Delhi District Court
State vs Sumit Kumar on 24 September, 2025
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FAST
TRACK COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, DWARKA
COURT, NEW DELHI
Presided by: Mr. Sharad Gupta
SC no. 404/2017
CNR No. DLSW01-007069-2017
FIR No. : 156/2017
Police Station : Dabri
Under Section : 302/307/449 IPC
In the matter of :
State
versus
Sumit Kumar,
S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Gupta,
R/o B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri,
New Delhi.
Date of institution : 09.06.2017
Date of committal to Sessions Court : 22.06.2017
Date of receipt by way of transfer : 23.09.2022
Date of conclusion of arguments : 12.09.2025
Date of judgment : 24.09.2025
JUDGMENT
Digitally 1. Vide this judgment, the accused namely Sumit signed by SHARAD SHARAD GUPTA Kumar is being convicted for the the offences punishable under GUPTA Date:
2025.09.24 Section 302, 307 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 17:56:28 +0530 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') in the instant case FIR No. State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 1 of 69 156/2017, Police Station Dabri, New Delhi for the reasons mentioned below.
CASE OF PROSECUTION
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.03.2017, at about 08.45 am, accused Sumit Kumar trespassed into the house of the complainant, namely, Mr. Nitin Kumar with an intention to commit the offence of murder and he committed the murder of Ms. Jyoti (sister of the complainant) by inflicting stab injuries to her. There are also allegations against the accused that he also gave stab injuries to the complainant Mr. Nitin Kumar and his mother Smt. Rajbala with an such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if by that act, he would have caused the death of Mr. Nitin Kumar and/or Smt. Rajbala, he would have been guilty of murder.
3. The circumstances which put the law into motion are that on 21.03.2017, on receipt of DD no. 19 A, ASI Sanjeev alongwith Ct. Vinay Kumar reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where he found that the injured Ms. Jyoti had already been declared brought dead. It was also found that vide MLC no. 8223/2017, injured Smt. Rajbala was also admitted at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, however, her son Mr. Nitin who was also an injured had got his mother injured Smt. Rajbala discharged from Mata Chanan Devi Hospital for getting her treated at AIIMS Trauma Centre. ASI Sanjeev Kumar collected both the MLCs and reached at the spot i.e. B-2/35, Gali no. 9, Rajapuri where a lot of blood was found scattered inside the house. Blood SHARAD GUPTA was also found on the bedsheet covering the bed and on the Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 2 of 69 17:56:35 +0530 clothes kept over a table. A blood stained knife was found lying under the table. A wrist watch make HMT was also found lying near the gate of the room. Public persons were gathered at the spot and it was found that one Sumit Gupta S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Gupta who had committed the offence is present at his house i.e. B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Rajapuri had committed the offence. In the meantime, Inspector Harender Singh, SHO PS Dabri alongwith beat staff also reached at the spot. Inspector Harender Singh, alongwith ASI Sanjeev and Ct. Arvind reached at B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Rajapuri where accused Sumit Gupta was found present in a room on the first floor of his house. No blood stains were found on the clothes worn by him at that time. Upon inquiry, accused Sumit Kumar admitted that he had committed the offence in the present case and that he had changed his clothes. The blood stained pant of the accused was found in his bathroom whereas his blood stained shirt was found lying on a shoe rack outside the bathroom. Ct. Arvind was left to guard the blood stained clothes of accused Sumit Kumar. Since the mob was getting agitated, in view of the safety of accused Sumit Kumar, he was sent to PS in the ERV in the custody of ASI Radha Kishan.
4. Intimation was given to the Crime Team. IO Inspector Harender Singh alongwith ASI Sanjeev reached at AIIMS Trauma Centre where Smt. Rajbala was found admitted. Injured Nitin Kumar was also met in the Trauma Centre. IO Inspector Harender Singh recorded the statement of injured Nitin Kumar wherein he alleged that his younger sister Jyoti, his SHARAD mother Smt. Rajbala and he himself were stabbed by their GUPTA neighbour accused Sumit Kumar with a knife and that Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 3 of 69 17:56:41 +0530 consequent to the stab injuries, his sister Jyoti was declared brought dead at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. On the basis of statement of the injured Mr. Nitin Kumar, IO Inspector Harender Singh prepared rukka and got the present FIR registered.
5. During the course of investigation, IO prepared site plan at the instance of the injured/complainant Mr. Nitin Kumar; got the spot inspected and photographed from the Crime Team; lifted the exhibits viz. blood stained knife, pair of slippers, an HMT watch, blood stained clothes (bed sheet, payjama, T-Shirt and a towel), blood stained earth control and the blood in gauze piece from the spot; recorded the statements of witnesses; got the PM conducted on the dead body of deceased Jyoti; arrested accused Sumit Kumar, interrogated him, recorded his disclosure statement and seized the blood stained clothes of accused Sumit Kumar, which he was wearing at the time of the incident, from his house at his instance; seized the blood stained clothes of injured Nitin and Raj Bala; seized the exhibits from the hospital after the post mortem of the deceased; obtained subsequent opinion regarding the weapon of offence; sent the exhibits to the FSL concerned for expert opinion and after completion of the investigation filed the charge-sheet in the court.
COURT PROCEEDINGS
6. In light of the police report and the documents filed alongwith the same, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial vide order dated SHARAD 09.06.2017.
GUPTA
7. The case was received by way of transfer by this Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:56:48 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 4 of 69 Court on 23.09.2022.
CHARGE
8. Vide order dated 25.10.2018, passed by Sh. Vivek Kumar Gulia, the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka Courts, South-West, Delhi, charge for the offences punishable under Section 302, 307 and 449 IPC was framed against accused Sumit Kumar. The charge was read over and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
9. The prosecution in all examined 17 (seventeeen) witnesses to prove the allegations levelled against the accused.
10. PW-1 Mr. Nitin Kumar and PW-2 Smt. Raj Bala are the brother and mother (respectively) of deceased Ms. Jyoti. They are also the injured and the eye witnesses of the incident. Their testimonies in detail shall be discussed in the later parts of this judgment.
11. PW-3 SI Rakesh Kumar was the Incharge Mobile Crime Team which inspected the spot i.e. House no. B-2/35, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, New Delhi and also the house of accused Sumit Kumar i.e. House no. B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, New Delhi and gave his report to the IO.
12. PW-4 ASI Satish was the Incharge PCR van which SHARAD reached at the spot on receipt of information regarding stabbing. GUPTA On reaching the spot i.e. House no. B-2/35, he came to know that Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 5 of 69 17:56:55 +0530 the injured had already been taken to the hospital and that one person, namely, Mr. Sumit had committed the incident. He alongwith his staff reached at the house of accused Sumit Kumar i.e. House no. B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, Delhi and apprehended him. On arrival of the local police staff of PS Dabri, the custody of accused Sumit was handed over to them.
13. PW-5 HC Lalu Ram is the Duty Officer who had registered the instant FIR no. 156/2017 at PS Dabri. After registration of the FIR, he made his endorsement on the rukka.
14. PW-6 Retired ACP Chander Pathak was the Nodal Officer at Command Room, CPCR, PHQ. He had issued the PCR Form-I CPCR DD no. 21MAR171450107 and the certificate U/s 65 B of the Indian Evidence Act to the IO.
15. PW-7 Inspector Anil had handed over the golden colour earrings of the deceased to her father Mr. Ashok Kumar.
16. PW-8 ASI Suresh was the photographer of the crime team. He had clicked the photographs of the spot.
17. PW-9 WHC Kavita and PW-10 HC Sumit, on the instructions of the IO, reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital from where the dead body of the deceased was shifted to DDU Hospital for mortuary.
18. PW-11 HC Arvind reached at the house of accused on being informed by the IO, where in his presence, the accused pointed towards his clothes i.e. a pant lying in the bathroom and SHARAD a shirt which was lying outside the bathroom on a shoe-rack, GUPTA which he was wearing at the time of the incident. He was left at Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 6 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:57:02 +0530 the house of the accused to safeguard the scene whereas accused Sumit Kumar was shifted to PS for his safety.
19. PW-12 HC Vinay Kumar had joined the proceedings with the initial IO ASI Sanjeev Kumar.
20. PW-13 HC Ramesh Kumar is the Assistant Draughtsman who had prepared the scaled site plan of the scenes of crime i.e. House no. B-2/25 and B-2/23, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, New Delhi from where the blood stained clothes of accused were recovered and the accused was arrested.
21. PW-14 HC Dal Chand is the MHC(M) who had handed over the exhibits of this case to Ct. Mukesh for depositing the same at FSL Rohini.
22. PW-15 SI Sanjeev Khokhar is the initial IO of this case who on receipt of DD no. 19 A alongwith Ct. Vinay reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where he came to know that injured Jyoti had expired in the hospital and the other two injured had gone to Trauma Centre, AIIMS. He alongwith Ct. Vinay thereafter went to the spot and inspected the spot. At the spot he came to know that the incident was committed by one Sumit Kumar. In the meantime, SHO Inspector Harender alongwith staff also reached there. Thereafter, they went to the house of accused Sumit Kumar from where accused Sumit Kumar and the clothes worn by him at the time of the incident were also found. Accused Sumit Kumar was got shifted to the police station for his safety. Thereafter, PW-15 SI Sanjeev Khokhar reached at SHARAD Taruma Centre, AIIMS where he recorded the statement of GUPTA injured Mr. Nitin Kumar, prepared rukka and got the present FIR Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 7 of 69 GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 17:57:10 +0530 registered. Thereafter he joined the seizure proceedings conducted by the IO at the spot as well as at the house of accused Sumit Kumar. He is also a witness to the arrest and disclosure of accused Sumit Kumar, seizure of clothes of the injured persons and the PM proceedings. He had also seized the exhibits handed over to him by the IO after the PM of deceased.
23. PW-16 Inspector Harender Singh is the investigating officer of this case. He has been examined to prove the investigation conducted by him.
24. PW-17 Mr. Kaushal Kumar is the Retired Senior Scientific Officer, FSL Rohini who had examined the exhibits of this case and had given his report, as per which human blood of 'B' blood group was found on the exhibits including the clothes of the accused.
ADMISSION/DENIAL OF DOCUMENTS
25. Vide proceedings dated 12.02.2024, in compliance with the provisions of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C., accused Sumit Kumar was called upon to admit or deny the genuineness of Copy of FIR no. 156/2017 PS Dabri, DD no. 19 A dated 21.03.2017, PM Report of body of deceased, MLCs of deceased bearing no. 8223/2017 of Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, MLC of injured Rajbala bearing FIR no. 8224 of Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and MLC of injured Nitin bearing no. 500012948/17 of AIIMS, which were admitted by the accused and in view of the admissions made, the evidence of the concerned witnesses were SHARAD dispensed with.
GUPTA Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:57:17 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 8 of 69
26. Vide proceedings dated 01.03.2024, in compliance with the provisions of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C., accused Sumit Kumar was once again called upon to admit or deny the genuineness of PCR form alongwith Section 65 B Indian Evidence Act Certificate and the subsequent opinion given by Dr. B. N. Mishra dated 21.03.2017, which were admitted by the accused and in view of the admissions made, the evidence of the concerned witnesses were dispensed with.
DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED
27. In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC, accused Sumit Kumar denied the entire incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. He claimed that the allegations made against him were false and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Accused Sumit Kumar opted to lead evidence in his defence.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
28. In order to prove his defence, accused Sumit Kumar examined DW-1 Mr. Bhola Thakur, his neighbour. DW-1 Mr. Bhola Thakur deposed that he knew accused Sumit since his birth as his house is near the house of accused Sumit. He stated that he is a barber by profession and whenever accused Sumit used to come to his shop for getting a haircut, he used to accompanied by somebody as his mention condition was not stable since birth. he added that sometimes, when he came alone to his shop, he created problems for him as he either used to laugh or got angry SHARAD and used to throw articles from the shop. He stated that he told GUPTA his father about this but his father took excuses that he was Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 9 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:57:33 +0530 getting mental treatment.
