Delhi District Court
St. vs . Raj Kumar Khandelwal on 16 February, 2008
-:1:-
S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
IN THE COURT OF SHRI B. R. KEDIA ; A.S.J.
TIS HAZARI COURTS ; DELHI
S.C. NO. 264/05
FIR NO : 281/05
P.S. : Lahori Gate
U/Sec. 302 IPC.
State Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal,
S/O Madan Mohan Khandelwal
R/O Lakhi Bagh, Manpur,
P.S. Mufasil, Gaya, Bihar.
Date of institution 13.10.2005.
Arguments heard on 12.2.2008.
Judgment delivered on 14.2.2008.
J U D G M E N T :-
Accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal S/O Madan Mohan Khandelwal, R/O Lakhi Bagh, Manpur, P.S. Mufasil, Gaya, Bihar. -:2:-
S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal has been chargesheeted for facing trial in a case bearing FIR NO. 281/05, for offence punishable 302 IPC, as registered at P.S. Lahori Gate, Delhi, on the basic allegation of committing murder of his own wife Smt. Anita by administering poisonous substance and committing murder of his own three minor helpless daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha - aged about 10 years, Kumari Chamma - aged about 8 years and Kumari Jyoti - aged about 4 years by administering poisonous substance and by strangulation/throttling inside Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel situated at Church Mission Road, Delhi, on the intervening night of 4/5-7-2005.
2. The precise case of the prosecution as found reflected from the case record is that on dt. 05.7.2005 at about 6:30 p.m. complainant Sh. Deepak Mehta (PW-5) came to police post Church Mission Road under P.S. Lahori Gate and lodged -:3:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal complaint vide D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A to the effect that on 25.6.2007 at about 7;45 p.m. accused Raj Kumar alongwith his wife Anita and his three daughters came as tourist to their Hotel Gautam and stayed in room no. 6 located at 2nd Floor. On 05.7.2005 at about 9:30 a.m. accused Raj Kumar informed the complainant (PW-5) that he was going to collect money from his known person, who had come to Delhi and thereafter he would clear the Hotel bill. However, on that day i.e. 05.7.2005 at about 6:15 p.m. their Hotel waiter Amrit Lal (PW-9) informed him that the lady and her three daughters were lying dead inside room no. 6 and on seeing the same, and finding that the accused Raj Kumar has not turned up since morning, the complainant (PW-5) lodged the said complaint vide EX. PW-27/A. On receipt of the copy of said D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A by S.I. Brij Mohan (PW-27) from Ct. Sanjay Mishra (PW-32), D.D. Writer of Police Post -:4:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Church Mission, said PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan alongwith Ct. Sant Raj (PW-26) reached the spot i.e. Room No. 6 of Hotel Gautam C. M. Road, Delhi and found dead bodies of the lady and three minor children, lying on the bed inside Room No. 6 of said Hotel. On getting information about that aspect from Ct. Sanjay Mishra (PW-
32), Inspector Raja Ram Yadav (PW-37), S.H.O. P.S. Lahori Gate in the meantime reached the spot and found four dead bodies lying on the bed and blood and froth oozing out from the nose and mouth of the dead bodies but their personal belongings were found to be intact. 2 glass tumblers, one steel tumbler, one plastic inner cup of mayur jug were found lying on the table. S.I. Brij Mohan ( PW-27) prepared rukka EX. PW-27/B, on the basis of the statement of the complainant Deepak, EX. PW-27/A and send the same through Ct. Sant Raj (PW-26) to get Register the case and F.I.R., bearing No. 281/05, U/S 302 IPC, copy of which is -:5:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal EX. PW-31/B was got registered at P.S. Lahori Gate. After the registration of the said F.I.R. investigation was taken up by PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram Yadav. During the course of investigation Crime Team headed by S.I. Ajay Kumar (PW-13) inspected the spot and prepared Visitation Report EX. PW-13/A, photographs from the crime scene were taken by Ct. Sunder Lal (PW-12), which are EX. PW-12/1 to 10, 6 chance prints were lifted from the glasses and inner cup, lying at the spot by Ct. Rajbir Singh (PW-19), as per his report EX. PW-13/B, unscaled site plan EX. PW-37/A was also prepared at the spot, one Exercise Book EX. P- 14 containing writing of the accused, one copy of complaint dt. 10.4.2005 of Ravi Shanker Prasad Ex. P-15 containing some writing of accused, 2 glass tumblers EX. P-11 (Colly), one steel glass EX. P-12, one plastic katori (inner cup) EX. P-13, one suit case type bag containing cloths etc. EX. P-1 (Colly), one blue -:6:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal colour bag type suit case containing clothes etc. EX. P-2 (Colly), one raxien bag of black colour containing clothes etc. EX. P-4 (Colly), one red colour raxien bag containing clothes etc. EX. P-5 (Colly), one polythene bag containing chappal and sandal etc. EX. P-6 (Colly), one Mayur Jug EX. P-7, one pulanda containing jewelery of deceased Anita EX. P-8 (Colly) two bedsheets EX. P-9 & P-10 etc. were seized from the spot Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel by PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram Yadav in the presence of PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan, PW-26 Ct. Sant Raj and PW-5 Deepak Mehta, complainant. The dead bodies of the lady and three minor children were sent to Subzi Mandi Mortuary. The accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal was arrested on 07.7.2005 at about 10:40 p.m. at Hazrat Nijamuddin Railway Station by HC Devender Kumar (PW-23) as per Kalandra U/S 41 Cr. P.C., EX. PW-23/A and was produced before the concerned court of Ld. M.M. on 08.7.2005 -:7:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal and sent to J.C. and ultimately on 15.7.2005 the accused has been duly identified by PW-5 Sh. Deepak Mehta, complainant and PW-9 Amrit Lal, Waiter of Gautam Hotel as per T.I.P. Proceeding, EX. PW-35/B. Postmortem on the dead body of lady Anita was got conducted by PW-6 Dr. K. Goel vide P.M. Report, EX. PW-6/A and postmortem on the dead bodies of Kumari Jyoti, Kumari Alisa and Kumari Chamma were got conducted by PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee vide P.M. Report, EX. PW-4/A, EX. PW-4/B and EX. PW-4/C, respectively. Thereafter, the said dead bodies, being not claimed by anyone were got cremated on 09.7.2005 at Electric Crematorium, Sarai Kale Khan, M.C.D., New Delhi vide entry at srl. no. 1089, 1090, 1091 and 1092, EX. PW-2/A. The accused was got formally arrested in this case on 16.7.05 vide arrest memo EX. PW-28/B and his police remand was got obtained and his disclosure statement EX. PW-28/A was got -:8:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal recorded. On 17.7.05, during police remand, accused got recovered one polythene bag containing one gamchha (EX. P-19), one handkerchief (EX. P-18), one piece of newspaper having vomiting material and sticked with powder of tablet (EX. P-20) from chajja of window of Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel, which were seized vide seizure memo EX. PW-7/A. On 18.7.2005 specimen handwriting of the accused were taken by PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri/I.O. on 12 sheets vide EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12) in the presence of PW-11 Shiv Kumar, PW-5 Deepak Mehta and PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan for purpose of comparison with questioned writings. On 19.7.2005, the accused took police party to his native place at Gaya, Bihar and pointed out "Mehta Krishi Kendra" at Gaya from where he disclosed to have purchased 7 tablets of sulphas in the last week of May, 2005. PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri/I.O. interrogated Rajesh Mehta (PW-14) owner -:9:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal of said "Mehta Krishi Kendra" and purchased 10 similar sulphas tablets from said PW-14 Rajesh Mehta vide receipt EX. PW-14/C and seizure memo