that his statement was recorded. This again is not believable since the medical evidence confirms that Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana was St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 109 of 136 conscious when he was brought to the hospital by the PCR as his name was already known to the PCR officials when he was admitted in the hospital and thereafter the doctors have proved that he absconded from the hospital and was not available. It was only at 8:15 AM that he was again brought to BJRM Hospital when still he was under the influence of alcohol and as reflected from the MLC was conscious when medically examined and not unconscious as claimed by him in the court. The oral version so given by Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana (PW16) is non credible and he is not a credible witness whose testimony requires independent corroboration and I say this in view of the above contradiction of the oral testimony of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana and the medical evidence on record. I thus hold that the prosecution has not been able to prove that the injuries on the person of Raju @ Kana was caused by a danda blow on the head and rather version that he had received the said injuries by a sudden fall on a hard surface is equally and appears to be more probable. Forensic Evidence:
(112) The case of the prosecution that after the incident the various exhibits were lifted from the spot which were thereafter sent to FSL Rohini for expert opinion. Sh. D. S. Paliwal (PW17) has proved that on 20.12.2012 sealed parcels were received in the FSL Rohini. He has also proved that on examination of the said exhibits Blood was detected on exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10. He has also proved that the source of exhibits St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 110 of 136 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10 were subjected to DNA isolation and DNA was isolated from the source of exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10 and DNA Profiles were generated by using AmpF1 STR Identifier PCR Amplification Kit and STR analysis was used for each of the sample and data was analysed by using Gene Mapper IDX Software. He has also proved that after examining he opined that the alleles from the source of exhibit 9 (blood sample of the deceased Manish @ Sonu) were accounted in the alleles from the source of exhibit 1 (blood stained earth taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 3 (blood sample in gauze taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 4 (brick), exhibit 5 (blood sample in gauze taken from the street in front of House No. C147 and C194, Lal Bagh) and exhibit 10 (wooden danda). He has proved that the DNA profiling (STR analysis) performed on the exhibits was sufficient to conclude that DNA profile generated from the biological stains i.e. blood stains present on the source of exhibit 1 (blood stained earth taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 3 (blood sample in gauze taken from the place of occurrence), exhibit 4 (brick), exhibit 5 (blood sample in gauze taken from the street in front of House No. C147 and C194, Lal Bagh) and exhibit 10 (wooden danda) is similar with DNA profile from the source of exhibit 9 (blood sample of the deceased Manish @ Sonu) and has proved his detail report in this regard which is Ex.PW17/A (running into four pages) along with the Annexure1A and Annexure 1B (i.e. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 111 of 136 Genotype Data of exhibits 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 & 10).
(113) The above forensic evidence establishes the spot of incident and also establishes that the wooden danda Ex.P1 was having the blood stains of the deceased Manish @ Sonu.
Ocular Evidence/ Allegations against the accused:
(114) Ocular evidence/eye witness count is the best evidence in any case but it is settled law that the testimonies of the eye witnesses are required to be carefully analyzed to test the reliability, credibility and truthfulness of the witness. The eye witness account requires a careful independent assessment and evaluation for its credibility, it should not be adversely prejudged on the basis of other evidence. The ocular evidence has to be tested for its inherent consistency and inherent probability of the story, consistency of the account given by one witness with that given by the other witness held to be creditworthy, consistency with the undisputed facts, the 'credit' of the witnesses who performed in the witnessbox, their power of observation and it is only then that the probative value of such evidence becomes eligible to be put into the scales for a cumulative evaluation.