29. DW-2 Mr. Vinod Gutpa is another neighbour of accused Sumit Kumar. He deposed that he knew accused Sumit since 1996-1997 and that he used to visit the grocery shop of father of accused Sumit to buy daily use articles. He further stated that he had seen and observed accused Sumit sitting in the shop of his father. He added that sometimes, he used to smile on seeing him and sometimes he used to get angry on him. He asserted that he inquired regarding this from the father of accused Sumit who told him that his mental condition was not normal and requested him not to mind his behaviour.
30. DW-3 Mr. Kanhaiya Lal is the father of accused Sumit. Kumar. He deposed that when his son i.e. accused Sumit Kumar was studying in class 6th, he was hit by a teacher on his ear due to which he had problem in his ear, however, the accused told his father about this three years later. He asserted that after coming to know about the problems of his son, he got him treated for his ear as well as for his mental ailments. He added that since 2014, the mental problems of Sumit increased and he used to behave strange. He added that he (Sumit) could not sleep at nights and used to clap for no reasons and they took him to Lady Harding Medical College for treatment where he received treatment. He asserted that one week prior to the incident also, he took his son to Lady Harding Medical College for his treatment and proved the copies of the relevant pages as Ex.DW3/A. He further averred that during the period accused Sumit was on SHARAD interim bail on account of Covid 19 Pandemic, they got him GUPTA treated at IHBAS and proved the relevant documents as Digitally signed by State Vs. Sumit Kumar SHARAD GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 10 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:57:39 +0530 Ex.DW3/B. He further deposed that on the date of the incident, his son Sumit was with him in the house and he also helped him to keep the milk in the shop, situated on the ground floor of their aforesaid house and thereafter, he went upstairs. He further stated that police came and apprehended his son while he was sitting after taking bath and he was falsely implicated in this case.
31. The record has been carefully perused. The respective submissions of Mr. Girish Kumar Manhas, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, Mr. Jitender Kumar Jha, Ld. Counsel for the complainant and Mr. Alok Kumar Rai, Ld. Defence Counsel for accused Sumit Kumar have been duly heard and considered.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED
32. It has been argued on behalf of the accused that the complainant Mr. Nitin Kumar, who claimed to have known accused Sumit Kumar since childhood, failed to mention his name as the assailant in the PCR call made to the police and the PCR call, the complainant had only stated that his sister was stabbed by a boy. He stated that not naming the accused by the complainant in the first call made to the police shows manipulation on part of the complainant.
33. It has further been argued on behalf of the accused that the prosecution has failed to attribute any motive to the accused for illegally trespassing into the house of the complainant and thereafter killing his sister Ms. Jyoti and SHARAD attempting to murder complainant Mr. Nitin and his mother Smt. GUPTA Rajbala.
Digitally signed by SHARADGUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar
FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 11 of 69
Date: 2025.09.24
17:57:47 +0530
34. Ld. Counsel for the accused persons also argued that the eye witnesses cited and examined by the prosecution are the brother and the mother of the deceased and they are therefore interested witnesses and their testimonies cannot be relied upon. It is added that the injuries sustained by PW-1 and PW-2 are not in consonance with their testimonies and there is every likelihood that the injuries were self inflicted.
35. It is argued that the blood recovered from the spot for sent for forensic examination, however, only one blood group i.e. blood group B was found on the said knife. That the same contradicts the prosecution version that three persons were injured using the said knife. It is further argued that if the prosecution version that three persons were injured using the said knife is believed then more than one blood group should have been found on the said knife. That no finger prints or chance prints were recovered from the said knife and as such the prosecution has not been able to connect the said knife with the commission of the offence or with the accused.
36. It is argued that the prosecution version is that blood stained clothes of the accused were recovered at his instance, however, the said recovery is highly suspicious considering the prosecution version that when the accused was apprehended he was found sitting peacefully in his house and no blood stains were observed on his clothes at that time.
37. It is further argued that no videography of the SHARAD recovery of clothes was done and no independent witnesses were GUPTA joined in the investigation. Thus, the recovery of blood stained Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 12 of 69 17:58:01 +0530 clothes cannot be relied upon.
38. It is argued that a wrist watch was recovered from the scene of crime. That as per the prosecution version, the said watch was of the accused, however, the prosecution failed to get TIP of the said watch conducted. Furthermore, the investigating agency failed to bring on record anything in black and white to establish that the said watch in fact belonged to the accused.
39. That there are contradictions in the prosecution version. That as per HC Vinay Kumar, his statement was recorded by one police official, named Rajesh, however, as per the prosecution version, the statement of the said witness was recorded by PW-16 Inspector Harender Singh. That the said contradiction goes to the root of the matter and casts doubt on the investigation conducted.
40. Is is further argued that the prosecution version is fraught with inconsistencies. That as per the police version, when they reached the scene of crime, one anonymous person disclosed that the person who killed the deceased was sitting at his house. However, neither the said anonymous person was examined nor cited as a witness. That the anonymous tip was the sole basis for apprehension of the accused and the failure of prosecution to bring on record anything to identify the said informant undermines the case of the prosecution.
41. That the prosecution is also relying upon the SHARAD disclosure statement of the accused which is itself not admissible GUPTA in evidence. That while as per prosecution version, the accused Digitally signed had disclosed that brother of deceased had an illicit relationship by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:58:07 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 13 of 69 with his wife, however, the IO PW-16 in his cross-examination stated that the mother and brother of deceased had denied the existence of any illicit relationship between the wife of the accused and brother of the deceased. That the IO also stated that he could not find any material to substantiate the said assertion of the accused. Thus, there is no corroboration of the assertions in the disclosure statement of the accused and the same is also fatal to the prosecution version and the disclosure statement cannot be relied upon.
42. That the accused had raised a plea of alibi which has come on record in the statement of his father DW-3. That DW-3 has stated that at the time of the incident, the accused was at his home. That thus, the accused has been able to establish his plea of alibi.
43. That the accused is of unsound mind which is reflected from his examination by the Medical Board dated 03.10.2018. That the medical board had opined and in view of previous episodic psychotic illness, the accused needed long term prophylaxis. That the said finding indicates that the accused is suffering from a recurring psychotic disorder which impairs his mental faculties and may recur without warning. That the requirement for long term prophylaxis demonstrates that the illness is chronic, serious and has a pattern of relapse. That such an illness can result in temporary but complete loss of judgment, self control and understanding particularly during a psychotic episode. That it is plausible that the accused was in such a SHARAD psychotic state at the time of the incident and was of unsound GUPTA mind at the time of the incident, due to which, he was easily Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 14 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:58:13 +0530 implicated in this case by the complainant.
44. That the opinion of the board was sought regarding fitness of the accused to stand trial. That there is difference between fitness to stand trial and mental capacity at the time of the incident and while the former pertains to the ability of the accused to understand legal proceedings and instruct his counsel, the later concerns his mental state at the time of commission of the offence.
45. Reliance is placed on the pronouncements in (i) Kansa Behera vs. State of Orissa, (1987) 3 SCC 480 and (ii) Mustkeem @ Sirajudeen vs. State of Rajasthan , (2011) 11 SCC 724. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE STATE
46. Ld. Addl. PP for the State assisted by Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that the present case is based on the testimonies of eye witnesses i.e. PW-1 and PW-2 who have consistently deposed regarding the incident and have corroborated each other in material particulars. That the MLCs of PW-1 and PW-2 further corroborate the prosecution version as per which both of them had suffered injuries in the incident. That the prosecution is also relying upon the MLC of deceased and the PM report, as per which various injuries with sharp weapon were suffered by the deceased. That as per PM report the cause of death was haemorrhagic shock as a result of tearing of multiple vital organs by sharp pointed weapon like a knife etc. Manner of SHARAD death was opined to be homicidal. That subsequent opinion was GUPTA obtained by the investigating agency and the concerned doctor Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 15 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:58:22 +0530 opined that the nature of injuries observed during post mortem could have been inflicted by the produced weapon of offence.
47. That the presence of PW-1 and PW-2 at the spot is natural and they are not planted witnesses. That the accused is the neighbour of the deceased and as such, the defence has not been able to bring anything on record to suspect the identification of the accused by the witnesses. That the contention of the accused that he was of unsound mind at the time of the incident was to be proved by him in terms of Section 105 of Indian Evidence Act, however, the accused failed to bring on record anything to suggest that he was of unsound mind at the time of incident. That it was specifically observed by the Ld. Predecessor of this court vide order dated 08.06.2018 and 09.10.2018 that the accused does not have any psychiatric illness and is fit to stand trial. That the prosecution version is corroborated by the recovery of blood stained knife from the spot and the blood stained clothes of the accused at his instance from his house. That as per FSL result, blood of the deceased was found on the knife used in commission of offence as well as the clothes of the accused and the same also corroborates the prosecution version. That since the prosecution version is based on testimony of eye witnesses, failure to establish motive is of no consequence. That the plea of alibi is sham and after thought and was introduced at the fag end of the trial. That there are no inconsistencies or contradictions in the prosecution version which might go to the root of the prosecution case. That the prosecution version is consistent, SHARAD corroborated by other material on record and the defence has not GUPTA been able to shake the veracity of the prosecution witnesses.
Digitally signed by SHARADGUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar
Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 16 of 69
17:58:29 +0530
Remaining assertions of the accused have been vehemently controverted. Reliance is placed on the pronouncements in (i) Chandan vs. State of NCT of Delhi, (2024) 6 SCC 799, (ii) Rupesh Manger vs. State of Sikkim, (2023) 9 SCC 739, (iii) Pruthiviraj Jayantibhai Vanol vs. Dinesh Dayabhai Vala, (2022) 18 SCC 683, (iv) Muthukaruppan vs. State by Inspector of Police, 2002 (2) MWN (Cr.) D.B. 171, (v) Santosh Maruti Mane vs. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 19 SCC 797, (vi) Shambhubhai Raisangbhai Padhiyar vs. State of Gujarat , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3769 and (vii) State of Karnataka vs. T. Naseer @ Nasir @ Thandiantavida Naseer @ Umarhazi @ Hazi & Ors. , passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) no. 6548 of 2022.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Re: Charge in respect of offence punishable under Section 302/307/449 IPC
48. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has interalia examined eye witnesses of the case who also received injuries during the incident i.e. PW-1 Nitin Kumar and PW-2 Smt. Raj Bala. PW-1 Sh. Nitin Kumar is the brother of the deceased and he has deposed that on 21.03.2017, at about 08.30 am, his father had gone to his office and at about 8:45 am, his mother had woken him up and his sister and after that he went to the washroom on the first floor and his sister had gone downstairs at ground floor for cleaning etc., and his mother SHARAD remained on the 1st floor itself. He further deposed that he heard GUPTA the shrieks of his sister and his mother went downstairs and he Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 17 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:58:36 +0530 also came out from the washroom and was washing his hands. He stated that thereafter, he also heard the shouting of his mother too and he went downstairs, where he saw that accused Sumit Gupta was giving knife blows to his sister Jyoti and when his mother intervened he had also given knife blows to his mother. He stated that when he intervened and tried to protect his mother and sister, Sumit Gupta had also given him a knife blow which landed on his chest. He asserted that he grabbed the hand of accused and his mother also grabbed him. He added that accused after getting himself freed from them, ran away from the spot leaving the knife at the spot.
49. He also deposed that the police officials had recorded his statement in AIIMS Hospital vide Ex.PW1/1. His further assertion was that after discharge of his mother he had gone to the PS and handed over the blood stained clothes of his mother and himself which were worn by them at the time of the incident. He identified his wearing clothes i.e. Lower Shirt and Baniyan as Ex.P1, Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 respectively. He also identified the wearing clothes of his mother i.e. once sky blue colour petticoat. one red and yellow colour maxi, one white colour cut bra, one red colour blouse and one multi colour stole as Ex.P4 to Ex.P8. He also identified the wearing clothes of his deceased sister as Ex.P9 (Colly).