EX. PW-14/B and obtained copy of license of said shop vide EX. PW-14/A. On 19.7.2005 from his house accused got recovered one Ledger Book, EX. P-22, which was seized vide memo EX. PW-15/A by the I.O./PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri in the presence of PW-15 Arun Kumar Khandelwal (brother of accused), PW-17 HC Benjamin Topno, PW-22 Sandeep Khandelwal (landlord of the accused) and PW-36 ASI Ram Kishan. During the investigation, it revealed that the accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal was proprietor of M/s Jyoti Industries, Lakhi Bagh, Maan Pur, Gaya and was engaged in the business of manufacturing bucket, almiraha etc. and had obtained loan in the form of cash credit limit of Rs. 10 lakhs from Canara Bank, 85 G.B. Road, Gaya on 27.3.2004 and total amount of -:10:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Rs.11,99,299.50 was lying outstanding against him as on 30.6.2005, as found reflected from the letter dt. 19.7.2005 vide EX. PW-18/A as issued by PW-18 V.B. Thakur coupled with the statement of accounts of the accused vide EX. PW-18/B which was seized by PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri. PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri/I.O. had also seized application dt. 17.11.2004 of accused, which is EX. PW-18/D and application dt. 19.7.2005 of accused, which is EX. PW-18/A vide seizure memo EX. PW-18/C from PW-18 V.B. Thakur, Senior Manager, Canara Bank, Gaya for the purpose of comparison of the handwriting of the accused with the questioned handwriting. During the investigation, it also revealed that the accused was running under financial crisis and was not in a capacity to clear the outstanding liability of the Canara Bank and he left Gaya alongwith his family comprising of his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, -:11:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Kumari Alisa, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti on 28.5.2005. During the investigation, it also revealed that accused alongwith his wife and 3 daughters reached Delhi on 02.6.2005 and stayed in Room No. 16A of Vaishnav Hotel, Church Mission Road, New Delhi and get entered his fake name and address as Rajiv Kumar R/O Gadolia Chowk near Vishvanath Mandir, Varanasi, U.P. in the Visitor/Reception Register of said Hotel and left said Hotel on 03.6.2005 and took a room at Hotel Gautam by getting entering same fake name and address in the Visitor/Reception Register of Gautam Hotel and left said Hotel on 04.6.2005 for Vaishno Devi. The accused alongwith his wife Anita and three daughters again came to Gautam Hotel on 25.6.2005 and stayed in Room No. 6 and get mentioned this time in the Visitor/Reception Register of Hotel Gautam as Raj Kumar S/O Madan Mohan R/O Maan Pur Bazar, Lakhi Bagh, Gaya, Bihar and they stayed there till the date -:12:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal of incident i.e. 05.7.2005. During the course of investigation, finger print of all the four deceased alongwith finger print of accused and six chance prints as lifted from the spot, as per EX. PW-13/B were sent to Director, Finger Print Bureau, Malviya Nagar for comparison and as per Finger Print Expert Report, EX. PW-20/A as prepared by PW-20 Chet Ram,Finger Print Expert, chance print Mark-Q2, as lifted from steel glass and Mark Q4, as lifted from inner cup from the spot found tallied with the right index finger marked as S1, on finger impression slip of accused and chance print Mark-Q5 as lifted from the inner cup from the spot found tallied with left middle finger Mark-S2 on the finger print slip of the accused. During the investigation, the viscera, blood samples, cloths of the deceased, bed sheet, gamchha, handkerchief having vomiting material and one piece of Newspaper having powder of tablet, glasses, cup as seized by -:13:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal police were sent to F.S.L. Rohini for expert opinion. During the investigation, the relevant Visitor/Reception Register of Hotel Gautam and Vaishno Hotel besides the Exercise Book containing the writing of the accused and copy of complaint dt. 10.4.2005 having writing of accused and specimen hand writing of accused and the admitted hand writing of the accused were sent to Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Kolkata for purpose of comparison. On recording the statement of the relevant witnesses and after conclusion of the investigation chargesheet for offence punishable U/S 302 IPC was ultimately filed on 26.9.05 against accused in the court of concerned Ld. M.M., who after compliance of requirement U/S 207 Cr. P.C. was pleased to commit the case to the court of Sessions and ultimately case was assigned to this court for trial on 13.10.2005. -:14:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
3. On hearing both the sides on the point of charge vide order dt. 02.02.2006, charge for the offence punishable U/S 302 IPC was framed against this accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
4. During the course of trial, the prosecution in support of its case got examined 38 prosecution witnesses as mentioned below :-
PW-1 Sh. Rajesh Babbar - He is a formal witness. He deposed to be running Krishna Jeweler's shop at Chandni Chowk, Delhi and accused sold one lady's gold ring for Rs. 900/- to him on 26.6.2005.-:15:-
S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-2 Sh. Sushil Kumar - He is Supervisor at Electric Crematorium, Sarai Kale Khan, M.C.D., New Delhi and deposed about the cremation of four dead bodies i.e. of wife and three daughters of the accused as per entries at srl. no. 1089, 1090, 1091 and 1092 on concerned Register vide EX. PW-2/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-3 Inspector Devender Singh, Draughtsman - He has proved the scaled site plan of the crime scene as prepared by him as EX. PW-3/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee - He has conducted the postmortem on the dead bodies of three daughters of the accused on 09.7.2005 and he has proved postmortem reports of Kumari -:16:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Jyoti, Kumari Alisa and Kumari Chamma as EX. PW-4/A, B & C, respectively. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-5 Sh. Deepak Mehta - He is the complainant and is a material witness. He is the owner's son/Manager of Gautam Hotel, Delhi, where the accused alongwith his wife and three minor daughters were staying during the period of the incident. On finding the dead bodies of wife and three daughters of the accused lying on bed inside Room No. 6 of their Hotel at about 6:15 p.m. on 05.7.2005, this PW-5 lodged complaint at Police Post Church Mission Road under P.S. Lahori Gate vide D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A, on the basis of which rukka EX. PW- 27/B was prepared and present case was registered vide F.I.R. EX. PW-31/B. PW-5 is also a witness to the identification of the dead bodies and witness to seizure of various articles as -:17:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal seized by police from the spot. He has deposed about the various steps taken by police in his presence during the course of investigation.
PW-6 Dr. K. Goel - He has conducted the postmortem on the dead body of deceased Anita, wife of the accused and proved his Postmortem Report as EX. PW-6/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-7 Sh. Prithvi Raj Mehta - He is the owner of Hotel Gautam, where the offence of murder of wife and 3 daughters of accused has taken place. He is also a witness to seizure memo, EX. PW-7/A concerning seizure of one polythene bag containing one gamchha, one handkerchief, one newspaper sticked with powder of tablet as recovered at the -:18:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal instance of the accused from the chajja of window of Room No. 6 on dt. 17.7.2005. He has also proved the certificate as EX. PW-7/B, showing that Amrti Lal (PW-9) was working as an employee in their Hotel Gautam.
PW-8 Raghunath - He is employee of Hotel Gautam and is a witness to seizure memo, EX. PW-7/A and he is, thus, a formal witness.