(115) Applying the settled principles of law to the facts of the present case it is evident that the prosecution is placing its reliance on the testimonies of the witnesses Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana (PW16), Hardesh (PW18), Krishna @ Nepali (PW19) and Satender @ Sikandar (PW20) St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 112 of 136 who are reported to be eye witnesses of the incident. I now proceed to analyze the testimonies of these witnesses individually. Coming first to the testimony of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana (PW16) the relevant portion of his testimony is reproduced as under:
"......... I used to work as a sweeper and labour. On the day of Deepawali in the last year at about 11:00 Pm12:00 midnight, I alongwith Krishna @ Nepali, Hardesa and Satender were eating and drinking in the dhaba behind the petrol pump at Mozawala Bagh. At about 12:00 midnight 1:00 AM, Sonu also came to me and he was having 4 quarter bottles liquor with him and he told me that to celebrate Diwali as I had met him long time and thereafter we also consume the 4 quarter bottles. Thereafter alongwith the above said Krishna @ Nepali, Hardesa , Satender and Manish @ Sonu we proceeded behind the Lalbagh and we found that gambling by playing cards was going on the chabootra and the 5 persons were playing cards. I knew them by their faces but I do not know their names. Manish @ Sonu also sat with the abovesaid persons for gambling. The above said 5 persons were winning the money in the gambling by cheating from Manish. Thereafter a verbal quarrel took place between the abovesaid 5 persons and Manish. The abovesaid 5 persons also call their 3 associates from the nearby mandir. I know them also by their faces but do not know their names. Thereafter the abovesaid 8 persons started beating me and Manish. Satender, Krishna @ Nepali and Hardesh were seeing the incident after concealing themselves at a distance. Rakesh and Sonu were in the above said assailants. The abovesaid St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 113 of 136 assailants gave beating to me by danda on my body and on my head and also gave the stone blows to me on my head. I become unconscious due to beatings. The abovesaid 8 assailants also gave beatings to Manish @ Sonu by danda and stones but I do not know who caused injuries to him. Thereafter I regained my consciousness after 1 or 2 days in the hospital. After 1 or 2 days of the incident, I was taken to the PS and my statement was recorded by the police. Manish @ Sonu was expired due to injuries. I can identify the abovesaid 8 assailants who caused injuries to me and Manish @ Sonu, if shown to me.
At this stage, witness pointed out towards 8 accused persons present in the Court and pointed out towards accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, vikas and Praveen as the assailants who gave beating to him and deceased Manish @ Sonu.
At this stage, Ld. APP seeks permission to put leading question to the witness as he is not deposing complete facts and name of the assailants.
Heard. Allowed.
It is correct that I have shown the place of incident to the police. It is correct that I alongwith Satender, Krishna and Hardesh were present in the petrol pump wali gali, Lal Bagh where Manish @ Sonu met. It is also correct that we consumed liquor near the dhaba of Gopal. It is also correct that about 01:00 AM we reached at the dispensary wali gali. It is also correct that the abovesaid 5 assailants were gambling with playing cards in front of the iron cloth shop (press karne wala) near the gate of dispensary. It is wrong to suggest that Rakesh, Parvesh, Vikas @ Sonu, Amit St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 114 of 136 and Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) were gambling with playing cards there. It is correct that I know these persons before the day of incident. It is correct that I alongwith Hardes, Satender and Krishan started watching them gambling with playing cards. It is correct that Manish @ Sonu lost the money in the gamble and thereafter he started abusing to them and started quarreling with them. Vol. The abovesaid persons were cheating with him. It is correct to suggest that Manish @ Sonu told to abovesaid persons that they committed cheating with him. It is wrong to suggest that Manish caught hold the collor of accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) and tried to snatch his money. It is incorrect to suggest that Manish @ Sonu slapped the accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP). It is correct that thereafter accused persons became aggressive and they were saying that "aaj hum teri dadagiri khatam kar denge". It is wrong to suggest that thereafter due to shoutings of quarrel other three accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad also came at the spot from Mata ki Chowki. It is also correct that all the 8 assailants were saying that 'teri dadagiri khatam kar denge". It is wrong to suggest that thereafter Manish @ Sonu caught hold accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) by his collar and he started slapping him and then all the accused assailants gave beating to Manish @ Sonu. It is wrong to suggest that Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) was the one who caught Manish by his neck to save accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) and Nitesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) came from behind and struck with Manish and thereafter Manish fell down on the ground.