50. In her testimony, PW-2 Smt. Rajbala who is the mother of the deceased has deposed that on 21.03.2017, at about 08.30 am, her husband had gone to his office. She had woken up SHARAD her children i.e. Nitin and Jyoti at first floor at about 08.45 am GUPTA and thereafter, PW-1 Mr. Nitin Kumar went to the washroom on Digitally signed State Vs. Sumit Kumar by SHARAD FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 18 of 69 GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 17:58:43 +0530 the first floor while her daughter Jyoti had gone downstairs to the ground floor for cleaning etc. and she remained on the first floor itself. She added that she heard the screams of her daughter and she immediately went downstairs where she saw that accused Sumit @ Munnu who used to reside in a house 2-3 houses away from their house was giving knife blows to his daughter Jyoti. She stated that she immediately tried to save her daughter by intervening but the accused also gave her a knife blow which landed on her lower chest/upper stomach. She further added that she tried to catch hold of accused from his backside, while he was hitting her daughter, and in the process she suffered injuries by said knife on both of her hands also. She further averred that she was also screaming because of which her son Nitin also came down and on this leaving her and her daughter, accused went towards Nitin and gave him a knife blow on his chest, however, her son and she were able to control the accused. She stated that they grabbed the accused and in the process, his wrist watch and knife fell at the spot, however, the accused managed to run away from there.
51. She identified her wearing clothes as Ex.P4 to Ex.P8. The contention of both PW-1 and PW-2 was that accused Sumit was known to them as he was living in a house few houses away from their house. Both PW-1 and PW-2 correctly identified the accused in the court. The contention of both PW-1 and PW-2 was that they had also suffered injuries in the incident. The accused has not disputed the MLC of PW-1 Mr. Nitin Ex.A6 and SHARAD the MLC of PW-2 Smt. Rajbala Ex.A5. As per MLC Ex.A6, PW- GUPTA 1 Mr. Nitin was medically examined on 21.03.2017 at about Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:59:01 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 19 of 69 11.52 hours and on his local examination one stab wound 3X2X3 cm over left side of chest was observed. The nature of injury was opined as 'simple - sharp'. As per MLC Ex.A5, PW-2 Smt. Rajbala arrived at the hospital on 21.03.2017 at about 09.35 am, where she was medically examined. On her local examination, wounds were examined over her right palm (5-6 cm), one wound was found over her left palm (5-6 cm) and one wound was observed over her abdomen (1-2 cm). The nature of injuries was opined as 'grievous'. The MLC of PW-1 and PW-2 also corroborates their version.
52. PW-1 and PW-2 have been cross-examined at length but their veracity regarding the incident could not be shaken and their testimonies inspire the confidence of the court.
53. PW-1 Mr. Nitin Kumar is the complainant in the present case and his statement was reduced into writing by ASI Sanjeev Khokhar vide Ex.PW1/1. In his complaint, the contention of PW-1 was that on the day of incident i.e. 21.03.2017, at about 08.30 am, his father had left for his job. He and his mother were on the first floor of their house and his deceased sister Jyoti was cleaning on the ground floor. At around 08.45 am, he and his mother heard screams of his sister at which his mother rushed downstairs. He had just come from the washroom and was washing his hands. After washing his hands, he ran downstairs and saw accused Sumit, who was living 2-3 houses away from their house, stabbing his sister and when his mother tried to save his sister, he gave many blows with knife to SHARAD her. When he tried to apprehend Sumit @ Mannu, he stabbed him GUPTA with knife on the left side of his chest. He caught hold of the Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 20 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:59:08 +0530 hand of the accused at which he got himself freed and escaped throwing the knife at the spot. Thereafter, he took his sister and mother in a battery rickshaw to some distance and thereafter, took them to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital in the car of his known Sanjay. At the hospital, his sister was declared brought dead. Thereafter, he took his mother to AIIMS Trauma Centre.
54. Perusal of Ex.PW1/1 would show that the stand of PW-1 was consistent during investigation and trial. It is also a matter of record that the fact that the accused was residing the near the house of the deceased has not been disputed. Thus, the identification of the accused as the culprit by PW-1 and PW-2 is natural and inspires the confidence of the court.
55. It would be appropriate here to refer to the medical evidence coming on record qua the deceased. The deceased Jyoti Kumar was taken to Mata Chandan Devi Hospital in unconscious state and her MLC Ex.A4 was prepared on 21.03.2017 at about 09.35 am. At that time, the following injuries/wounds were observed on her person :-
1. Rt. arm above elbow joint approx 15x10 cm.
2. Rt. Chest lateral to sternum approx 7x5 cm.
3. Upper abdomen just below rt. breast.
4. Rt. breast areola 2x3 cm.
5. R. Flank 1-2 cm.
6. below Rt. knee.
56. As per the MLC Ex.A4, which has not been disputed by the accused, deceased Ms. Jyoti Kumari was declared dead at about 10.00 am on 21.03.2017. It would be SHARAD GUPTA appropriate to refer here to the PM Report of the deceased. As per record, post mortem of the deceased Ms. Jyoti Kumar was Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 21 of 69 17:59:15 +0530 done at DDU Hospital on 22.03.2017 as per the PM Report Ex.A3 which has not been disputed by the accused. The following external injuries were observed on the dead body:-
1. Incised stab wound present on the right side of chest on the area between 2nd and 3rd intercostals space at mid clavicular line having dimension of 5cm x 3cm x deep to thoracic cavity with regular margins.
On exploration the underlying structures i.e. whole thickness of chest wall and upper lower of lung pierced which making an tear of 2.5cm x 1.5cm x 1cm on the anterior surface of upper lobe of right lung. Right thoracic cavity contained clotted blood of about 200 ml.
2. Incised stab wound present on the right side of chest over the right breast adjacent to areola having dimension of 4cm x 2cm x muscle deep with regular margins.
3. Incised stab wound present on the lower part of chest on right side with dimensions of 8cm x 4cm x deep to abdominal cavity. On exploration the underlying structures i.e. right lobe of liver bearing one tear of size 3cm x 2cm x 2cm with massive blood clot into abdominal cavity made of about 1 litre.
4. Incised stab wound present on the right upper limb of size 12cm x 5cm x muscle deep extended from lower one third part of right arm to elbow on lateral aspect with exposed muscles and sharp regular margins.
5. Two apartly placed incised wounds present on the anterior aspect of right knee having dimension of 5cm x 2cm x muscle deep and 2cm x 1.5cm x muscle deep respectively.
6. One incised stab wound present on the right hypochondrium of abdomen having dimension of 4cm x 1cm x deep to abdominal cavity.
57. As per PM report Ex.A4, the cause of death was due to hemorrhagic shock as a result of tearing of multiple vital SHARAD organs by sharp pointed weapon like knife and the manner of GUPTA death was homicidal.
Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTADate: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:59:22 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 22 of 69
58. It is a matter of record that the weapon of offence was recovered from the spot itself. Both PW-1 and PW-2 have deposed that the accused had escaped from their house leaving the weapon of offence in their house. The same was seized by PW-16 ACP Harender Singh vide memo Ex.PW15/C. PW-15 SI Sanjeev Khokhar has corroborated the version of PW-16 in this regard. It has also come on record in the testimonies of PW-15 and PW-16 that the sketch of the recovered knife was prepared vide Ex.PW15/B. Furthermore, as per the prosecution version, crime team was called at the spot and had prepared its report Ex.PW3/A. The prosecution has examined PW-3 SI Rakesh Kumar who was Incharge Mobile Crime Team and had inspected the spot i.e. House of the deceased as well as the house of the accused. He has deposed that interalia one knife having blood stains was found under the table at house no. B-2/35, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, New Delhi. The photographs of the crime scene were also clicked which have also been proved on record as Ex.PW8/A (Colly). Three photographs forming part of Ex.PW8/A show one knife lying under a table. Thus, the photographs of the Crime Scene as well as the Crime Team Report also corroborate the prosecution version.
59. As per record, the knife was sent alongwith the wearing clothes of the deceased for subsequent opinion. The accused has admitted the subsequent opinion Ex.A8. The relevant portion of the subsequent opinion is reproduced hereinunder for ready reference :-
SHARAD "On examination of Kurta it is observed that it has GUPTA already been cut in the hospital(before removing Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 23 of 69 17:59:29 +0530 and sealing) at different parts but 2-3 cuts/tears present on the corresponding parts of injuries. The cloth is smeared with blood at different parts. The lower clothing i.e. salwar shows 2 cuts at corresponding area of injuries sustained on the legs with smeared with blood. The underwear does not show any significant findings.
After going through PM report finding i.e. stab/incised wounds on the chest/abdomen/legs of the deceased and nature of produced weapon of offence alongwith tearing on the both salwar and kurta. I am opinion of that the injuries on the body of the deceased i.e. external injury no.1 to 6 and tears on the clothings could have been inflicted by produced weapon of offence. The detailed of knife has been mentioned at sketch diagram of it on separate page."
60. Thus, the subsequent opinion corroborates the prosecution version and correlates the injuries suffered by the victim with the clothes worn by her. Furthermore, the concerned doctor had also prepared the sketch of the knife which also forms part of the subsequent opinion. The subsequent opinion also observes that the injuries mentioned in post mortem report and tears on the worn clothing of the victim could have been inflicted by the produced weapon of offence. Thus, the subsequent opinion fortifies the prosecution version by co-relating the weapon of offence with the injuries suffered by the victim and the cut/tears observed on her clothing. Furthermore, comparison of the dimensions of the knife in the sketch prepared by the IO Ex.PW15/B with the sketch of the knife prepared forming part of Ex.A-8 and prepared by the concerned doctor would show that SHARAD the dimensions of the knife, its shape are structure are same in GUPTA both the sketches. In view of the subsequent opinion, the Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 24 of 69 17:59:38 +0530 prosecution has been able to establish that the injuries on the person of the deceased were possible and could have been inflicted by the produced weapon of offence.
Recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused at his instance from his house.
61. It is argued on behalf of the State that as per report of PW-17, Mr. Kaushal Kumar, Human Blood B-Group was found interalia on the exhibits including the knife (used in commission of the offence) kept in Parcel no. 3, and one open shirt and pants i.e. wearing clothes of the accused, kept in Parcel no. 5, which matched with the blood in gauze piece of deceased Jyoti, kept in Parcel no. 7. It is argued that the same also fortifies the prosecution version.
62. To establish the recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused from his house, the prosecution has inter alia examined PW-11 HC Arvind who had deposed that when he alongwith other staff went to the house of accused, the accused pointed towards grey color pant which was found in the bathroom and shirt which was lying on shoe rack outside his room in the balcony and had stated that he had worn the said clothes at the time of commission of offence. PW-12 HC Vinay Kumar had deposed that when he alongwith police staff went to the house of the accused, on interrogation, the accused told them that pant having blood stains which he was wearing at the time of the incident was lying in the bathroom whereas the shirt having SHARAD blood stains was lying on the shoe-rack outside his room. PW-15 GUPTA SI Sanjeev Khokkar has similarly deposed that when he Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 17:59:49 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 25 of 69 alongwith other staff went to the house of accused, his clothes were not having any blood stains and on enquiry he told that he had changed his clothes and that the blood stained pant was lying in the bathroom and blood stained shirt was lying on shoe- rack outside the house which were found there. PW-15 has further deposed that the said clothes were seized by the IO after putting them in cloth envelop which was duly sealed with the seal of SK and seized vide memo Ex.PW15/H. PW-16 ACP Harender Singh, the IO of the case has deposed that the accused was found at his home. That no blood stains were present on his clothes. That upon enquiry, he told that he had changed the clothes which he was wearing at the time of the incident. He further told that the blood stained pant was lying in the bathroom and the blood stained shirt was lying on the shoe-rack outside the bathroom. He further deposed that the same were sealed by him with the seal of SK and seized vide memo Ex.PW15/H. He also deposed that he had prepared the site plan of recovery (wrongly mentioned as sketch in the testimony of the witness) vide Ex.PW16/B. The prosecution version in this regard is corroborated by the testimony of PW-8 SI Suresh who was part of the crime team and had photographed the recoveries. The photographs of pant and shirt are part of the photographs Ex.PW8/A collectively.