PW-9 Amrit Lal - He is also an employee of Hotel Gautam and on 05.7.2005 at about 6:15 p.m. on seeing four female dead bodies, lying on the bed inside Room No. 6, he immediately informed PW-5 Deepak Mehta, who immediately lodged the complaint vide D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A. Said PW-9 is also a witness, who identified the dead bodies of wife -:19:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal and 3 daughters of accused and he had also identified the accused vide T.I.P. Proceeding, EX. PW-35/B. He is also a witness seizure memo, EX. PW-7/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-10 Dalip Kumar Sharma - He is owner of Hotel Vaishnav, situated at Fateh Puri, Delhi. He deposed that accused alongwith his wife and three daughters stayed at their Hotel at Room No. 16A in the name of Rajiv Kumar S/O Madan Babu R/O Gadolia Chowk near Vishwanath Manidr, Varansi, U.P. for one day and left his Hotel on 03.6.2005 and police seized their visitor/reception Register, EX. P-21 vide seizure memo EX. PW-10/A. Thus, he is a formal witness. -:20:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-11 Shiv Kumar - He is also a formal witness. He deposed to have accompanied with the accused on dt. 26.6.05 to sell one gold ring of his wife with Krishna Jewelers for Rs. 900/-. He is also a witness to specimen handwriting of accused taken by police on 12 sheets on dt. 18.7.05 which are EX. P-17 (Colly) and EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12) PW-12 Ct. Sunder Lal - He is from Mobile Crime Team and deposed to have taken photographs from the crime scene and proved said photographs as EX. PW-12/1 to 10 and negatives as EX. PW-12/11 (Colly). Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-13 S.I. Ajay Kumar - He headed the Crime Team, who inspected the spot on 05.7.2005 and he proved his -:21:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Visitation Report as EX. PW-13/A and Report of six chance prints as lifted from the spot as EX. PW-13/B. PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Mehta - He is the owner of "Mehta Krishi Kendra", Gaya and he deposed that he knew accused earlier and accused had purchased 7 tablets of Sulphas from his shop in May, 2005. He also deposed that on 19.7.2005 police alongwith accused came to his shop and police purchased 10 similar Sulphas tablets from him vide receipt EX. PW-14/C and said tablets were seized vide seizure memo EX. PW-14/B and police also received copy of license of his shop, which is EX. PW-14/A. Said PW-14 also deposed that Sulphas tablet turns into powder with the passage of time. -:22:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-15 Arun Kumar Khandelwal - He is elder brother of the accused and he deposed to have identified the wife and three daughters of the accused from the photographs shown to him by the police on 19.7.2005. He has also duly identified the accused and deposed that accused was residing with his family in the house where they were residing as tenant at Gaya, Bihar. He is also a witness to seizure of one Ledger Book, EX. P-22, which was in the handwriting of accused and recovered from the room of the accused and seized vide seizure memo EX. PW- 15/A and was witnessed by PW-22 Sandeep Kumar, who was their landlord. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-16 Ravi Shankar Prasad - He is a formal witness. He has deposed to have lodged complaint at P.S. Civil Line, Gaya, Bihar, Copy of which is EX. P-15 and on being shown by -:23:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal the Delhi Police at his house on 19.7.2005, he has duly identified the same, bearing his signature at point-X. PW-17 HC Benjamin Topno - He deposed that on 19.7.2005 he was posted at Police Post P.S. Mufassil, Gaya Bihar and he accompanied with Delhi Police and accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal at the house of accused and is a witness to the seizure of one Ledger Book EX. P-22 from the room of the accused vide seizure memo EX. PW-15/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-18 Vidhu Bhushan Tharkur - He is Senior Manager, Canara Bank from Gaya, Bihar. He has duly identified the accused and deposed to have given information as per the letter dt. 19.7.2005, EX. PW-18/A and statement of -:24:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal account of the accused EX. PW-18/B to Delhi Police on dt. 19.7.2005. He also deposed to have delivered to Delhi Police the application of accused dt. 17.11.2004 and 09.2.2005, which were seized by the I.O. vide seizure memo EX. PW-18/C. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-19 Ct. Rajbir Singh - On 05.7.2005 he was posted in Mobile Crime Team, North District and have inspected the spot alongwith S.I. Ajay Kumar and Ct. Sunder Lal. He deposed to have lifted six chance prints from Steel glass, glass made of glass, inner cup of Mayur jug, lying inside Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel vide his Report EX. PW-13/B. He also deposed about taking of photographs of the crime scene by PW- 12 Ct. Sunder Lal and inspection of the crime scene by PW-13 S.I. Ajay Kumar.
-:25:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-20 Chet Ram - He is Finger Print Expert from Finger Print Bureau, Malviya Nagar, Delhi. He deposed to have received scene of crime visitation report, EX. PW-13/B having six chance prints Mark-Q1 to Q6 and also to have received specimen finger prints of accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal for the purpose of comparison and stated to have prepared the Report and proved the same as EX. PW-20/A. As per said Report, chance prints Mark-Q2 and Q4 are found identical with specimen right index finger Marked as 'S1' on the finger impression slip of accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal and chance print Mark- Q5 is found identical with specimen left middle finger marked as 'S2' on the finger impression slip of accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal.
-:26:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-21 Rajinder Kumar Vajpayee - He is Director of Finger Print Bureau, Malviya Nagar, Delhi and deposed to have endorsed the Finger Print Expert Report, EX. PW-20/A and have prepared memorandum slip EX. PW-21/A in this respect. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-22 Sandeep Khandelwal - He is the landlord of the accused and deposed to know accused very well. He also deposed that accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal alongwith his wife and three daughters were residing as tenant in their premises and accused was also running business of making bucket, iron almiraha etc. in the name and style of "Jyoti Enterprises" where he was residing. He also deposed that on 19.7.2005 he has identified the dead body of Smt. Anita Devi, wife of accused and dead bodies of Alisa, Chamma and Jyoti, 3 daughters of -:27:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal accused from the photographs as shown to him by the police at the tenanted room on 19.7.2005 and said photographs are EX. PW-12/3 and PW-12/4. He also deposed that one Ledger Book of the accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal was seized by the police from the room of the accused vide seizure memo EX. PW-15/A and said Ledger Book is EX. P-22, which is in handwriting of accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal.
PW-23 HC Devender Kumar - He is a witness to initial arrest of accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal on 07.07.2005 at Nizamuddin Railway Station as per Kalandra U/S 41 Cr.P.C., EX. PW-23/A. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-24 Ct. Karamvir - He is also a formal witness as he deposed to be present with PW-23 HC Devender Kumar at -:28:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal the time of the arrest of the accused and deposed in the line of PW-23.
PW-25 HC Raj Kumar - He is witness to the seizure of Reception Register of Hotel Gautam as seized from PW-5 Deepak Mehta vide seizure memo EX. PW-5/F. He has identified said Reception Register as EX. P-16. He has also joined the investigation with PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri/ I.O. on dt. 09.7.2005 and reached mortuary where 4 female dead bodies were identified by PW-5 Deepak Mehta and PW-9 Amrit Lal. He is also a witness to seizure of the parcels containing blood sample, clothes of deceased etc. as seized by the I.O. vide seizure memo EX. PW-25/A, B, C & D. -:29:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-26 Ct. Sant Raj - He deposed that on 05.7.2005 he was posted at Police Post Church Mission under P.S. Lahori Gate and on receipt of D.D. NO. 31 by PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan, he accompanied him and the complainant PW-5 Deepak Mehta and reached at Room No. 6, Hotel Gautam, where 4 female dead bodies were lying on the bed. He also deposed to have taken rukka from the spot and got registered the F.I.R. and thereafter further investigation was taken up by Inspector Raja Ram Yadav. He also joined proceeding with the I.O. on 05.7.2005 and on 09.7.2005 and deposed in this respect.
PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan - He was posted as Incharge of Police Post Church Mission under P.S. Lahori Gate and on 05.7.2005 at about 6:30 p.m. on receipt of D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A he alongwith PW-26 Ct. Sant Raj and complainant -:30:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Deepak Mehta reached the spot at Room No. 6 of Hotel Gautam and found 4 female dead bodies lying on the bed. He also deposed to have prepared the rukka EX. PW-27/B on the direction of PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram and got registered the F.I.R. and thereafter further investigation was taken up by PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram. He also deposed to have joined investigation with the I.O. at the spot and deposed in details about the same.
PW-28 Ct. Satender Kumar - He has deposed to have joined investigation with the I.O. on 16.7.2005 and witness to the disclosure statement of accused EX. PW-28/A and is a witness to the arrest of accused vide arrest memo EX. PW-28/B. Thus, he is a formal witness.
-:31:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-29 Ct. Pradeep - He is a formal witness as he deposed to have deposited the relevant case properties at F.S.L. Rohini on 29.7.2005 vide R.C. NO. 37/21.
PW-30 HC Maha Singh - He was working as MHC(M) at P.S. Lahori Gate at the relevant time and he deposed about the entries concerning the deposit and dispatch of the case properties relating to this case as made by him in the Register No. 19. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-31 ASI Surender Singh - He was working as Duty Officer at P.S. Lahori Gate from 4:00 p.m. to 12:00 mid night on dt. 05.7.2005 and deposed to have recorded the D.D. NO. 21A vide EX. PW-31/A, copy of F.I.R. of this case vide EX. PW- 31/B and D.D. NO. 22A vide EX. PW-31/C. Thus, he is a -:32:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal formal witness.
PW-32 Ct. Sanjay Mishra - He was posted as D.D. Writer at Police Post Church Mission under P.S. Lahori Gate on 05.7.2005 from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and have proved the copy of D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A as recorded by him as per the statement of complainant Deepak Mehta. He also deposed that he has delivered the copy of said D.D. NO. 31 to chowki incharge S.I. Brij Mohan, who left alongwith Ct. Sant Raj from the police post for taking action.
PW-33 Ct. Pawan Kumar - On 05.7.2007 he was posted as motorcycle rider messenger at P.S. Lahori Gate and deposed to have taken six envelope containing, copies of F.I.R. of this case for delivering the same to concerned Ld. M.M. and -:33:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal senior police officials. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-34 Ct. Mehboob Ali - He deposed to have taken eight parcels containing exhibits concerning this case from P.S. Lahori Gate on dt. 10.8.2005 and deposited the same at C.F.S.L. Calcutta. Thus, he is a formal witness.
PW-35 Dr. Archana Sinha, Ld. M.M. - She has proved T.I.P. Proceeding dt. 15.7.2005 vide EX. PW-35/B and as per said proceeding, accused was correctly identified in T.I.P. by PW-5 Deepak and PW-9 Amrit Lal. Thus, she is a formal witness.
PW-36 ASI Ram Kishan - He has joined investigation with the I.O. on 09.7.2005 and reached mortuary and -:34:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal participated in the proceedings. He has also joined investigation with the PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri/I.O. and had accompanied with him to Gaya alongwith the accused and is a witness to the various proceedings as conducted by I.O. at Gaya.
PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram - He was posted as S.H.O. P.S. Lahori Gate at the relevant period and on 05.7.2005 on the receipt of the information regarding D.D. NO. 31, EX. PW-27/A, he reached the spot at Room No. 6, Gautam Hotel and after registration of the F.I.R. took up the investigation and have deposed about the various steps as taken by him during the course of investigation.
PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri - He was posted as Additional S.H.O. at P.S. Lahori Gate during the relevant period -:35:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal and he is the part I.O. and have deposed in details about the various steps as taken by him during the course of investigation.
5. After examination of aforesaid 38 prosecution witnesses, prosecution evidence was closed. Thereafter, statement of accused U/S 313 Cr. P.C. was recorded, in which the accused denied the allegation of the prosecution and claimed to be innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. However, the accused has not led any evidence in his defence.
6. I have heard Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Adv. Ld. Amicus Curiae on behalf of the accused, Ld. APP for the state and perused the relevant material as available on case record. -:36:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
7. It is submitted by Ld. Amicus Curiae for the accused that this accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and hence deserves to be acquitted. It is also added by Ld. Amicus Curiae that this accused alongwith his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti were staying in Room No. 6, Gautam Hotel since 25.6.2005 and this accused alone left said Hotel in the morning of 05.7.2005 to arrange for money and he do not know as to how his wife and three daughters expired inside Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel and this accused have no concern with their death and hence deserves to be acquitted. It is further added by Ld. Amicus Curiae that the accused had not made any disclosure statement to the police and nothing was recovered at his instance and this accused has been falsely implicated by the police in this case. It is also added by Ld. Amicus Curiae that there is no -:37:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal motive on the part of this accused for committing murder of his wife and three minor daughters and the same falsify the case of the prosecution as against this accused and hence this accused deserves to be acquitted. It is further added by Ld. Amicus Curiae that there are several discrepancies in the deposition of various PWs and the same falsify the case of the prosecution and hence this accused deserves to be acquitted. It is further added by Ld. Amicus Curiae that none of the prosecution witness deposed to have seen accused committing murder of his wife and three daughters and hence he deserves to be acquitted. It is, thus, urged by Ld. Amicus Curiae that as the prosecution could not establish its case as against this accused beyond reasonable doubt and hence this accused deserves to be acquitted.
-:38:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
8. To the contrary it is submitted by the Ld. APP for the State that the prosecution by examining 38 prosecution witnesses have successfully established its case as against this accused for the charged offence punishable U/S 302 I.P.C. for committing murder of his wife and three minor daughters inside Room No. 6, Gautam Hotel, Delhi and hence this accused deserves to be convicted for the said charged offence. It is also added by Ld. APP that this accused after committing murder of his wife and three minor daughters on the night of 04/05-07-2005 absconded from the said Hotel on the morning of 05.7.2005 and was ultimately arrested by police on 07.07.2005 and there are ample material as against this accused for establishing the case of the prosecution for the charged offence punishable U/S 302 IPC and hence this accused deserves to be convicted accordingly. It is further added by Ld. APP that the writing of this accused as per -:39:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal the contents of Exercise Book, EX. P-14, as recovered from the spot by the police was found to be tallied with the specimen handwriting and signature of the accused, as per EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12) and his earlier handwriting, as per letters EX. PW-18/D & E and of Ledger Book of the accused EX. P-22, as per Handwriting Expert Report, EX. PW-38/L and same support the case of the prosecution. It is also added by Ld. APP that as per the Finger Print Expert Report EX. PW-20/A, Chance print, as lifted from the spot found tallied with the specimen finger print of this accused and same also corroborate the stand of the prosecution. It is further added by Ld. APP that the F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, N & O also corroborate the case of the prosecution as against the accused and hence this accused deserves to be conducted. It is further added by Ld. A.P.P. that mere discrepancies in the deposition of some PWs cannot be treated as fatal for the case of -:40:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal the prosecution and same are formal and usual in nature. It is, thus, added by Ld. APP that as the prosecution have been successful in establishing the case of the prosecution as against this accused for the charged offence punishable U/S 302 IPC for commission of murder of his wife and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti and hence this accused deserves to be convicted accordingly.