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 115 of 136 It is also correct that all the accused persons thereafter gave beatings to Manish @ Sonu by leg and fist blows. It is wrong to suggest that accused Rakesh (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) caught hold Manish from the left side of his hand and Nitesh(accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) caught hold him from the right side of his hand and Amit, Narad and Vikas (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) caught hold him by his legs and meanwhile accused Ranjan (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) lifted one brick from there and give brick blows on the head of Manish. It is also wrong to suggest that accused Parvez (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) was saying loudly that "aj saale ko khatam kar do" and thereafter Babloo (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) also gave same brick blows on the head of Manish @ Sonu and blood was oozing out from his head. It is wrong to suggest that accused Parvez (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) after seeing towards me said "aaj kaane ko bhi khatm kar do". It is correct that after hearing this I ran from there and accused Parvez and Vikas @ Sonu (accused pointed out by the Ld.PP) chased me and someone from them had thrown brick and I received the brick blows and I fell down on the ground and thereafter I received the danda blows on my head and thereafter I became unconscious. I do not know the accused persons by their name but I know them by faces as they are the residents of my neighbourhood/locality.
At this stage, Ld. PP seeks permission to cross examine the witness as the witness is resiling from his previous statement.
Heard. Allowed.
St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 116 of 136 XXXXXXXXX by Ld. PP for the State.
Police only enquired about the facts but did not record my statement. It is wrong to suggest that I have stated to the police that the Rakesh, Parvez, Vikas @ Sonu, Amit and Babloo were playing cards and gambling there who were known to me before the day of incident. Confronted with portion A to A of Ex.PW16/PX1 where it is so recorded. It is further wrong to suggest that Manish caught hold Rakesh by his collar and started snatching his money and slapped him or that the other assailants were saying that "teri dadagiri khatam kar denge" and after hearing the shoutings the other three accused Ranjan, Nitesh and Narad who are known to me before the incident and they all were saying that "teri dadagiri khatam kar denge" Confronted with portion B to B of Ex.PW16/PX1 where it is so recorded. It is further wrong to suggest that Manish caught hold Rakesh by his collar and slapped him and thereafter all the assailants gave beating to Manish @ Sonu or that Babloo caught hold neck of Manish to save Rakesh and Nitesh struck with him and thereafter Manish fell down on ground. Confronted with portion C to C of Ex.PW16/PX1 where it is so recorded. It is further wrong to suggest that when Manish started to stand up then accused Rakesh caught hold from his left side and Nitesh caught hold him from the right side and Amit, Narad and Vikas caught hold him by his legs and accused Ranjan gave a brick blow on the head of Manish and Parvez was saying that "aaj saale ko khatam kar do" and Babloo gave same brick blows on the head of Manish and thereafter blood was oozing out from the head of Manish. Confronted with portion D to St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 117 of 136 D of Ex.PW16/PX1 where it is so recorded. It is further wrong to suggest that after seeing towards me and said that "aaj kaane ko bhi khatam kar do" or after hearing the same I ran away from there but Parvez and Vikas chased me and thrown bricks upon me and I received injuries on my head by said bricks. Confronted with portion E to E of Ex.PW16/PX1 where it is so recorded. Statement Ex.PW16/PX1 is read over and confronted to the witness but witness denied the same deposed before the police.
It is wrong to suggest that the accused persons known to me before the incident and I named them in my statement to the police in detail with specific role of the accused persons. It is wrong to suggest that I have been pressurized by the locality persons not to depose true facts before the Court and also not to identify the accused with their specific roles......"
(116) The above witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana has been exhaustively crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsels and following aspects emerge from the same:
➢ That Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana is involved in many criminal cases.
➢ That during his deposition he had stated that five persons had called their three associates and thereafter he stated that the accused persons started beating him and Manish but the other three witnesses had concealed themselves at a distance.