63. Furthermore, the crime team report Ex.PW3/A also corroborates the recovery of blood stained clothes from the house of accused. Thus, the prosecution has been able to establish that SHARAD the clothes of accused were duly recovered at his instance from GUPTA his house and the same were duly sealed at the spot. As per the Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 26 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 17:59:59 +0530 FSL report Ex.PW17/A, blood group human blood of blood group 'B' was found on the clothes of the accused. As per the report, the clothes worn by the deceased were also sent to FSL concerned. As per the report Ex.PW17/A, the same were sealed with seal of PM DDUH. As per the report, human blood of blood group 'B' was found on the said clothes i.e. ladies shirt, salwar and underwear. Furthermore, the blood in gauze of the deceased was collected at the time of her post mortem and was sent to the FSL concerned. As per report Ex.PW17/A, human blood of B- Group was also found on the said gauze. The prosecution has thus been able to establish that the blood of the same group as the deceased was found on the recovered clothes of the accused.
64. It is argued on behalf of the accused that as per the prosecution version, the accused was known to the family members of the deceased, however, he was not specifically named in DD no. 19 A. It is thus argued that the prosecution version is unreliable. In this context perusal of record shows that the initial PCR call was recorded vide DD no. 19 dated 21.02.2017 as per which the caller intimated that one boy had stabbed the sister of the caller multiple times after entering into their house. The DD further records that the victim was brought to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital in the emergency and police help was needed. As per the DD, the sister of the caller had been stabbed multiple times. As per record, the caller i.e. PW-1 Mr. Nitin Kumar and his mother Ms. Rajbala had also received injuries in the incident. In these circumstances merely because SHARAD the caller failed to mention the name of the assailant in the PCR GUPTA call is of no consequence. This is especially moreso when the Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 27 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:00:07 +0530 version of PW-1 and PW-2 regarding the identity of the culprit has been consistent during investigation and trial and the accused has been named as a culprit in the initial complaint Ex.PW1/1 as well as in their testimonies by PW-1 and PW-2 during investigation and trial. Thus, the arguments of accused in this regard are liable to be rejected and mere non-mentioning of the name of the accused as the culprit in the initial PCR call is not fatal to the prosecution version.
65. It has further been argued on behalf of the accused that the prosecution has failed to attribute any motive to the accused for illegally trespassing into the house of the complainant and thereafter killing his sister Ms. Jyoti and attempting to murder complainant Mr. Nitin and his mother Smt. Rajbala. Per contra, it is asserted vehemently by the State assisted by Ld. Counsel for the complainant that the present case is based on eye witness account and in such cases merely because motive is not proved, is not fatal to the prosecution version. In Chandan (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to observe as follows :-
"9. The argument of the defence that the prosecution has not been able to establish any motive on the accused for committing this dastardly act is in fact true, but since this is a case of eyewitness where there is nothing to discredit the eyewitness, the motive itself is of little relevance. It would be necessary to mention some of the leading cases on this aspect which are as under.
10. In Shivaji Genu Mohite v. State of SHARAD Maharashtra², it was held that it is a well-settled principle in criminal jurisprudence that when ocular GUPTA testimony inspires the confidence of the court, the Digitally signed by prosecution is not required to establish motive. Mere SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:00:14 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 28 of 69 absence of motive would not impinge on the testimony of a reliable eyewitness. Motive is an important factor for consideration in a case of circumstantial evidence. But when there is direct eyewitness, motive is not significant. This is what was held: (SCC pp. 224-25, para 12) In case the prosecution is not able to discover an impelling motive, that could not reflect upon the credibility of a witness proved to be a reliable eyewitness. Evidence as to motive would, no doubt, go a long way in cases wholly dependent on circumstantial evidence. Such evidence would form one of the links in the chain of circumstantial evidence in such a case. But that would not be so in cases where there are eyewitnesses of credibility, though even in such cases if a motive is properly proved, such proof would strengthen the prosecution case and fortify the court in its ultimate conclusion. But that does not mean that if motive is not established, the evidence of an eyewitness is rendered untrustworthy.
11. The principle that the lack or absence of motive is inconsequential when direct evidence establishes the crime has been reiterated by this Court in Bikau Pandey v. State of Bihar; Rajagopal v. Muthupandi: Yogesh Singh v. Mahabeer Singh."
66. In the facts of the present case, as already discussed the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 are reliable. PW-1 and PW-2 have corroborated each other in material particulars and their version has remained consistent throughout investigation and trial. Thus, merely because the prosecution was not able to establish motive is of no consequence.
67. Ld. Counsel for the accused persons also argued that SHARAD GUPTA the eye witnesses cited and examined by the prosecution are the brother and the mother of the deceased and they are therefore Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 29 of 69 18:00:21 +0530 interested witnesses and their testimonies cannot be relied upon. In this context, it is pertinent to observe that the incident had happened inside the house of the victim. As per the prosecution version, the brother and mother of the deceased were present in the house at the relevant time. The incident had happened at about 08.45 am on 21.03.2017 i.e. in the morning. Considering the time at which the offence was committed and considering the relationship between the witnesses and the deceased, their presence inside their own house is very much natural and probable. The presence of PW-1 and PW-2 at the spot is also corroborated by their MLCs as per which they had received injuries in the incident. Furthermore, nothing has been brought forth in the cross-examination of the witnesses to challenge their presence at the spot or to show that they are planted witnesses. It would also be appropriate here to refer to the settled preposition of law as to the appreciation of evidence of injured - eye witness. It has been held in Veer Bahadur Singh vs. State and others, 2015:DHC 2594 that the evidence of an injured witness has to be given due weightage as he is a stamped witness and his presence at the spot cannot be doubted. It was further held that testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy. Furthermore, in Rajan Vs. State of Haryana, 2025, INSC 1081 , the Hon'ble Apex Court summarized the law relating to appreciation of evidence of an injured eye witness in the following terms:-
33. When the evidence of an injured eye-witness is to be appreciated, the undernoted legal SHARAD principles enunciated by the Courts are required to GUPTA be kept in mind: "(a) The presence of an injured eye-witness at the time and place of the Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 30 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:00:30 +0530 occurrence cannot be doubted unless there are material contradictions in his deposition. (b) Unless, it is otherwise established by the evidence, it must be believed that an injured witness would not allow the real culprits to escape and falsely implicate the accused. (c) The evidence of injured witness has greater evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly. (d) The evidence of injured witness cannot be doubted on account of some embellishment in natural conduct or minor contradictions. (e) If there be any exaggeration or immaterial embellishments in the evidence of an injured witness, then such contradiction, exaggeration or embellishment should be discarded from the evidence of injured, but not the whole evidence. (f) The broad substratum of the prosecution version must be taken into consideration and discrepancies which normally creep due to loss of memory with passage of time should be discarded."
34. In assessing the value of the evidence of the eyewitnesses, two principal considerations are whether, in the circumstances of the case, it is possible to believe their presence at the scene of occurrence or in such situations as would make it possible for them to witness the facts deposed to by them and secondly, whether there is anything inherently improbable or unreliable in their evidence. In respect of both these considerations, circumstances either elicited from those witnesses themselves or established by other 12 evidence tending to improbabilise their presence or to discredit the veracity of their statements, will have a bearing upon the value which a Court would attach to their evidence. Although in cases where the plea of the accused is a mere denial yet the evidence of the prosecution witnesses has to be examined on its own merits, where the accused raise a definite plea or put forward a positive case SHARAD which is inconsistent with that of the prosecution, the nature of such plea or case and the GUPTA probabilities in respect of it will also have to be Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:00:36 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 31 of 69 taken into account while assessing the value of the prosecution evidence. (See: Balu Sudam Khalde and Another v. State of Maharashtra :(2023) 13 SCC 365)
68. In the facts of the present case, the fact that PW-1 and PW-2 had suffered injuries in the course of commission of offence fortifies their presence at the spot. Nothing could be brought on record to disbelieve their presence at the spot. There is nothing on record to suggest that PW-1 and PW-2 could not have witnessed the incident. Furthermore, there is nothing inherently improbable or unreliable in their evidence. As already observed PW-1 and PW-2 have withstood the test of cross- examination and their testimonies inspire the confidence of the court.
69. Thus in the facts of the present case, PW-1 and PW- 2 cannot be said to be interested or planted witnesses. Their testimonies cannot be rejected merely because they are related to the deceased.
70. It is also argued that the injuries sustained by PW-1 and PW-2 are not in consonance with their testimonies and there is every likelihood that the injuries were self inflicted. In this context, perusal of testimony of PW-1 Sh. Nitin as regards the aspect of injuries received by him shows that he stated that on coming downstairs on day of the incident, he saw accused giving knife blows to his sister Jyoti and when his mother intervened, the accused had given knife blows to his mother. That when he intervened and tried to protect his mother and sister, accused had SHARAD GUPTA given him a knife blow which landed on his chest. PW-2 Smt. Rajbala has similarly deposed that when she went downstairs on Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 32 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:00:42 +0530 hearing the screams of her daughter, she saw the accused giving knife blows to her daughter Jyoti. That when she tried to save her daughter, the accused gave her a knife blow which landed on her lower chest/upper stomach. She further deposed that when she tried to catch hold of the accused from his back side, she suffered injuries by knife on both her hands. It is a matter of record that during the course of her testimony, the witness had shown in the court stitch marks on her lower chest/upper stomach and her hands. Furthermore, both PW-1 and PW-2 were medically examined. As per MLC of PW-1 Mr. Nitin, Ex.A6, he had suffered a stab wound 3x2x3 cm on the left side of his chest. Similarly, as per MLC of PW-Rajbala Ex.A5, wounds were observed on the right palm (5-6 cm), left palm (5-6 cm) and one wound was observed over her abdomen (1-2 cm). Thus, the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 are corroborated by their MLCs. The accused had admitted the MLCs of both PW-1 and PW-2. Pertinently, it was not put to either PW-1 or PW-2 that the injuries sustained by them were self inflicted. There is nothing on record to suggest that the injuries suffered by PW-1 and PW-2 are self inflicted. Thus, the argument of the accused in this regard is liable to be rejected.
71. It is further argued that no finger prints or chance prints were recovered from the said knife and as such the prosecution has not been able to connect the said knife with the commission of the offence or with the accused. In the facts of the present case, the knife was recovered from the spot itself. The scene of crime report Ex.PW3/A mentions the factum of recovery SHARAD GUPTA of blood stained knife from the spot. The prosecution is also Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 33 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:00:49 +0530 relying upon the photographs of the spot taken by the crime team from the spot. Three of the said photographs show the presence of the knife at the spot partly under the table. PW-1 and PW-2 have both deposed that the accused had escaped from the spot leaving the knife there. Furthermore, PW-15 SI Sanjeev Khokhar has also deposed that one knife having blood stains was found lying under the table. Testimony of PW-15 in this regard has been corroborated by the testimony of PW-16 ACP Harender Singh who has also deposed on the same lines. Thus, the prosecution has been able to establish the recovery of the knife from the spot. In these circumstances merely because no chance prints could be lifted from the knife is by itself of no consequence and does not effect the veracity of the prosecution version.
72. It is argued on behalf of the accused that there are contradictions in the prosecution version. That as per PW-4 ASI Satish, his statement was recorded by one police official, named SI Rajesh, however, as per the prosecution version, the statement of the said witness was recorded by PW-16 Inspector Harender Singh. That furthermore, PW-4 asserted that he his statement was reduced into writing and was thereafter got typed. He also asserted that he had gone through the contents of his handwritten statement and had signed it. However, no such handwritten signed statement is available on record. It is further urged that there are contradictions in the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 regarding factum of watch of accused falling at the spot during the course of the incident.
SHARAD GUPTA 73. Before proceeding any further, it would be Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 34 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:00:55 +0530 appropriate to refer to the settled preposition of law on this point. In the judgment titled as Kuriya v. State of Rajasthan reported as (2012) 10 SCC 433 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed:
"......30. This Court has repeatedly taken the view that the discrepancies or improvements which do not materially affect the case of the prosecution and are insignificant cannot be made the basis for doubting the case of the prosecution. The courts may not concentrate too much on such discrepancies or improvements. The purpose is to primarily and clearly sift the chaff from the grain and find out the truth from the testimony of the witnesses. Where it does not affect the core of the prosecution case, such discrepancy should not be attached undue significance. The normal course of human conduct would be that while narrating a particular incident, there may occur minor discrepancies. Such discrepancies may even in law render credential to the depositions. The improvements or variations must essentially relate to the material particulars of the prosecution case. The alleged improvements and variations must be shown with respect to material particulars of the case and the occurrence. Every such improvement, not directly related to the occurrence, is not a ground to doubt the testimony of a witness. The credibility of a definite circumstance of the prosecution case cannot be weakened with reference to such minor or insignificant improvements. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgments of this Court in Kathi Bharat Vajsur v. State of Gujarat [(2012) 5 SCC 724 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 740], Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary v. State of Maharashtra [(2000) 8 SCC 457 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 1546], Gura Singh v. State of Rajasthan [(2001) 2 SCC 205 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 323] and Sukhchain Singh v. State of Haryana [(2002) 5 SCC 100 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 961]."