9. From the perusal of the relevant material as available on the case record including testimony of the prosecution witnesses as examined during the course of the trial coupled with perusal of relevant documents as brought on record by the prosecution and on analytical examination of the same, following pieces of incriminating circumstances as against this accused found emerged:-
-:41:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
1) The accused alongwith his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha aged about 10 years, Kumari Chamma aged about 8 years and Kumari Jyoti aged about 4 years were residing as a tenant in Mohalla Lakhi Bagh, Maan Pur, Gaya, Bihar. - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-15 Arun Kumar Khandelwal (brother of this accused) and PW-22 Sandeep Khandelwal (landlord of this accused) besides the statement of accused recorded U/S 313 Cr. P.C.
2) The accused was running the business of manufacturing iron almiraha etc. as proprietor of firm "Jyoti Industries" - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-15 Arun Kumar Khandelwal (brother of this accused) and -:42:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-22 Sandeep Khandelwal (landlord of this accused) besides the statement of the accused recorded U/S 313 Cr. P.C.
3) The accused had taken loan of Rs. 10 lakh from Canara Bank, G.B. Road, Branch Gaya, Bihar on 27.3.2004 and was having outstanding liability towards said Bank to the tune of Rs. 11,99,299.50 as on 30.6.2005 and the accused was running under financial crisis - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-18 Vidhu Bhushan Thakur coupled with letter of Canara Bank EX. PW-18/A and statement of accounts of accused with said Canara Bank EX. PW-18/B.
4) The accused alongwith his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma -:43:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal and Kumari Jyoti left their house from Gaya on 28.5.2005 for visiting Delhi and other places - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-15 Arun Kumar Khandelwal (brother of this accused) PW-22 Sandeep Khandelwal (landlord of this accused) besides the statement of accused recorded U/S 313 Cr. P.C.
5) This accused alongwith his wife Anita and three daughters reached Delhi on 02.6.2005 and stayed in Vaishnav Hotel, Fateh Puri, Delhi and left that Hotel on next day i.e. 03.6.2005 and accused got entry in the Hotel Register in fake name and address as "Rajiv Kumar S/O Madan Babu, R/O Gadolia Chowk, near Vishwanath Mandir, Varanasi, U.P."
and fakely signed as 'Rajiv' at column no. (11) and (15) against Srl. no. 2116 of said Hotel Register EX. P-21 - Same is found -:44:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal supported from the deposition of PW-10 Dalip Kumar, owner of Vaishnav Hotel coupled with entry at Srl. No. 2116 of said Hotel's Register EX. P-21 as per EX. PW-38/H.
6) This accused on 03.6.2005 after leaving Vaishnav Hotel, stayed at Gautam Hotel, Fateh Puri, Delhi by getting entry fake name and address in the Hotel Register as "Rajiv Kumar S/O Mohan Lal R/O Godhiria Chowk behind Vishwanath Mandir, Varanasi, U.P." and left said Hotel on 04.6.2005 and fakely signed as 'Rajiv' at column no. (11) and (15) against srl. no. 152 of said Hotel Register EX. P-16 - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-5 Deepak Mehta, Manager of Gautam Hotel and PW-9 Amrit Lal, Waiter of said Hotel coupled with the entry at Srl. No. 152 of said Hotel Register -:45:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal EX. P-16 as per EX. PW-38/J.
7) This accused alongwith his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti came back once again to Hotel Gautam, Delhi, on 25.6.2005 at about 7:45 p.m. and correctly get entered his name and address on the Hotel register at srl. no. 343 and stayed at Room No. 6 of said Hotel till the date of occurrence i.e. 05.7.2005 - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-5 Deepak Mehta and PW-9 Amrit Lal coupled with the entry at srl. no. 343 of said Hotel Register EX. P-16 as per EX. PW-38/K. -:46:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
8) Accused while staying in said Hotel Gautam, Delhi, on 26.6.2005 had sold one gold ring of his wife for Rs. 900/- to PW-1 Rajesh Babbar through PW-11 Shiv Kumar due to financial crisis - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-1 Rajesh Babbar and PW-11 Shiv Kumar.
9) The accused while staying alongwith his wife and three minor daughters in said Hotel Gautam was having financial crisis and on 05.7.2005 at about 9:30 a.m. left the Hotel by informing PW-5 Deepak Mehta that he is going to collect money to clear the Hotel bill - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-5 Deepak Mehta.
-:47:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
10) The accused after leaving said Hotel Gautam on 05.7.2005 at about 9:30 a.m. was found absconding and he did not come back to said Hotel and was ultimately arrested by police on 07.7.2005 at about 10:40 p.m. at platform no. 6/7 of Nizamuddin Railway Station - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-5 Deepak Mehta coupled with the deposition of PW-23 HC Devender Kumar and PW-24 Ct. Karambir coupled with Arrest Memo of accused EX. PW-23/C.
11) On 09.7.05 postmortem of dead body of Anita (wife of this accused) was conducted by PW-6 Dr. K. Goel vide Postmortem Report EX. PW-6/A and after seeing her viscera report which gave positive test for the aluminum phosphide and dihydroergotamine in the stomach and its contents and -:48:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal positive for phosphide in rest of viscera, said PW-6 opined cause of death of wife of this accused as "Asphyxia and cardiac anoxia as a result of phosphide poisoning." - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-6 Dr. K. Goel coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M and P.M. Report EX. PW-6/A.
12) On 09.7.05 postmortem on the dead body of Jyoti (daughter of this accused) was conducted by PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee vide Postmortem Report EX. PW-4/A, which reflect interalia as under :-
"External Injuries :-
1. Contusion reddish 1.5 x 1 cm present over front of right side neck middle half 2 cm below and inner to right angle of mandible.-:49:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
2. 3 crescentric abrasions reddish in colour measuring 1 x 0.2 cm, 0.6 x 0.1 cm and 0.8 x 0.1 cm present over front of left side neck middle half 2 cm from the mid line at the level of thyroid prominence. ........"
"Cause of death is asphyxia as a result of the manual strangulation.".
All injuries are ante mortem in nature and fresh in duration.
Time since death is around 4 to 5 days.
Throttling is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature."
- Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee coupled with P.M. Report of Jyoti EX. PW- 4/A. -:50:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
13) On 09.7.05 postmortem on the dead body of Alisha Kumari (daughter of this accused) was conducted by PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee vide Postmortem Report EX. PW-4/B which reflect interalia as under :-
"External Injuries :-
1. Contusion Abrasion reddish 2.5 x 2 cm present over front of right side neck middle half 3 cm below and inner to right angle of mandible.
2. 2 crescentric abrasions reddish in colour measuring 1 x 0.2 cm and 0.6 x 0.1 cm present over front of left side neck middle half 3 cm below the level of left angle of mandible........."-:51:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Cause of death is asphyxia as a result of manual strangulation/ throttling.
All injuries are antemortem in nature and fresh in duration.
Throttling is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
Time since death is around 4 to 5 days."
- Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee coupled with P.M. Report of Alisha Kumari EX. PW-4/B.