➢ That he was unconscious and all his clothes were blood stained and he remained unconscious in the Hospital from 14.11.2012 to St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 118 of 136 16.12.2012.
➢ He has also stated that he cannot say as to what has been written in his statement dated 14.11.2012 by the Investgating Officer and that his statement was written after one or two days after his discharge from the hospital.
➢ That police made enquiries from him in the Police Station and he had not named any of the accused persons to the Investigating Officer at the time he was making enquiries from him.
➢ That he had not told the Investigating Officer as to the manner and specific role of the accused persons.
➢ The witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana has also denied having told the Investigating Officer that other three witnesses had seen the occurrence while concealing themselves.
➢ That he did not know the names of the accused persons.
(117) I may observe that this witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana (PW16) is not reliable and as already observed it is not safe to rely upon his oral testimony without an independent authentic corroboration. No explanation is forthcoming as to why he absconded from hospital and about the whereabouts of the said witness during the period he absconded from the hospital which he has failed to explain. As discussed herein above his injury has been opined as a Simple in nature and the medical record confirms that he was conscious trhoughout whereas according to oral testimony of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana he was unconscious for two to St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 119 of 136 three days a fact which is totally incorrect and a new introduction. Also, the witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana is stated to have been discharged from the Hospital at 10:00 AM and was having blood stains on his clothes.
Why, then his clothes have not been seized? It was necessary to find out if his clothes which he claims were blood stained, were stained with his own blood or with the blood of deceased Manish @ Sonu.
(118) As per the case of the prosecution the accused persons were arrested on 16.11.2012, enquiries were stated to have been made in the police station after 16.11.2012 and hence the names of accused could not have been disclosed on 14.11.2012. This explains why the statement of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana could not have been recorded on 14.11.2012 with the name of the accused and hence the case set up by the prosecution that Ajaj came at the place of occurrence on 14.11.2012 after his medically examination when his statement was recorded and site plan was prepared, is not sustainable (119) Fruther, there are various discrepancies in the statement of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana which is evident from the fact that he has stated that he did not know who threw the bricks on him. As apparently six cemented bricks which are big and heavy could not have been thrown on a person who is running and if Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana was in fact hit by the said bricks then why no injury was caused to him by the same. It is not possible that a person is hit with the heavy concrete piece of six cemented bricks and there would not have been injury sustained by him. He has also St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 120 of 136 not stated that who had thrown the bricks or who had hit him with danda. The MLC of Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana which is Ex.PW18/B shows that the only injury he had sustained was a lacerated wound on his forehead and a person having injury on his forehead could not have been ignorant about the fact that who had hit him with danda.
(120) Coming next to the testimiony of Hardesh (PW18), I may observe that this witness has not identified any of the accused persons and has not supported the prosecution version and has come up with a story which is different from the story put by the other witnesses. The case set up by prosecution is that the deceased had offered the drinks to Ajaj alone by taking him aside but he stated that he was also drinking with them and also said that he did not know the names of the accuseds. He did not state about Ranjan having joined them from Mata Ki Chowki but has stated that many public persons gathered there and seven - eight assailants started beating Manish. He has been alleged to have been drinking with the deceased and Ajaj but did not do anything in saving them and stated to have watching at a distance and run away due to fear. He has also denied to having seen the gambling with other witnesses. He has not supported the case of the prosecution in so far as the identity of the accused and has denied that the accused were the assailants who had caused injuries to the deceased Manish @ Sonu or to Aijaj @ Raju @ Kana.
(121) Coming now to the testimony of witness Krishna @ Nepali (PW19), he too does not support the prosecution version and has turned St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 121 of 136 hostile both on the aspect of incident as well as on the identity of the accused. He has stated that he was sleeping after consuming liquor in the Lal Bagh area and the police had taken him to the Police Station for interrogation. However, the Investigating Officer has claimed that he has recorded his statement in the night at his house. The following aspects emerge from his testimony:
➢ He is alleged to have been lifted by the police along with Hardesh, Satender and brother of Raju @ Kana and detained in the Police Station.