SHARAD GUPTA 74. Furthermore, in the judgment titled as Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat reported as (1983) 3 Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 35 of 69 18:01:03 +0530 SCC 217, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held:
".........We do not consider it appropriate or permissible to enter upon a reappraisal or reappreciation of the evidence in the context of the minor discrepancies painstakingly highlighted by learned Counsel for the appellant. Overmuch importance cannot be attached to minor discrepancies". The reasons are obvious :
"(1) By and large a witness cannot be expected to possess a photographic memory and to recall the details of an incident. It is not as if a video tape is replayed on the mental screen.
(2) Ordinarily it so happens that a witness is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element of surprised.
The mental faculties therefore cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb the details.
(3) The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. An object or movement might emboss its image on one person's mind, whereas it might go unnoticed on the part of another.
(4) By and large people cannot accurately recall a conversation and reproduce the very words used by them or heard by them. They can only recall the main purport of the conversation. It is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a human tape-recorder.
(5) In regard to exact time of an incident, or the time duration of an occurrence, usually, people make their estimates by guess-work on the spur of the moment at the time of interrogation. And one cannot expect people to make very precise or reliable estimates in such matters. Again, it depends on the time-sense of individuals which varies from person to person. (6) Ordinarily a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately the sequence of events which takes place in rapid succession or in a short time span. A witness is liable to get confused, or mixed up when interrogated SHARAD later on.
GUPTA (7) A witness, though wholly truthful, is liable to be
Digitally signed
by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar
GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 36 of 69
Date: 2025.09.24
18:01:10 +0530
overawed by the court atmosphere and the piercing cross-examination made by counsel and out of nervousness mix up facts, get confused regarding sequence of events, or fill up details from imagination on the spur of the moment. The sub-conscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates on account of the fear of looking foolish or being disbelieved though the witness is giving a truthful and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him -- Perhaps it is a sort of a psychological defence mechanism activated on the spur of the moment".
75. The law is thus well settled that discrepancies which do not go to the root of the matter and shake the basic version of the witnesses cannot be annexed with undue importance. Trivial discrepancies ought not to obliterate an otherwise acceptable evidence. Furthermore, one cannot come across a witness whose evidence does not contain some exaggeration or embellishments. Court can sift the chaff from corn and find out truth from the testimony of witnesses. Evidence is to be considered from the point of trustworthiness. If this element is satisfied, and the witnesses are found to be trustworthy, their evidence ought to inspire confidence in mind of the court.
76. Also, it is to be seen that ordinarily a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately after lapse of time the sequence of events which take place in rapid succession or in a short time span. A witness is liable to get confused, or can mix up sequence or particulars of events when interrogated later on. A witness, though wholly truthful, is liable to be overawed by the somber SHARAD court atmosphere and the piercing cross examination made by the GUPTA defence counsel and out of nervousness can mix up facts, get Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:01:17 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 37 of 69 confused regarding sequence of events, or fill up details from imagination on the spur of the moment. It is to be observed that the sub-conscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates by embellishing or embroidering details on account of the fear of looking foolish or being disbelieved though the witness is giving a truthful and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him. Sometimes there could even be a deliberate attempt to offer embellishment perhaps due to over-anxiety and the witness may give slightly exaggerated account. However, the same would not imply that the testimony of the witness is to be brushed aside and cannot be relied upon. In this regard, reliance may be placed upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled as Rana Pratap v. State of Haryana AIR 1983 SC 680 , Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh (1988) 4 SCC 551) , Leela Ram (Dead) through Duli Chand v. State of Haryana, (SC) 1999(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 588, Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat AIR 1983 SC 753, Sohrab v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1972 SC 2020 and State of U.P. v. Anil Singh AIR 1988 SC 1998.
77. It is a matter of record that the incident was of 21.03.2017 while the PW-4 was examined and cross-examined on 09.12.2019 i.e. about two years and eight months after the incident. As already observed, human memory is neither perfect nor infallible. With passage of time, some discrepancies are to be expected in the testimonies of witnesses. Thus, merely because SHARAD PW-4 ASI Satish stated that his statement was recorded by SI GUPTA Rajesh or that he stated that his statement was got signed by the Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 38 of 69 18:01:24 +0530 IO is of no consequence. Furthermore, the accused admitted the PCR form alongwith requisite certificate U/s 65 B of the Indian Evidence Act in consultation with his counsel U/s 294 Cr.P.C. and the same were collectively marked as Ex.A7. The PCR form shows the presence of ASI Satish Kumar at the spot being part of the PCR staff. Thus, the presence of PW-4 ASI Satish, at the spot, has been duly established by the prosecution. Thus, in the totality of the circumstances, the discrepancies in the testimony of PW-4 ASI Satish are of no consequence.
78. It is further argued that as per prosecution version, one watch was recovered from the spot, however, PW-1 failed to state in his testimony in the court that any watch was recovered from the spot while PW-2 asserted that the watch of the accused had fallen down at the spot. In this context also, it is pertinent to observe that some discrepancies in the testimonies of witnesses are to be expected with passage of time. A person cannot be expected to give a parrot like version or depose with mathematical precision at the drop of a hat as and when called to depose. Only a tutored witness can depose so. Errors due to lapse of time and resultant lapse of memory have to be given due allowance.
79. Furthermore, the failure of PW-1 to depose regarding the watch of the accused having fallen during scuffle does not affect the broad contours of the prosecution version SHARAD when the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 are otherwise found to GUPTA be credible and their credit could not be impeached during trial.
Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTAState Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 39 of 69 18:01:31 +0530 Thus, testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 cannot be disbelieved on this short ground.
80. Is is further argued that the prosecution version is fraught with inconsistencies. That as per the police version, when they reached the scene of crime, one anonymous person disclosed that the person who killed the deceased was sitting at his house. However, neither the said anonymous person was examined nor cited as a witness. That the anonymous tip was the sole basis for apprehension of the accused and the failure of prosecution to bring on record anything to identify the said informant undermines the case of the prosecution.
81. In the facts of the present case, it is undisputed that the accused was residing near the house of the deceased and was well known to her family members. Furthermore, the said anonymous person was not an eye witness of the incident. Thus, merely because the said person who told the police officials that the accused was available in his house was not cited as a witness is of no consequence and this argument of the accused is liable to be rejected.
82. It is further argued on behalf of the accused that the prosecution is also relying upon the disclosure statement of the accused which is itself not admissible in evidence. That while as per prosecution version, the accused had disclosed that brother of deceased had an illicit relationship with his wife, however, the IO SHARAD GUPTA PW-16 in his cross-examination stated that the mother and brother of deceased had denied the existence of any illicit Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 40 of 69 18:01:39 +0530 relationship between the wife of the accused and brother of the deceased. That the IO also stated that he could not find any material to substantiate the said assertion of the accused. Thus, there is no corroboration of the assertions in the disclosure statement of the accused regarding motive and the same is also fatal to the prosecution version and the disclosure statement cannot be relied upon. In the facts of the present case, it has already been observed that the prosecution has not been able to establish any motive for commission of the offence. It has also been observed in preceeding parts of this judgment that failure of prosecution to establish the motive is not fatal to the prosecution case especially when the prosecution version is based on the testimonies of eye witnesses of the incident who also received injuries in the incident. Thus, at the most, this argument of the accused is also related to the argument of absence of motive and is liable to be rejected.
83. It is argued on behalf of the accused that he had raised a plea of alibi which has come on record in the statement of his father DW-3. That DW-3 has stated that at the time of the incident, the accused was at his home. That thus, the accused has been able to establish his plea of alibi.
84. In this context, it is pertinent to observe that the plea of alibi was not put to either to PW-1 or PW-2 or to any other prosecution witness. The said plea was not taken by the accused even in his statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C. The plea of alibi was SHARAD introduced for the first time by his father DW-3 Mr. Kanhaiya GUPTA Lal. DW-3 is an interested witness and his testimony is to be Digitally signed treated with caution. In totality of circumstances, the plea of alibi by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 41 of 69 18:01:47 +0530 appears to have been taken as an afterthought and is liable to be rejected being a sham defence.
85. It has further been argued on behalf of the accused that the blood recovered from the spot was sent for forensic examination, however, only one blood group i.e. blood group B was found on the said knife. It is urged that the same contradicts the prosecution version that three persons were injured using the said knife. It is further argued that if the prosecution version that three persons were injured using the said knife is believed then more than one blood group should have been found on the said knife.
86. In this context, PW-17 Mr. Kaushal Kumar was cross examined by the accused. The relevant portion of the cross examination of PW-17 is re-produced here under for ready reference:
"I had found only one type of blood group on the knife i.e. Ex.3 i.e. blood group B. The blood group was already not provided to the laboratory only the blood sample was provided. It is correct that blood ground B is of number of persons in general. It is correct that I had not conducted any DNA test of the exhibits. (Vol. The same were not sought from me). I cannot comment as to whether the clothes sent to me for analysis, were not of deceased or victim. It is wrong to suggest that deceased Jyoti was not having blood group B. I cannot comment that all the person of the family cannot have a same blood group. It might be or it might not be. It is correct that if DNA analysis could have been done on the exhibits, then the results could be more clear. (Vol. The same was not sought from me). I cannot comment that if one knife SHARAD was used to commit murder of three people, then the GUPTA blood of all three people would be available on the knife".Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24
18:01:54 +0530 State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 42 of 69
87. Thus, PW-17 in his cross examination unequivocally stated that he could not comment that all the persons of a family cannot have same blood group and that he could not comment if one knife was used to commit murder of three people then the blood of all three would be available on the knife. To my mind, the cross examination of PW-17 demolishes the arguments of the accused in this regard. Furthermore, the accused could not bring on record anything to suggest that the deceased Jyoti was not having blood group "B". Rather the serological report Ex.PW17/B notices that the human blood of B Group was found on the gauze piece of deceased Jyoti, which had been preserved at the time of her post mortem. Also the injuries on the body of the deceased and the injured persons respectively have been recapitulated in preceding paras of this judgment. It is observed that the deceased suffered as many as seven injuries on her person as per PM report Ex.A3 which resulted in haemorrhagic shock as a result of tearing of multiple vital organs by sharp pointed weapon like knife. Also PW-1 suffered a stab injury on left side of chest as per his MLC Ex.A6 which was opined as simple with sharp weapon. PW-2 suffered grievous injuries including wound on her left palm, right palm and one wound on her abdomen. The flow of blood from wounds of the deceased would be more than the flow of blood from the injuries of PW-1 and PW-2. Thus, having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the deceased and the victims respectively, it is quite plausible that only one blood group was discovered on the same. This is SHARAD especially moreso as the victim and the injured were related to GUPTA each other, the victim being the sister of PW-1 and daughter of Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 43 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:02:01 +0530 PW-2. It is quite plausible that all three of them shared the same blood group especially in view of testimony of PW-17 in this regard excerpted above. Thus merely because only one blood group was found on the knife would not imply that the report is fabricated.
88. As regards the arguments that the recoveries were planted or tampered with, the argument is liable to be rejected for the simple reason that there was no requirement for the police officials to go to such extreme lengths and plant the blood of the victim on the recovered exhibits especially when it is not the case of the accused that the Investigating Officer or any police official were inimical towards him.
89. It is argued that the prosecution version is that blood stained clothes of the accused were recovered at his instance, however, the said recovery is highly suspicious considering the prosecution version that when the accused was apprehended he was found sitting peacefully in his house and no blood stains were observed on his clothes at that time. It is further argued that no videography of the recovery of clothes was done and no independent witnesses were joined in the investigation. Thus, the recovery of blood stained clothes cannot be relied upon.