14) On 09.7.05 the postmortem on the dead body of Chamma (daughter of this accused) was conducted by PW-4 -:52:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Dr. Akash Jhanjee vide Postmortem Report EX. PW-4/C which reflect interalia as under :-
"External Injuries :-
1. Contusion reddish 1.5 x 1.5 cm present over front of right side neck middle half 3.2 cm below and inner to right angle of mandible.
2. 3 crescentric abrasions reddish in colour measuring 1.3 x 0.2 cm, 0.5 x 0.2 cm present over front of left side neck middle half 2.5 cm below and inner to left angle of mandible.........."
"Cause of death is asphyxia as a result of manual strangulation/ throttling.-:53:-
S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal All injuries are antemortem in nature and fresh in duration.
Throttling is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
Time since death is around 4 to 5 days.
- Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-4 Dr. Akash Jhanjee coupled with P.M. Report of Jyoti EX. PW-4/C.
15) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, part of viscera of Anita Devi (wife of the accused) EX. 3A (stomach and piece of small intestine with contents) gave positive tests for presence of Aluminium phosphide and dihydroergotamine and part of viscera of Anita Devi, EX. 3B (pieces of liver, spleen and kidney) gave positive tests for presence of phosphide and -:54:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal dihydroergotamine - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38 I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-
38/M.
16) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 4A (one gown, having whitish and brownish stains, of Anita Devi (wife of the accused) and EX. 4B (one bra, having dirty stains, of said Anita Devi) gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38/I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
17) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 1A (one printed bedsheet having reddish, brownish stains) and EX. 1B (one printed bedsheet having grey stains) as seized from the -:55:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal spot, gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium phosphide - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW- 38/I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
18) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, part of viscera of Alisha Kumari (daughter of accused) EX. 7A (stomach and piece of small intestine with contents) gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium phosphide and dihydroergotamine and part of viscera EX. 7B (pieces of liver, spleen and kidney of Alisha) gave positive tests for presence of phosphide and dihydroergotamine - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38/I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M. -:56:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
19) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, part of viscera of Kumari Chamma (daughter of the accused) EX. 11A (stomach and piece of small intestine with contents) gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium phosphide and dihydroergotamine and part of viscera EX. 11B (pieces of liver, spleen and kidney of said Chamma) gave positive tests for the presence of dihydroergotamine - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38/I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
20) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, part of viscera of Kumari Jyoti (daughter of accused) EX. 15A (stomach and piece of small intestine with contents) and part of viscera of said Jyoti, EX. PW-15/B (pieces of liver, spleen and kidney of -:57:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal said Jyoti) gave positive tests for the presence of dihydroergotamine - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38/I.O. coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
21) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 19A (one gamchha), EX. 19B (one Rumal having some grey and white stains) and EX. 19C (one piece of newspaper having some grey and white material) which are stated to have been used for wiping vomiting of daughters of the accused and were recovered at the instance of the accused from near the spot and were seized vide seizure memo EX. PW-7/A, gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium phosphide - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh -:58:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Khatri coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
22) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 21-A (one glass tumbler having some greyish material) stated to have been used by accused for feeding poisonous substance upon his wife and as seized by the PW-37/I.O. from the spot, gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium phosphide - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-37 and PW-38 coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
23) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 21-B (one glass tumbler having some grey and white deposits) stated to have been used by the accused for feeding poisonous substance upon his daughters and as seized by PW-37/I.O. from the spot, -:59:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-37 and PW-38 coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
24) As per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M, EX. 24 (one plastic container (Inner cup of Mayur Jug) having some grey deposits) stated to have been used by accused for feeding poisonous substance upon his daughters and as seized by PW-37/I.O. from the spot, gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-37 and PW-38 coupled with F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
25) Chance print Mark Q2, Q4 and Q5 as lifted from one glass and one Inner cup of mayur jug from the spot by PW-13 -:60:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Ct. Rajiv, as per Chance Print Report EX. PW-13/B were found tallied with specimen finger print of the accused as per Finger Print Expert Report EX. PW-20/A - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-13 Ct. Rajiv, PW-20 Chet Ram, PW-21 Rajinder Kumar coupled with Chance Print Report EX. PW-13/B and Finger Print Expert Report EX. PW-20/A.
26) One Exercise Book EX. P-14 containing the alleged writing of the accused as per Q1 to Q4 and copy of complaint EX. P-15, dt. 10.4.05 having the alleged writing of the accused as per Mark Q5 to Q6 as seized by PW-37/I.O. from the spot vide seizure memo EX. PW-5/E found tallied with the specimen handwriting of the accused as per EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12) and earlier handwriting of the accused as per letter -:61:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal dt. 17.11.04, EX. PW-18/D and letter dt. 09.2.05 EX. PW-18/E and handwriting of accused as per contents of his Ledger Book, EX. P-22 as established from Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram, PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri coupled with contents of documents EX. P-14, P-15, EX. PW18/D, EX. PW-18/E, EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12) and Ledger Book of accused EX. P-22 coupled with Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L.
27) Exercise Book EX. P-14 containing the writings of the accused (as established from Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L) found narrating about reason for financial crisis of accused and about death of wife and 3 daughters of accused -:62:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal and said Exercise Book EX. P-14 was seized by PW-37/I.O. from the spot - Same is found supported from Exercise Book EX. P-14 (Pages 9 to 12) coupled with Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L and deposition of PW-37/I.O.
28) Copy of one complaint dt. 10.4.05, EX. P-15 containing some writings of the accused (as established from Handwriting Expert Report, EX. PW-38/L) also found narrating about the factors responsible for financial crisis of the accused - Same is found supported from contents of complaint EX. P-15 coupled with Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L and deposition of PW-37/I.O.
-:63:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
29) In the last week of May, 2005 accused before leaving Gaya for tour had purchased 7 tablets of Aluminium phosphide sulphas from the shop of PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Mehta and similar 10 tablets were purchased by PW-38/I.O. from said PW-14 vide receipt EX. PW-14/C and seizure memo EX. PW-14/B for the purpose of comparison - Same is found supported from the deposition of PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Mehta and PW-38/I.O. coupled with contents of Receipt EX. PW-14/C and memo EX. PW-14/B.
30) The elements of said Aluminum phosphide sulplhas tablets as purchased by accused from shop of PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Mehta, found present in the viscera (stomach, pieces of small intestine, pieces of liver, spleen and kidney) of -:64:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Smt. Anita (wife of accused) and of Kumari Alisha, Chamma and Jyoti (daughters of accused) as found established from their viscera Reports/F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M - Same is found supported from deposition of PW-14 Rajesh Kumar Mehta coupled with F.S.L. Report, EX. PW-38/M.
10. From the perusal of the relevant material as available on the case record, it is reflected that the substantive part of the deposition of prosecution witnesses including PW-5 Deepak Mehta/complainant, PW-26 Ct. Sant Raj, PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan, PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram and PW-38 Inspector Rai Singh Khatri remained intact, in their cross-examination by Ld. Amicus Curiae. No doubt, some sort of discrepancies have been brought on record in their cross-examination but I am of the considered view that said discrepancies are bound to occur in the deposition of various -:65:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal witnesses being usual and natural and even otherwise as they are found to be formal in nature without striking at the root of the matter, the same cannot be treated as fatal for the case of the prosecution. In the case reported as, "JT 1999 (9) SC 43 State of H.P. Vs. Lekhraj and another", it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as under :-
"In the depositions of witnesses
there are always normal discrepancy,
however, honest and truthful they may be.