➢ He had shown ignorance as to how Raju @ Kana had suffered injuries but he told the police personnel that he had seen him only in injured condition and called the police after which they were allowed to sleep in the Police Station.
➢ In the morning police had brought all the accused persons to the Police Station and he had identified the accused persons in police station out of fear.
➢ They were detained in the police station for six to seven 67 days after which they were allowed to leave the Police Station. ➢ That the police often called him to the Police Station made to sign several papers; the details of which were not known to him but he identified his signatures on the documents. Here, I may observe that the documents of seizure indicate that his name and signatures have been written in differenthand writing with different pen and in St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 122 of 136 Hindi whereas the name of other witnesses has been recorded in English in different handwriting and with different pen, which establishes that Krishna @ Nepali was not a witness to the seizure and perhaps his name has been added later on and therefore these seizure memos do not appear to be credible.
➢ Further, the deposition of Krishna @ Nepali (PW19) to the extent that on the next morning the accused were brought to Police Station falsifies the story of arrest of the accused persons on 16.11.2012, the recovery memos and the story of the raids.
➢ He has denied to have seen the accused assaulting Raju @ Kana and even denied to have known the deceased Manish @ Sonu.
➢ He has even denied that the accused persons assaulted on any person in his presence at any point of time.
➢ He has even denied having joined the investigations or searched for the accused persons.
➢ He has denied his presence at the time of arrest of the accused persons or the further proceeding of disclosure or personal search etc or the other recoveries etc. pertaining to clothes. ➢ He has denied the recovery in his presence and also denied to have seen the incidence and having seen the accused persons to have committed the murder by giving brick blow to deceased on his head or giving the brick and danda blows on the head of Raju @ Kana. St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 123 of 136 (122) Now coming to the testimony of Satender @ Sikandar (PW20), he also does not support the prosecution version and has turned completely hostile. According to him, on 1314.11.2012 he along with his friend Krishna @ Nepali was sleeping in the lane of Lal Bagh area under the influence of liquor and the police personnels of Police Station Adarsh Nagar took them to the Police Station for interrogation and made enquiries regarding Raju @ Kana who was taken by the PCR officials to the hospital on the call of Krishna @ Nepali who after seeing Raju @ Kana in an injured condition called the PCR. He has stated that the police personnel made enquiries about how Raju @ Kana had suffered injuries and he had shown his ignorance for the same and explained that he had seen him only in an injured condition. He has further explained that the police had brought all the accused persons in the morning and he identified them out of fear as he was being apprehended by the police and had been detained in the Police Station for four to five days after which they were allowed to leave the Police Station after they identified the accused persons in Police Station. According to this witness, on one occasion police called him to the police station and asked him to stand witness as an eye witness and in order to escape torture from police, under protest he agreed for the same even though he had not seen the incident and only seen Raju @ Kana in an injured condition. He has denied that any incident had taken place in his presence and stated that he was made to sign several documents details of which he is unable to tell but only identified his signatures on the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 124 of 136 documents. He has denied having known any person by the name of Manish @ Sonu and also denied having seen the accused persons assaulting Raju @ Kana. He has also stated that the accused persons had not assaulted any person in his presence at any point of time. (123) In so far as the accused Vikas is concerned, it is very important to note that none of the witness has stated having known the accused Vikas @ Sonu by name and therefore, without an identification parade none could have named the accused Vikas. Except for the alleged statements of these witnesses who have not supported the prosecution version in the court and the documents of arrests, personal search etc. there is no other documents which establishes the presence of accused Vikas at the place of occurrence. Ld. Counsel for the accused has vehemently argued that the alleged Disclosure Statement of the accused Vikas which is Ex.PW24/C1 is not admissible since the same has been fabricated on blank papers got signed from the accused Vikas during custody. In this regard, I may observe that the argument so raised by the Ld. Defence Counsel is not all that unfounded in view of the fact that page 3 of Ex.PW24/C1 bears the signature of accused Vikas but on which it is written in the manner "......Inkshaaf Amit @ Sonu Contd.....". It is this which establishes that the disclosure statement was in fact fabricated.