90. In this context, it is pertinent to observe that merely because the accused was found in his home after the incident would not imply that he is innocent or that the recovery was planted. The house of accused was a place of sanctuary for him SHARAD and it was but reasonable and probable that after the incident he GUPTA went to his own house and changed his clothes.Digitally signed by SHARAD
GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar
FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 44 of 69
Date: 2025.09.24
18:02:09 +0530
91. As regards the argument that the videography of the recovery of the clothes was not done, it is pertinent to observe that the recovery was duly photographed and the photographs have been proved on record as Ex.PW8/A collectively. Thus, merely because the recovery was not videographed would not imply that the recovery itself is planted.
92. As regards the argument regarding absence of public witnesses during recovery proceedings, the law in this regard is well settled. Reliance can be placed on the pronouncement in Surinder Kumar vs The State Of Punjab, AIR 2020 SC 303 wherein the judgment of Jarnail Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011) 3 SCC 521 was quoted with approval and it was observed that merely because public witnesses were not joined would not falsify the prosecution version and merely because case of prosecution is based on evidence of official witnesses, does not mean that the same should not be believed. The relevant portion of the said pronouncement is reproduced hereinunder : -
"15. The judgment in the case of Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, relied on by the counsel for the respondent-State also supports the case of the prosecution. In the aforesaid judgment, this Court has held that merely because prosecution did not examine any independent witness, would not necessarily lead to conclusion that accused was falsely implicated. The evidence of official witnesses cannot be distrusted and disbelieved, merely on account of their official status. In the case of State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Sunil & Anr. it was held as under:
"It is an archaic notion that actions of the Police Officer, should be approached with initial distrust. It is time now to start placing at least initial trust on the actions and the documents made by the Police. At SHARAD any rate, the Courts cannot start with the GUPTA presumption that the police records are untrustworthy. As a presumption of law, the Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 45 of 69 18:02:16 +0530 presumption would be the other way round. The official acts of the Police have been regularly performed is a wise principle of presumption and recognized even by the Legislature".
93. Thus merely because public witnesses were not joined in the recovery proceedings would not by itself vitiate the recovery itself. This argument of the accused is thus liable to be rejected. This is especially moreso when the recovery witnesses i.e. PW-11 HC Arvind, PW-12 HC Vinay Kumar, PW-15 SI Sanjeev Khokkar and PW-16 ACP Harinder Singh have been consistent regarding the circumstances of the recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused at his instance from his house and their veracity could not be shaken in their cross examinations.
94. It is argued that a wrist watch was recovered from the scene of crime. That as per the prosecution version, the said watch was of the accused, however, the prosecution failed to get TIP of the said watch conducted. Furthermore, the investigating agency failed to bring on record anything in black and white to establish that the said watch in fact belonged to the accused. In this context, it is a matter of record that the prosecution failed to bring on record anything to connect the watch recovered at the scene of crime with the accused. However, to establish its case, the prosecution is relying upon the testimony of eye witnesses of the case i.e. PW-1 Nitin Kumar and PW-2 Smt. Rajbala who were also injured during the incident and as already discussed their veracity could not be shaken in cross-examination. Thus merely because the prosecution failed to connect the watch SHARAD recovered from the spot with the accused is not fatal to the GUPTA prosecution version. This argument of the accused is thus liable Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 46 of 69 18:02:24 +0530 to be rejected.
95. The argument of the accused to my mind is at the most that investigation was faulty in this regard. However, the law is well settled that an accused should not be allowed to go scot free or the witnesses disbelieved for defective investigation (Balwant Singh v. State of Haryana, (SC) 1995 A.I.R. (SC) 84 and Amar Singh Vs. Balwinder Singh 2003 AIR SCW 717). An accused should not be allowed to go scot free merely on account of faulty/negligent investigation. Every faulty investigation or padding in evidence cannot by itself lead to total demolition of prosecution case if it can otherwise stand ignoring these fallacies. (Lakshmi v. State of UP (SC) 2002 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 82). Mere faulty investigation cannot be made basis of acquitting the accused when sufficient evidence is available to nail him (Ram Parshad v. State of Haryana, (P & H) (DB) 1992(3) R.C.R (Criminal) 231). In Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujrat (SC), 2004 (4) S.C.C 158 and State of UP v. Jagdeo (SC) 2003 A.I.R. (SC) 660, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that accused should not be acquitted solely on account of the defect in investigation. To do so would tantamount to playing into hands of investigating officer if investigation is designedly defective. Thus, even if, this argument of the accused is taken at its face value even then, the same would not entail acquittal of the accused and he cannot take benefit of the lapses, if any, in the investigation especially when the testimony of the eye witnesses are found to be cogent, credible and trustworthy.
SHARAD GUPTA Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:02:31 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 47 of 69 Plea of insanity
96. It is argued on behalf of the accused that the accused is of unsound mind which is reflected from his examination by the Medical Board dated 03.10.2018. That the medical board had opined and in view of previous episodic psychotic illness, the accused needed long term prophylaxis. That the said finding indicates that the accused is suffering from a recurring psychotic disorder which impairs his mental faculties and may recur without warning. That the requirement for long term prophylaxis demonstrates that the illness is chronic, serious and has a pattern of relapse. That such an illness can result in temporary but complete loss of judgment, self control and understanding particularly during a psychotic episode. That it is plausible that the accused was in such a psychotic state at the time of the incident and was of unsound mind at the time of the incident, due to which, he was easily implicated in this case by the complainant.
97. It is further argued that the opinion of the board was sought regarding fitness of the accused to stand trial. That there is difference between fitness to stand trial and mental capacity at the time of the incident and while the former pertains to the ability of the accused to understand legal proceedings and instruct his counsel, the later concerns his mental state at the time of commission of the offence.
98. Ld. Addl. PP for State has vehemently opposed the SHARAD contention of the accused in this regard. Adverting to the GUPTA arguments of the accused, the contention of accused during Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 48 of 69 18:02:38 +0530 course of trial was that the accused was suffering from mental illness and was taking treatment for his mental illness and suggestions in this regard were put to PW-1, PW-2 and PW-16. The contention of the accused even during trial was that the accused was falsely implicated in this case being a soft target as he was mentally unfit. The argument of the accused that the accused was falsely implicated as he was a soft target due to his mental condition, to my mind falls short of the defence of insanity as enshrined in Section 84 IPC. Furthermore as already observed that PW1 and PW2 are eye witnesses of the incident who were injured during the incident. Their testimonies as already observed inspire the confidence of the court and are corroborated by medical evidence in the form of MLCs of PW1 and PW2. Thus, PW1 and PW2 had every opportunity to see the assailant. The accused failed to bring on record or ascribe any motive to PW1 and PW2 to falsely implicate the accused and shield the real culprit. No previous enmity has either been suggested to either PW1 or PW2 which might have afforded a reason to either PWs 1 and 2 to falsely implicate the accused while shielding the real culprit. Similarly, it is not the case of accused that the police officials including PW-16 were inimical towards him for which he was singled out and falsely implicated in this case. To my mind, the argument that the accused was a soft target is neither here nor there and is liable to be rejected.
99. Adverting to the plea of insanity, it would be appropriate here to refer to the settled preposition of law on this SHARAD aspect. It has been held in Prakash Nayi @ Sen vs. State of Goa, GUPTA 2023 SCC OnLine SC 93 as follows :-
Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTADate: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:02:45 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 49 of 69 "4. Section 84 of the IPC recognizes only an act which could not be termed as an offence. It starts with the words "nothing is an offence". The said words are a clear indication of the intendment behind this laudable provision. Such an act shall emanate from an unsound mind. Therefore, the existence of an unsound mind is a sine qua non to the applicability of the provision. A mere unsound mind per se would not suffice, and it should be to the extent of not knowing the nature of the act. Such a person is incapable of knowing the nature of the said act. Similarly, he does not stand to reason as to whether an act committed is either wrong or contrary to law. Needless to state, the element of incapacity emerging from an unsound mind shall be present at the time of commission.
5. The provision speaks about the act of a person of unsound mind. It is a very broad provision relatable to the incapacity, as aforesaid. The test is from the point of view of a prudent man. Therefore, a mere medical insanity cannot be said to mean unsoundness of mind. There may be a case where a person suffering from medical insanity would have committed an act, however, the test is one of legal insanity to attract the mandate of Section 84 of the IPC. There must be an inability of a person in knowing the nature of the act or to understand it to be either wrong or contrary to the law.
6. The aforesaid provision is founded on the maxim, actus non reum facit nisi mens sit rea, i.e., an act does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty intention. It is a fundamental principle of criminal law that there has to be an element of mens rea in forming guilt with intention. A person of an unsound mind, who is incapable of knowing the consequence of an act, does not know that such an act is right or wrong. He may not even know that he has committed that act. When such is the position, he cannot be made to suffer punishment. This act cannot be termed as a mental rebellion constituting a deviant behaviour leading to a crime against society. He stands as a victim in need of help, and therefore, cannot be charged and tried for an SHARAD offence. His position is that of a child not knowing either his action or the consequence of it."
GUPTA Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:02:52 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 50 of 69
100. It would be appropriate here to refer to the pronouncement in Surendra Mishra v. State of Jharkhand (2011) 11 SCC 495, wherein it was held as under :-
"11. In our opinion, an accused who seeks exoneration from liability of an act under Section 84 of the Penal Code is to prove legal insanity and not medical insanity. Expression "unsoundness of mind" has not been defined in the Penal Code and it has mainly been treated as equivalent to insanity. But the term "insanity" carries different meaning in different contexts and describes varying degrees of mental disorder. Every person who is suffering from mental disease is not ipso facto exempted from criminal liability. The mere fact that the accused is conceited, odd, irascible and his brain is not quite all right, or that the physical and mental ailments from which he suffered had rendered his intellect weak and affected his emotions or indulges in certain unusual acts, or had fits of insanity at short intervals or that he was subject to epileptic fits and there was abnormal behaviour or the behaviour is queer, are not sufficient to attract the application of Section 84 of the Penal Code."
101. Further in Hari Singh Gond v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2008) 16 SCC, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under :-
"7. Section 84 lays down the legal test of responsibility in cases of alleged unsoundness of mind. There is no definition of "unsoundness of mind" in IPC. The courts have, however, mainly treated this expression as equivalent to insanity. But the term "insanity" itself has no precise definition. It is a term used to describe varying degrees of mental disorder. So, every person, who is mentally diseased, is not ipso facto exempted from criminal responsibility. A distinction is to be made between legal insanity and medical insanity. A court is concerned with legal insanity, and not with medical insanity.""
In Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakkar v. State of SHARAD 102.
GUPTA Gujarat (AIR 1964 SC 1563), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 51 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:02:59 +0530 held that:
"(7) The doctrine of burden of proof in the context of the plea of insanity may be stated in the following propositions:
(1) The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed the offence with the requisite mens rea; and the burden of proving that always rests on the prosecution from the beginning to the end of the trial.
(2) There is a rebuttable presumption that the accused was not insane, when he committed the crime, in the sense laid down by Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code: the accused may rebut it by placing before the court all the relevant evidence oral, documentary or circumstantial, but the burden of proof upon him is no higher than that rests upon a party to civil proceedings.
(3) Even if the accused was not able to establish conclusively that he was insane at the time he committed the offence, the evidence placed before the court by the accused or by the prosecution may raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the court as regards one or more of the ingredients of the offence, including mens rea of the accused and in that case the court would be entitled to acquit the accused on the ground that the general burden of proof resting on the prosecution was not discharged."
103. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Bapu vs. State of Rajasthan, (2007) 8SCC 66, held as under :-
"8. ...The onus of proving unsoundness of mind is on the accused. But where during the investigation previous history of insanity is revealed, it is the duty of an honest investigator to subject the accused to a medical examination and place that evidence before the court and if this is not done, it creates a serious infirmity in the prosecution case and the benefit of doubt has to be given to the accused. The onus, however, has to be discharged by producing evidence as to the conduct of the accused shortly prior to the offence and his conduct at the time or immediately afterwards, also by evidence of his mental condition and other relevant SHARAD factors. ........