Such discrepancies are due to normal errors of observation, normal errors of memory due to laps of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of occurrence, and the like."
-:66:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal It was further observed in the said judgment as under :-
"The traditional dogmatic hyper technical approach has to be replaced by rational, realistic and genuine approach for administering justice in a criminal trial."
Further more in another case reported as AIR 1983 SC 753/1983 Crl. L.J. 1096" it was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as under :-
"Overmuch importance cannot be given to minor discrepancies. Discrepancies which do not go to the root of the matter and shake the basic version of the witnesses, therefore, cannot be annexed with undue importance. More so when the all important -:67:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal "probabilities/factor" echoes in favour of the person narrated by witnesses."
In another case reported as AIR 1981 SC 1237/1981 Crl. L.J. 743 it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as under:-
"The prosecution evidence no doubt suffers from inconsistencies here and discrepancies there but that is a shortcoming from which no criminal case is free. The main thing to be seen is whether those inconsistencies, etc. go to the root of the matter or pertain to insignificant aspect thereof. In the former case, the defence may be justified in seeking advantage of the incongruities obtaining in the evidence. In the latter, however, no such benefit -:68:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal may be available to it. That is a salutary method of appreciation of evidence in criminal cases."
11. I also do not find any force in the submission of Ld. Amicus Curiae to the effect that as there is no motive on the part of this accused for committing murder of his wife and three minor daughters and hence this accused deserves to be acquitted. In the case reported as AIR 1966 SC 1322, "Rajinder Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Punjab", it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while dealing on the point of motive in a crime as under :-
"The motive behind a crime (in this case one punishable U/S 302 IPC) is a relevant fact of which evidence can be given. The absence of the motive is also a -:69:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal circumstance which is relevant for assessing the evidence. The circumstances which proved the guilt of the accused are however not weakened at all by this fact that motive has not been established. It often happens that only the culprit himself knows what moved him to a certain course of action."
Further more, in another case reported as 2002 IX A.D. (SC) 197, "Sahadevan @ Sagadevan Vs. State", the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India relying upon an earlier decision rendered in "Mani Kumar Thapa Vs. State of Sikkim" 2002 VI A.D. (SC) 565 = 2002 (7) SCC 157, held that :-
-:70:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal "In a case of circumstantial evidence, if the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution are proved beyond doubt then the absence of motive would not hamper a conviction."
From the perusal of the relevant material as brought on record by the prosecution in the present case, it is reflected that this accused was running under financial crisis and was having outstanding liability of Rs. 11,99,299.50 towards Canara Bank, Gaya, Bihar, as per letter dt. 19.7.05, EX. PW-18/A and statement of accounts, EX. PW-18/B coupled with the deposition of PW-18 Sh. V.B. Thakur. It is further revealed from the record that the accused while staying in Room No. 6 of Gautam Hotel, Delhi, alongwith his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti since 25.6.05 -:71:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal was also found to be running under financial crisis and have even sold gold ring of his wife for Rs. 900/- on 26.6.05 to PW-1 Sh. Rajesh Babbar through PW-11 Shiv Kumar. It is also revealed from the record that due to financial crisis, the accused could not clear the Hotel bill of said Hotel Gautam, as found reflected from the deposition of PW-5 Deepak Mehta. Further more, contents as per writing from pages 9 to 12 of the Exercise Book, EX. P-14, as recovered from the spot by the police, (as opined to be tallied with handwriting of the accused as per Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L) also revealed the reason for financial crisis of the accused and therefore the accused wanted to get rid of his wife and three minor daughters and hence the 'element of motive' for committing murder of his wife and three minor daughters as against this accused can be attributed as against him. -:72:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
12. I also do not find any force in the submission of Ld. Amicus Curiae to the effect that as none of the prosecution witness deposed to have seen the accused committing murder of his wife and three daughters in Gautam Hotel, Delhi and hence this accused deserves to be acquitted. No doubt, there is no eye-witness relating to commission of murder by the accused of his wife and three minor daughters and the present case is based on circumstantial evidence and I am of the considered view that circumstantial evidence is a good evidence and it can even be sounder than the direct evidence of a eye witness because the witness may lie but circumstances will not. Further more in the case reported as 2005 VII AD (SC) 37 "A. N. Venkatesh & Anr Vs. State of Karnataka" it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as under : -
-:73:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal " The effort of the criminal court should not be to prowl and to find out imaginative doubts. Unless the doubt is of a reasonable dimension, which the judicial mind thinks, require consideration with objectivity, no benefit can be claimed by the accused on the basis of some hypothetical proposition".
Even otherwise, no eye-witness can be expected specifically when the offence of murder take place inside the closed room during night time and except accused and his wife and three minor daughters (who are deceased) no one else was stated to be present inside said Room No. 6 of Hotel Gautam on the intervening night of 4/5-7-05. Further more, it is revealed from the record that this accused due to heavy financial crisis -:74:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal wanted to get rid of his wife and three minor daughters and have also purchased 7 Aluminium phosphide sulphas tablets from PW-14 Rajesh Mehta's shop 'Mehta Krishi Kendra', Gaya, Bihar in the month of May, 2005 i.e. before leaving for tour from Gaya, Bihar and is stated to have administered said tablets with milk to his wife and daughters on the night of 4/5-7-05 inside Room No. 6 of Hotel Gautam and same is also found corroborated from the viscera report of his wife and three minor daughters as per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M. Same is further found supported from F.S.L. Report, EX. PW-38/M as EX.-21B (one glass tumbler having some grey and white deposits) and EX. 24 (one plastic container having some grey deposits) as seized by police from the spot, on examination at F.S.L., Delhi, gave positive tests for the presence of Aluminium. It is further revealed from the record that chance prints as lifted from the glass tumbler and plastic container -:75:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal (inner cup) from the spot as per Chance Print Report EX. PW- 13/B found tallied with finger print impression of the accused as established from Finger Print Expert Report EX. PW-20/A. It is further revealed from the F.S.L. Report, EX. PW-38/M that EX. 19A (one gamchha), EX. 19B (one Rumal) and EX. 19-C (one piece of newspaper having some grey and white material) which are stated to have been used by the accused for wiping of the vomiting of her daughters and were recovered at the instance of the accused from the chajja of window of Room No. 6, Gautam Hotel, as per seizure memo EX. PW-7/A, on examination by F.S.L., gave positive tests for presence of Aluminium phosphide. EX. P-20 (one Aluminium container) containing similar Aluminium phosphide sulphas tablets as purchased by PW-38/I.O. vide receipt EX. PW-14/C from the same shop of PW-14 from which accused have purchased, also on examination, gave positive -:76:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal tests for Aluminium phosphide, as per F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M.