Further, this Disclosure Statement does not mention about the discovery regarding clothes worn at the time of alleged incident and only mentions about the Danda. I may specifically note that if the disclosure statement St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 125 of 136 would have been genuine there would not have been two recovery attempts one for the Danda and other for the alleged clothes which is not the case. (124) I may further observe that the seizure memo Ex.PW19/H is not admissible in evidence since there is no disclosure regarding availability of the clothes has been made and the name of the witness appears to have been interpolated with different pen in Hindi and with different handwriting. It is also apparent that the date on Ex.PW19/H has been changed from 16.11.2012 as 17.11.2012 whereas the seizure memo of Danda which is Ex.PW24/B is dated 16.11.2012. I may also observe that the alleged danda is stated to be measuring 5'9" and no diameter of the Danda has been mentioned in the seizure memo Ex.PW24/B whereas the Subsequent Opinion which is Ex.PW13/B shows that it has been mentioned that "on opening the Pullanda III Old bamboo stick (not a danda) having one end square shaped, measuring 5' 6½ in length and diameter is approximately 7"and 6½" respectively, having blood stain on one end, having seven knots". Further, as per the prosecution case the Danda has been used for assaulting Ajaj @ Raju whereas according to the DNA Report the blood present on the danda was that of deceased Manish @ Sonu. In so far as the alleged recovery of the danda is concerned, I may observe that had the danda been actually recovered from the house of the accused Vikas the witnesses to the seizure memo would have been able to depose truly on this aspect which is not the case. On the one hand St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 126 of 136 SI Praveen (PW27) has stated the time of recovery as 5.30 PM whereas SI Afaq Ahmed (PW24) has stated that the secret informer met them at 1:00 PM, they returned back at about 2.00 PM, they again left at 5.00 PM and accused Rakesh, Babloo, Parvesh and Amit were apprehended at about 6.306.45 PM whereas on the other hand SI Praveen (PW27) has stated that they returned back to the police station at about 2.00 P.M. after apprehending first four accused, with respect to the second arrest he has stated the informer came in the police station at about 6.00 - 6.30 PM and regarding the remaining four accused persons they did not leave the police station after coming there with first four accused persons and till the arrival of the secret informer regarding the information of remaining accused persons. I may also observe that the prosecution has not disclosed as to how the blood of the deceased would be stain on the T Shirt of another person lying on the ground unless the accused Vikas had allegedly ran after Raju @ Kana which is not the case or unless Vikas would have embraced the deceased also lying on the ground and that too with the other seven accused which again is not the case. No circumstances have been shown that the deceased Manish @ Sonu had bled in such a profuse manner that blood had come like a fountain to splash and stain the clothes of all the accused persons around him. Even otherwise, the public witness Krishna @ Nepali has not supported the case of the prosecution or proved the alleged seizure memo of the accused Vikas. It is otherwise unbelievable that any accused after committing the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 127 of 136 alleged offence would keep the Danda or the blood stained clothes in his residence/ house to provide a ready evidence to the police which inculpates them. The genuineness and admissibility of the seizure memos is also not established.
(125) From the evidence which has come on record, many questions have arisen which have remained unserved. Firstly it is evident that a friend of witness Raju namely Kishan S/o Ram Singh was with the injured who is the person who had in fact informed the PCR officials that he had heard some voices and large number of persons had gathered and he was told that there was a Jhagra of which he did not know. Who is this Kishan S/o Ram Singh? Why he has not been cited as a witness nor examined in the Court? He was the most important witness who had made a call to the PCR and not Krishna @ Nepali. Kishan S/o Ram Singh is the only person who could have informed about the fight and the quarrel and how the deceased received injuries.