GUPTA 12. Mere abnormality of mind or partial delusion, Digitally signed by SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 52 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:03:06 +0530 irresistible impulse or compulsive behaviour of a psychopath affords no protection under Section 84 as the law contained in that section is still squarely based on the outdated M'Naughton rules of 19th century England. The provisions of Section 84 are in substance the same as those laid down in the answers of the Judges to the questions put to them by the House of Lords, in M'Naughton's case [(1843) 4 St Tr NS 847 (HL)]. Behaviour, antecedent, attendant and subsequent to the event, may be relevant in finding the mental condition of the accused at the time of the event, but not that remote in time. It is difficult to prove the precise state of the offender's mind at the time of the commission of the offence, but some indication thereof is often furnished by the conduct of the offender while committing it or immediately after the commission of the offence. A lucid interval of an insane person is not merely a cessation of the violent symptoms of the disorder, but a restoration of the faculties of the mind sufficiently to enable the person soundly to judge the act; but the expression does not necessarily mean complete or perfect restoration of the mental faculties to their original condition. So, if there is such a restoration, the person concerned can do the act with such reason, memory and judgment as to make it a legal act; but merely a cessation of the violent symptoms of the disorder is not sufficient."
104. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Devidas Loka Rathod v. State of Maharashtra (2018) 7 SCC 718, has held that:
"11. Section 84 IPC carves out an exception, that an act will not be an offence, if done by a person, who at the time of doing the same, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law. But this onus on the accused, under Section 105 of the Evidence Act is not as stringent as on the prosecution to be established beyond all reasonable doubts. The accused has only to establish his defence on a preponderance of probability, as observed in Surendra Mishra v. State of Jharkhand (2011) 11 SHARAD SCC 495 : (2011) 3 SCC (Cri) 232, after which the onus shall shift on the prosecution to establish the GUPTA inapplicability of the exception. But, it is not every Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:03:12 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 53 of 69 and any plea of unsoundness of mind that will suffice. The standard of test to be applied shall be of legal insanity and not medical insanity, as observed in State of Rajasthan v. Shera Ram (2012) 1 SCC 602 : (2012) 1 SCC (Cri) 406, as follows:
(Shera Ram, SCC p. 614, para 19) "19...Once, a person is found to be suffering from mental disorder or mental deficiency, which takes within its ambit hallucinations, dementia, loss of memory and self-control, at all relevant times by way of appropriate documentary and oral evidence, the person concerned would be entitled to seek resort to the general exceptions from criminal liability.
12. The crucial point of time for considering the defence plea of unsoundness of mind has to be with regard to the mental state of the accused at the time the offence was committed collated from evidence of conduct which preceded, attended and followed the crime as observed in Ratan Lal v. State of M.P. (1970) 3 SCC 533 : 1971 SCC (Cri) 139, as follows: (SCC pp. 533-34, para 2) "2. It is now well settled that the crucial point of time at which unsoundness of mind should be established is the time when the crime is actually committed and the burden of proving this lies on the accused. In Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakkar v. State of Gujarat (1964) 7 SCR 361 : AIR 1964 SC 1563, it was laid down that 'there is a rebuttable presumption that the accused was not insane. when he committed the crime, in the sense laid down by Section 84 of the Penal Code, the accused may rebut it by placing before the court all the relevant evidence- oral, documentary or circumstantial, but the burden of proof upon him is no higher than that which rests upon a party to civil proceedings'.
13. If from the materials placed on record, a reasonable doubt is created in the mind of the Court with regard to the mental condition of the accused at the time of occurrence, he shall be entitled to the benefit of the reasonable doubt and consequent acquittal, as observed in Vijayee Singh v. State of U.P. (1990) 3 SCC 190 : 1990 SCC (Cri) 378."
105. It is thus well settled that Section 84 IPC carves out SHARAD an exception and provides that if an accused at the time of GUPTA commission of offence was incapable of knowing the nature of Digitally signed State Vs. Sumit Kumar by SHARAD FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 54 of 69 GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 18:03:19 +0530 the act or that what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law due to unsoundness of mind, then such act would not be an offence. It is also well settled that the accused has to establish that he was suffering from unsoundness of mind of such nature as mentioned in Section 84 IPC at the time of commission of the offence and not at previous or subsequent time. It is also well settled that there is difference between legal insanity and medical insanity and not every ailment of the mind would be covered within the ambit of Section 84 IPC. It is also well settled that every person who is suffering from mental disease is not ipso facto exempted from criminal liability. The mere fact that the accused is conceited, odd, irascible and his brain is not quite all right, or that the physical and mental ailments from which he suffered had rendered his intellect weak and affected his emotions or indulges in certain unusual acts, or had fits of insanity at short intervals or that he was subject to epileptic fits and there was abnormal behaviour or the behaviour is queer, are not sufficient to attract the application of Section 84 of the Penal Code. Further mere abnormality of mind or partial delusion, irresistible impulse or compulsive behaviour of a psychopath affords no protection under Section 84 IPC. To take benefit of Section 84 IPC, the "unsoundness of mind" should be of such a nature so that the accused is either incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law. It is also well settled that the factum of his insanity being within special knowledge of the accused has to be SHARAD established by him. It is also well settled that the onus upon the GUPTA accused is to establish 'insanity' by preponderance of Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:03:26 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 55 of 69 probabilities.
106. Adverting to the facts of the present case, it is pertinent to observe that the accused has not examined any expert in his defence to show that he was suffering from any mental disorder at the time of commission of the offence. The fact that the accused was suffering from any mental disorder and for this reason cannot be held liable for the commission of the offence or that he was a soft target due to the said ailment was within special knowledge of the accused himself. It would be pertinent here to refer to Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act/109 of the BSA, 2023 which provides that where any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him. Thus, it was for the accused to bring on record material to show that he was in fact suffering from legal insanity as contemplated U/s 84 IPC/Section 22 BNS, 2023. The accused failed to examine any medical expert to establish that he as in fact legally insane at the time of commission of the offence. The only material produced by the accused in this regard is in the form of testimonies of DW-1 Mr. Bhola Thakur, DW-2 Mr. Vinod Gupta and DW-3 Mr. Kanhaiya Lal. DW-3 also produced on record documents Ex.DW/A (Colly) and Ex.DW3/B (Colly).
107. In this context, it is pertinent to observe that the stand of defence witnesses regarding the mental condition of the accused has not been consistent. As per DW-1 Mr. Bhola Thakur, he knew accused Sumit since his birth. He asserted that whenever SHARAD accused Sumit came to his shop for getting a hair cut, he was GUPTA accompanied by someone as his mental condition was not stable Digitally signed since birth. However, DW-3 Mr. Kanhaiya Lal, father of the by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:03:34 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 56 of 69 accused has contradicted the version of DW-1 that the accused was suffering from mental ailment since his birth. As per DW-3, the accused was hit by a teacher when he was in 6th Class and he told this fact to him three years later. That accused had problem in his ear due to the same. That after coming to know about problems of his son, he got his son treated for injury in his ear as well as his mental ailments. That since 2014, mental problems of his son Sumit had increased. Thus, while as per DW-1, mental condition of the accused was not well since birth, as per DW-3, the problems had started three years after he was hit by his teacher on his ear in 6th class.
108. Furthermore, assertion of DW-1 was that the accused when he used to come alone to his shop created problems as he either used to laugh or got angry and used to throw articles from the shop.
109. DW-2 merely stated that he used to visit the shop of father of accused and the accused sometimes used to smile at him and sometimes used to get angry at him. The assertion of DW-3 was that his son used to behave strange. That he could not sleep at night and used to clap for no reason.
110. The accused was required to establish legal insanity in terms of Section 84 IPC. The assertions of DW-1, DW-2 and DW-3, recapitulated above, by themselves are insufficient to establish that the accused was legally insane in terms of Section 84 IPC i.e. he was incapable of knowing the nature of his act or SHARAD that what he was doing is either wrong or contrary to law. GUPTA Furthermore, as observed in Surender Mishra (supra), the mere Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:03:41 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 57 of 69 fact that the accused is conceited, odd, irascible and his brain is not quite all right, or that the physical and mental ailments from which he suffered had rendered his intellect weak and affected his emotions or indulges in certain unusual acts, or had fits of insanity at short intervals and there was abnormal behaviour or the behaviour is queer, are not sufficient to attract the application of Section 84 of the Penal Code. Further as held in Bapu (supra) mere abnormality of mind or partial delusion, irresistible impulse or compulsive behaviour of a psychopath affords no protection under Section 84 IPC. To take benefit of Section 84 IPC, the "unsoundness of mind" should be of such a nature so that the accused is either incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law. The accused to my mind has not been able to establish that he was suffering from "legal insanity" so as to be incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that what he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law.
111. Further assertion of DW-2 was that father of the accused had told him that mental condition of the accused was not normal. The said assertion to my mind is neither here nor there and is insufficient to show that the accused was insane at the time of commission of offence.
112. Furthermore, DW-1 in his cross examination stated that the family of accused consisted of his brother, his parents, his wife and one child. DW-2 similarly in his cross examination SHARAD stated that the family of accused consisted of his brother, his GUPTA parents, his wife and one child. He further stated that he had Digitally signed attended the marriage of accused. DW-3 Kanahiya Lal, father of by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 58 of 69 18:03:48 +0530 accused stated that the accused was aged about 25 years at the time of his marriage and the name of wife of accused Sumit is Renu. He further stated that the wife of accused Sumit remained with him in their house from the date of their marriage till the date of arrest of accused. Thus, as per DW1, DW2 and DW3, the accused was sane enough to get married and sire a child. As per DW2, the accused used to sit in the grocery shop of his father. The accused was thus sufficiently sane to sit in the grocery shop of his father even as per defence witnesses. Cumulatively these facts would show that even as per the evidence adduced by the accused on record, he was not suffering from any degree of mental insanity to render him either incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law or even any degree of mental illness which might incapacitate him from doing normal acts of daily life or might render him a danger to safety of himself and other persons. Thus taken at face value, none of the defence witnesses has been able to establish that the accused was legally insane at the time of commission of the offence.
113. The accused is placing reliance on medical records i.e. Ex.DW3/A and Ex.DW3/B. Ex.DW3/A comprises inter alia of OPD cards and the treatment taken by the accused for loss of hearing in his left ear. The fact that accused was taking treatment for complaint of loss of hearing in his left ear is of no help to him in the facts of the present case. Ex.DW3/A also comprises of OPD cards regarding treatment taken by him from RML Hospital SHARAD and Acharya Shri Bhikshu Hospital. The record pertaining to GUPTA Acharya Shri Bhikshu Hospital dated 16.11.2016 is for treatment Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 59 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:03:54 +0530 of dermatological problem and is of no help to the accused in the present case. The accused is also relying upon the OPD cards of IHBAS Ex.DW3/B (colly). The documents pertaining to IHBAS are of the year 2020 and 2021 and were prepared much after the commission of offence in the present matter. Thus, by themselves, the OPD cards of IHBAS are insufficient to show that the accused was incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that what he was doing is wrong or contrary to law at the time of commission of the offence.
114. Pertinently, the OPD card of RML hospital where accused took treatment on 18.01.2016 and 09.03.2016 gives the clinical diagnosis of depression. The OPD card of Lady Harding hospital shows that the accused took treatment on 13.08.2016, 15.09.2016, 18.10.2016 and 14.03.2017 at the said hospital. The accused is noted as doing well on all dates except 14.03.2017 on which date he was accompanied by his father and was noted as symptomatic due to poor compliance. The incident in the present case had happened on 21.03.2017. The accused has not been able to establish on record his mental state during the period from 14.03.2017 to 21.03.2017. Thus the OPD cards of Lady Harding Hospital by themselves are insufficient to show that the accused was suffering from any legal insanity at the time of commission of the offence.
115. Perusal of the record shows that reports regarding the medical condition of the accused were sought from Superintendent Jails concerned as well as various hospital during SHARAD the course of trial. As per record, medical report of the accused GUPTA dated 22.08.2017 was filed as per which the accused was Digitally signed by State Vs. Sumit Kumar SHARAD GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 60 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:04:01 +0530 reviewed by psychiatric specialist in Central Jail Hospital. The report mentions that on examination on psychiatric illness was found and there is high possibility of malingering i.e. intentional and dishonest fabrication or exaggeration of physical or psychological symptoms to gain external benefits. Thus, the medical report of the accused received from Superintendent Jails concerned sought during course of trial showed that the accused was not suffering from any psychiatric illness and could be faking psychological symptoms.
116. It is a matter of record that the accused had moved an application under Section 328 Cr.P.C. during course of the trial. Vide order dated 29.11.2017, the said application was disposed off and the accused was referred to Psychiatric/clinical psychologist at DDU Hospital or any other govt. hospital. Report was sought from the concerned doctor as to whether the accused was suffering from unsoundness of mind. On 08.06.2018, it was observed that as per the medical report, received from Department of Psychiatry, RML Hospital, suggested meditational impairment and impaired reality testing, however, the patient's repeated mental state examination conducted on 02.01.2018, 15.03.2018 and 10.05.2018 in Department of Psychiatry LHMC did not show any abnormality in thought and behaviour and at the same time, the behavioural report received from jail authorities also did not suggest any abnormality and thus, in view of different observations noted the patient may require long term assessment in inpatient care.
SHARAD 117. It would be appropriate to refer to report received GUPTA from Lady Harding Hospital dated 17.05.2018, the relevant Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 61 of 69 18:04:07 +0530 portion whereof reads as under :-
"Available past records of patient Mr. Sumit Kumar on treatment from department of Psychiatry, LHMC & Department of Psychiatry RML are suggestive of psychotic symptoms in patients in the past. 7th May 2018 suggest meditational impairment and impaired reality testing. Psychological assessment report form Department of Psychiatry Dr. RML. Hospital prepared on Patient's repeated mental state examination on date 2nd Jan 2018, 15th March 2018 and 10th May 2018 in department of Psychiatry LHMC did not show any abnormality in thought and behavior. Behavioral report from jail authorities also did not suggest any abnormality. In view of different observations noted, patient may require long term assessment in inpatient care.
Further to this, it is being submitted that Department of Psychiatry, LHMC does not have a closed ward. The patient Sumit was examined by the Standing Medical Board at IHBAS on 03.10.2018."
118. Thus, the report received from Lady Harding Hospital also noted that while past records of accused were suggestive of psychotic symptoms in him in the past, his mental state examinations conducted repeatedly in department of Psychiatry Lady Harding Medical College did not show any abnormality in thought and behaviour and his behavioral report also did not suggest any abnormality. The report also notices that in view of the different observations suggesting psychotic symptoms in the past and no abnormality in thought and behaviour on repeated mental state examinations, long term assessment of the accused might be required.
119. It is a matter of record that accordingly, the accused SHARAD was referred to IHBAS for admission for better assessment for GUPTA Digitally signed State Vs. Sumit Kumar by SHARAD FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 62 of 69 GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 18:04:14 +0530 ascertaining unsoundness of mind of the accused. The medical board was further required to give opinion regarding the current mental status of the accused and its implications and his fitness to stand trial.
120. The Standing Medical Board of IHBAS vide report dated 03.10.2018, opined as follows :-
"1. Patient had psychotic illness with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) for which he received treatment from Lady Harding Medical College and Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital.
2. As per our clinical evaluation and on cross sectional assessment, he is not having any active psychopathology.
3. Patient is having sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in left ear for which he can take treatment from Department of ENT and Neurology.
4. In view of previous episodic psychotic illness, patient needs long term prophylaxis.
5. On our assessment, patient is found 'fit to stand trial."
121. Thus, as per the report received from IHBAS, the accused was found fit to stand trial. It was found that the accused was not having any active psychopathology. His medicines were continued only in view of previous episodic psychotic illness as disclosed by the accused and his family members as a precautionary measure.
122. Thus even the medical record available on record would show that the accused did not show any active psychopathology, he did not show any abnormality in thought or SHARAD behaviour. Rather, as per the initial report received from GUPTA concerned Jail authorities, there was possibility of malingering.
Digitally signedby SHARAD State Vs. Sumit Kumar
GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 63 of 69
Date: 2025.09.24
18:04:21 +0530
Thus, even the medical record of the accused available on record is insufficient to warrant an inference that the accused was suffering from any unsoundness of mind in terms of Section 84 IPC due to which he was either incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he was doing was either wrong or contrary to law at the time of commission of the offence.
123. It would also be pertinent here to observe the conduct of accused during and after the commission of offence. The prosecution has been able to establish that the accused trespassed into the house of the deceased on 21.03.2017 in the morning at about 08.45 am. As per prosecution version, the deceased and the injured were assaulted with a knife. The accused caused as many as seven stab injuries on the deceased with three stab wounds on the chest of the deceased, one wound on the right upper limb, two wounds on the right knee of the deceased and one wound on the abdomen of the deceased. When the mother and brother of the deceased tried to intervene, the accused had stabbed them also with the same knife. Having regard to the manner of commission of the offence also no finding that the accused was either incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that what he was doing was either wrong or contrary to law can be given. Furthermore, the prosecution has been able to establish that after the incident, the accused escaped from the spot and went to his house. As per the prosecution version, accused had changed his clothes and the prosecution has been able to establish that the clothes which had been worn by the accused at the time of the incident were recovered at his SHARAD GUPTA instance. Thus, the accused had the presence of mind to change Digitally signed by State Vs. Sumit Kumar SHARAD GUPTA FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 64 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:04:31 +0530 his clothes. Thus the conduct of the accused during and after commission of offence is insufficient to show that he was suffering from any legal insanity at the time of commission of offence. In view of the above discussion, to my mind, the accused has not been able to establish the plea of insanity in terms of Section 84 IPC.
124. The ratio in Kansa Behera and Mustkeem @ Sirajudeen (Supra), though undisputed is of no help to the accused in the facts of the present case.
125. With regard to appreciation of evidence by court and doubt entertained by the Courts, the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of "State of U.P. vs. Krishna Gopal", AIR 1988 SC 2154: (1989 Cri. LJ 288) are as under:
"A person has, no doubt, a profound right not to he con- victed of an offence which is not established by the evi- dential standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Though this standard is a higher standard, there is, how- ever, no absolute standard. What degree of probability amounts to "proof is an exercise particular to each case. Doubts would be called reasonable if they are free from a zest for abstract speculation. Law cannot afford any favourite other than truth. To constitute reasonable doubt, it must be free from an over emotional response. Doubts must be actual and substantial doubts as to the guilt of the accused person arising from the evidence, or from the lack of it, as opposed to mere vague apprehensions. A reason- able doubt is not an imaginary, trivial or a merely possible doubt; but a fair doubt based upon reason and common sense.
The concepts of probability, and the degrees of it, cannot SHARAD obviously be expressed in terms of units to be mathemati-
cally enumerated as to how many of such units constitute GUPTA proof beyond reasonable doubt. There is an unmistakable Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 State Vs. Sumit Kumar 18:05:11 +0530 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 65 of 69 subjective element in the evalution of the degrees of prob- ability and the quantum of proof. Forensic probability must, in the last analysis, rest on a robust commonsense and, ultimately, on the trained intuitions of the judge. While the protection given by the criminal process to the accused persons is not be eroded, at the same time, uni- formed legitimisation of trivalities would make a mockery of administration of criminal justice".
126. The following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra", AIR 1973 SC 2622: (1973 Cri. LJ 1783) also need to be kept in mind while appreciating evidence in criminal trials:-
"Even at this stage we may remind ourselves of a necessary social perspective in criminal cases which suffers from insufficient forensic appreciation. The dangers of exaggerated devotion to the rule of benefit of doubt at the expense of social defence and to the soothing sentiment that all acquittals are always good regardless of justice to the victim and the community, demand especial emphasis in the contemporary con- text of escalating crime and escape. The judicial in- strument has a public accountability. The cherished principles or golden thread of proof beyond reason- able doubt which runs through the web of our law should not be stretched morbidly to embrace every hunch, hesitancy and degree of doubt. The excessive solicitude reflected in the attitude that a thousand guilty men may go but one innocent martyr shall not suffer is a false dilemma. Only reasonable doubts be- long to the accused. Otherwise any practical system of justice will then break down and lost credibility with the community. The evil of acquitting a guilty person light-heartedly as a learned author has sapi- ently observed, goes much beyond the simple fact that just one guilty person has gone unpunished. If unmerited acquittals become general, they tend to lead to a cynical disregard of the law, and this in turn SHARAD leads to a public demand for harsher legal presump- GUPTA tions against indicted 'persons' and more severe pun- Digitally signed by
SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar
Date: 2025.09.24 FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 66 of 69
18:05:20 +0530
ishment of those who are found guilty. Thus too fre- quent acquittals of the guilty may lead to a ferocious penal law, eventually eroding the judicial protection of the guiltless. For all these reasons it is true to say, with Viscount Simon, that "a miscarriage of justice may arise from the acquittal of the guilty no less than from the conviction of the innocent..." In short our jurisprudential enthusiasm for presumed innocence must be moderated by the pragmatic need to make criminal justice potent and realistic. A balance has to be struck between chasing chance possibilities as good enough to set the delinquent free and chopping the logic of preponderant probability to punish mar- ginal innocents."
127. Appreciating and analysing the evidence adduced in the present matter in light of aforesaid principles regarding ap- preciation of evidence, I have no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has successfully established guilt of accused persons beyond reasonable doubt.
Offences proved to have been committed :-
128. Section 300 IPC definces Murder as under :-
Murder. Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or-- 2ndly.--If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused, or-- 3rdly.--If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or--
4thly.--If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid. SHARAD GUPTA 129. Section 307 IPC reads as under :-
State Vs. Sumit Kumar Digitally signed by FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 67 of 69 SHARAD GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 18:05:29 +0530 " S. 307 - Attempt to murder.
Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned."
Section 449 IPC reads as under :-
" S. 449 - House-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with death -
Whoever commits house - trespass in order to the committing of any offence punishable with death, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
130. The prosecution has been able to establish that on 21.03.2017, at about 08.45 am, the accused trespassed into house no. B-2/35, Gali no. 9, Raja Puri, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi in possession of the deceased and her family members. The prosecution has been able to establish that the accused had stabbed deceased Jyoti multiple times resulting in her death. As per PM report Ex.A3, cause of death was hemorrhagic shock as a result of tearing of multiple vital organs and manner of death was homicidal. A knife was used by the accused in commission of the offence which was recovered from the spot itself. The knife was having blade which was 18.5 cm long and the width of the blade was 3.5 cm on the body and 2 cm on the edge. The act of giving multiple knife blows to the deceased which tore multiple vital organs would be squarely covered under Section 300 IPC. The SHARAD GUPTA prosecution has been able to establish that the accused had also Digitally signed by SHARAD GUPTA State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 68 of 69 Date: 2025.09.24 18:05:37 +0530 stabbed Nitin Kumar and his mother Raj Bala. As per record, the injured Nitin had suffered stab injury on left side of his chest which is a vital part of the body. Injured Raj Bala had suffered wounds on her left and right palm and had also suffered a stab wound over her abdomen which is a vital part of the body. The act of the accused coupled with the nature of weapon used would be squarely covered within the mischief contemplated U/s 307 IPC.
131. In view of the aforesaid discussion, accused Sumit Kumar is hereby convicted for the offences punishable U/s 302, 307 and 449 IPC.
132. Let the accused be heard on the point of sentence separately.
133. Copy of this judgment be provided to the accused persons free of cost.
Announced in the open Court on 24th September, 2025.
Digitally
signed by (SHARAD GUPTA)
SHARAD
SHARAD GUPTA Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court)
GUPTA Date:
2025.09.24
South West District, Dwarka Courts,
18:05:47
+0530
New Delhi
It is certified that this Judgment contains sixty nine (69) pages and each page bears my initials / signatures.
SHARAD Digitally signed by SHARAD
GUPTA
GUPTA Date: 2025.09.24 18:05:53
+0530
(SHARAD GUPTA)
Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) South West District, Dwarka Courts/New Delhi.
State Vs. Sumit Kumar FIR No. 156/2017 PS Dabri Page 69 of 69