(126) Secondly it is an admitted fact that Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana had absconded from the hospital without treatment and no reason is forthcoming for the same as to why he had absconded? This aspect in fact clearly establishes that he was very much conscious and falsifies his version that he was unconscious for two days.
(127) Thirdly ASI Om Prakash (PW23) and other police officials have unanimously admitted that Manish @ Sonu was involved in several criminal cases and no connection has been established between the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 128 of 136 various accused and the deceased. Why then would the accused say anything regarding finishing his dadagiri and get allegedly involved in the fight without any rhyme or reason?
(128) Fourthly why the distance of Mata ki Chowki and the place of incident has not been disclosed? I may observe that this fact that the fight between the deceased and other persons was audible in place of already noisy Mata ki Chowki so that anybody could have come to the place of occurrence has not been established. The place where Mata ki Chowki was going on, has not been shown in the site plans Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW24/DA. This establishes that perhaps this Mata ki Chowki was not nearby and hence it is not possible that the other three accused or any one else could have come from the said place on merely hearing the voices.
(129) Fifthly no inquries were made from the nearby shop owners where the incident took place or from the staff of Ruchi Clinic or from the Petrol Pump Staff. Why?
(130) Sixthly the place of incident is a densely populated area despite which why no efforts were made to join independent witness even though it was Diwali on the day of alleged incident and presence of public persons is presumed.
(131) Seventhly why the Investigating Officer has not shown the positions of the alleged Eye Witnesses at the time of the incident? St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 129 of 136 (132) Eighthly the investigating Officer has not seized the clothes of the injured Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana nor he prepare the site plan of the places where the alleged recoveries of blood stained clothes of the accused persons got effected nor he has mentioned the position of the blood stains on the clothes recovered at the instance of accused persons. (133) Ninethly there is nothing in the disclosure statements of the accused that any blood stains came on the clothes worn by them at the time of the commission of offence or that they had concealed the same at their respective houses or that they could get those blood stained clothes then why the alleged recoveries are not made pursuant to any disclosure statements? The recoveries if any were not pursuant to any disclosure statement.
(134) Lastly how is it possible that blood stains would have come on the clothes of each and every accused? It does not appear probable that the accused would have kept their clothes in their respective houses which could be the most incriminating evidence against them which is despite the fact that they have sufficient opportunity to destroy their clothes. Moreover, the alleged recovery of blood stained clothes in the absence of any independent witness is doubtful.
(135) I may also note that, there is nothing on record to show that any of the alleged eye witnesses have themselves approached the police, rather it is other way round and the police had gone to the various eye witnesses to record their statements and as per their testimonies made in St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 130 of 136 the Court they were pressurized to make their statement. One thing which is most unbelievable is the fact that blood stains have been found on each and every accused as also on the Danda. As per the Medical Evidence on record and also the case of the prosecution, the deceased had been hit with bricks and danda and not with the sharp edged weapon like knives so as to give a surge of blood which would have splashed on the clothes of the accused. The deceased being hit with the danda and the bricks, the blood stains would have fallen on the clothes of the deceased and of such persons who had either lifted him or carried him, which is not the case. The prosecution has failed to explain as to how blood of the deceased would stained on the Tshirt from a person lying on the ground unless the either accused would have together embraced the lying deceased, which does not appear to be probable. There is no circumstantial evidence on record to show that there was a profuse bleeding so that the blood of the deceased would come on the clothes of all the accused and also on the danda. Even otherwise, no accused would keep the blood stained clothes in his house and it is unbelievable that the accused would have retained the blood stained clothes and danda in their respective houses despite have opportunity to destroy the same only to ensure that the most incriminating evidence against them reaches the hands of the police. There is no independent public witness at the time of the recovery of the said clothes and the danda by the accused, thereby creating a doubt in the mind of the Court and therefore, the genuineness and admissibility of the seizure St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 131 of 136 memo has not been established beyond doubt. Further, in so far as the disclosure statements made by the various accused are concerned, they are inadmissible in evidence per se. In the said disclosure statements none of the accused mentioned that they could get the clothes which they were wearing at the time of the incident recovered.
(136) This being the background, I hereby hold that the discrepancies as noted herein above are material leaving a large number of unanswered questions and raises doubt in the mind of the Court regarding the credibility of not only of the witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was one of the injured in the incident and was completely under the influence of alcohol at the relevant time but also as regards the other evidence relied upon by the prosecution in the nature of clothes of the accused persons and danda at the instance of Vikas which recovery does not inspire confidence of the Court. In so far as the bricks are concerned, the same were found lying at the spot of the incident itself which is an open place and does not incriminate the accused in any manner. I therefore hold that the prosecution has not been able to prove and substantiate the allegations against the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh beyond reasonable doubt.
FINAL CONCLUSIONS:
(137) In the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs. State of Maharastra, AIR 1984 SC 1622, the Apex Court has laid down the tests St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 132 of 136 which are prerequisites before conviction should be recorded, which are as under:
1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned 'must or should' and not 'may be' established;
2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty;
3. The circumstances should be of conclusive nature and tendency;
4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and
5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
(138) Applying the above principles of law to the facts of present case, it is evident that the identity of all the accused i.e. Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh, stands established. The Medical Evidence on record establishes that the cause of death of Manish @ Sonu was due to head injury consequent upon injury no. 1, 2 and 3 which were antemortem and fresh in nature and could be caused by hard blunt object and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 133 of 136 nature. It has been established that the injured/ eye witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana was in an inebriated state at the time of the incident and was taken to BJRM Hospital by the PCR from where he absconded without any treatment and was again traced in the morning and treated when his injuries were found to be Simple in nature.
(139) However, the prosecution has not been able to prove that the injuries on the person of Raju @ Kana was caused by a danda blow on the head and rather version that he had received the said injuries by a sudden fall on a hard surface is equally possible and rather appears to be more probable. In so far as the Ocular Evidence is concerned, there are material discrepancies leaving a large number of unanswered questions and raises doubt in the mind of the Court regarding the credibility of not only of the witness Ajaj @ Raju @ Kana who was one of the injured in the incident and was completely under the influence of alcohol at the relevant time but also as regards the other evidence relied upon by the prosecution in the nature of recovery of clothes of the accused persons and danda at the instance of Vikas which recovery does not inspire confidence of the Court. In so far as the bricks are concerned, the same were found lying at the spot of the incident and recovered from there which is an open area and this recovery does not incriminate the accused in any manner. I therefore hold that the prosecution has not been able to prove and substantiate the allegations against the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh beyond reasonable St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 134 of 136 doubt.
(140) In view of the above, I hereby hold that the circumstances reflected from the material on record do not stand conclusively established. The facts are also not consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused persons. The chain of evidence is not so much complete so as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused persons. The material brought on record by the prosecution are insufficient to hold that each of the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh were guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution has also not established a conclusive link connecting each individual circumstance with the other, and the accused namely Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh. Crucially, the materials and evident on the record do not bridge the gap between "may be true" and must be true" so essential for a court to cross, while finding the guilty of an accused, particularly in cases based on circumstances evidence. Therefore, I hereby hold that the prosecution has not been able to prove and substantiate the allegations against the accused Ranjan, Amit, Narad, Babloo, Rakesh, Nitesh, Vikas and Parvesh beyond reasonable doubt and hence, benefit of doubt is being given to them who are acquitted of the charges under Section 302/ 34 Indian Penal Code. Further, the accused Vikas @ Sonu and Parvesh are acquitted of the St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 135 of 136 charges under Section 307/34 Indian Penal Code. The accused be released if not required in any other case.
(141) File be consigned to Record Room. Announced in the open court (Dr. KAMINI LAU) Dated: 14.1.2015 ASJII(NW)/ ROHINI St. Vs. Ranjan Etc., FIR No. 289/12, PS Adarsh Nagar Page No. 136 of 136