13. Further more, the Exercise Book EX. P-14 from pages 9 to 12 containing the details regarding the miserable condition of the accused as per writing marked Q1 to Q4 and the writing marked Q5 and Q6 as found on copy of complaint dt. 10.4.05 EX. P-15, narrating the reason for financial crisis of the accused as recovered by police from the spot, found tallied with the specimen handwriting of the accused as per EX. PW-27/B (1 to 12), S1 to S12 and admitted handwriting of accused as per letter dt. 17.11.04 of accused, which is EX. PW-18/D and letter dt. 09.2.05 of accused, which is EX. PW-18/E and as per writing Mark A-3 to A-6 of the accused contained in Ledger Book, EX. P-22, being found established from the Handwriting Expert Report EX. -:77:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal PW-38/L
14. In the light of the aforesaid material as found available on the case record, I do not find any force in the submission of Ld. Amicus Curiae to the effect that the accused is innocent and he do not know as to how his wife and three minor daughters expired after his leaving said Hotel Gautam in the morning of 05.7.05. Further more, the conduct of the accused, thereby, absconding from the spot in the morning of 05.7.05 and not coming back to said Hotel and the fact that ultimately on 07.7.05 at about 10:40 p.m. accused was arrested by PW-23 HC Devender Kumar in the presence of PW-24 Ct. Karambir from platform no. 6/7 of Nizamuddin Railway Station vide arrest memo EX. PW-23/C and Kalandra proceeding U/S 41 Cr. P.C. EX. PW-23/A, falsify the stand of the accused that he had left said Hotel Gautam in the -:78:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal morning of 05.7.07 for the purpose of arranging money from his known person who had come to Delhi.
15. I also do not find any force in the submission of Ld. Amicus Curiae for throwing out the case of the prosecution merely on the ground that no independent witness was joined in the investigation at the time of recovery of the incriminating materials from the spot. I am of the considered view that non examination of any independent public witness cannot be treated as fatal for the case of the prosecution as in the case reported as AIR 1988 SC 696, it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as under :-
" Failure of prosecution to examine the independent witness cannot be ground for throwing out the case of the prosecution". -:79:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Further more in the case J.T. 1999 (8) SC 537, it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :-
"Mere fact that no independent public witness was joined as witness to recovery, it is not vitiated by it."
Further more, from the perusal of the relevant material as available on the case record, it is clearly reflected that PW-5 Deepak Mehta, who is the owner's son/Manager of Gautam Hotel has duly joined the recovery proceeding from the spot, which is found corroborated from the deposition of PW-27 S.I. Brij Mohan and PW-37 Inspector Raja Ram and I do not see any reason to disbelieve the same specifically when the articles as recovered from the spot were concerning the accused and his wife and three minor daughters.
-:80:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
16. In the light of the aforesaid material as found available on the case record and specifically keeping in mind the incriminating pieces of circumstances as narrated in Para-9 of this judgment and the fact that incriminating materials as against this accused are further found supported even from the scientific evidence i.e. Handwriting Expert Report EX. PW-38/L, Finger Print Expert Report EX. PW-20/A, F.S.L. Report EX. PW-38/M and the findings of Postmortem Report of Anita (wife of accused) which is EX. PW-6/A and findings of Postmortem Report of Kumari Jyoti EX. PW-4/A and that of Kumari Alisha EX. PW-4/B and that of Kumari Chamma EX. PW-4/C, thereby, establishing the case of prosecution, I have no hesitation to safely conclude that this accused is found guilty for offence punishable U/S 302 IPC for causing murder of his wife Anita and three minor daughters, namely, Kumari Alisha aged about 10 years, Kumari Chamma -:81:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal aged about 8 years and Kumari Jyoti aged about 4 years, inside Room No. 6 of Hotel Gautam, Delhi on the intervening night of 4/5-7-05, for which he was charged with and he is convicted accordingly.
17. Let, this accused be heard separately on the point of sentence.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT (B.R. KEDIA) On 14th February, 2008 Addl. Sessions Judge Tis Hazari Courts Delhi.
-:82:-S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal IN THE COURT OF SHRI B. R. KEDIA ; A.S.J. TIS HAZARI COURTS ; DELHI S.C. NO. 264/05 FIR NO : 281/05 P.S. : Lahori Gate U/Sec. 302 IPC.
State Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal,
S/O Madan Mohan Khandelwal
R/O Lakhi Bagh, Manpur,
P.S. Mufasil, Gaya, Bihar.
ORDER ON SENTENCE :-
In pursuance of judgment dt. 14/02/2008 as passed by this court, whereby, convicting the accused Raj Kumar Khandelwal for offence punishable U/S 302 IPC, I have heard Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Advocate, Ld. Amicus Curiae for the convict -:83:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal as well as convict, Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State and perused the case record for passing this order on sentence.
2. It is submitted by Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Advocate, Ld. Amicus Curiae for the convict that this convict is aged about 41 years and he was under mental and emotional disturbance due to financial loss in his business of his firm "M/s Jyoti Industries" at that time. It is further added that the family life of this convict has been completely ruined due to this incident and this convict himself had already suffered a lot as he lost his wife and all the 3 daughters and hence urged for taking lenient consideration.
3. I have also heard this convict, who submitted that he was doing the business of manufacturing the iron bucket, almirah etc. as proprietor of "M/s Jyoti Industries" but suffered heavy loss and -:84:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal was running under mental disturbance at the time of the incident. He further added that he had already suffered a lot as he had lost his wife as well as all the 3 daughters and pray for lenient consideration.
4. To the contrary, it is submitted by Ld. APP for the State that since this convict is found to have committed cold blooded murder of his wife Smt. Anita and his 3 minor daughters, namely, Alisha Kumari - aged about 10 years, Chamma Kumari - aged about 8 years and Jyoti Kumari - aged about 4 years by feeding poisonous substance and strangulating and hence this convict does not deserves any leniency. It is further added that the cold blooded murder as committed by this convict of his own wife and 3 minor daughters in a calculated manner only because he found himself under financial loss, this case is duly covered in the category of the -:85:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal 'rarest of the rare' cases and hence urged for awarding capital punishment as against this convict.
5. While dealing with principle relating the point of sentence in the case reported as (1994) 2 SCC 220, "Dhananjoy Chatterjee Vs. State of W.B." it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Para-15 as under :-
"15. In our opinion, the measure of punishment in a given case must depend upon the atrocity of the crime; the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless and unprotected state of the victim.
Imposition of appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminals. Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the -:86:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The courts must not only keep in view the rights of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of crime and the society at large while considering imposition of appropriate punishment."
6. In the case reported as AIR 1980 SC 898, "Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab" and in the case reported as AIR 1983 S.C. 957, "Machhi Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab" the guidelines which are to be kept in view when considering the question, whether the case belong to "rarest of the rare" category for awarding death sentence were indicated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
-:87:-S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal
7. The guidelines found emerged from Bachan Singh's case as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India are as under :-
(i) The extreme penalty of death need not be inflicted except in gravest cases of extreme culpability.
(ii) Before opting for the death penalty the circumstances of the 'offender' also require to be taken into consideration alongwith the circumstances of the 'crime'.
(iii) Life imprisonment is the rule and
death sentence is an exception. Death
sentence must be imposed only when life
imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime, and -:88:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal provided, and only provided, the option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all the relevant circumstances.
(iv) A balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances has to be drawn up and in doing so the mitigating circumstances have to be accorded full weightage and a just balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the mitigating circumstances before the option is exercised.
8. The guidelines as found laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Machhi Singh's case are as under :- -:89:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal "I. Manner of Commission of Murder When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting, or dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community. For instance.
(i) When the house of the victim is set aflame with the end in view to roast him alive in the house.
(ii) When the victim is subjected to inhuman acts of torture or cruelty in order to bring about his or her death.
(iii) When the body of the victim is cut into pieces or his body is dismembered in a fiendish manner.-:90:-
S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal II. Motive for Commission of murder When the murder is committed for a motive which evinces total depravity and meanness. For instance when (a) a hired assassin commits murder for the sake of money or reward; (b) a cold-blooded murder is committed with a deliberate design in order to inherit property or to gain control over property of a ward or a person under the control of the murderer or vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a dominating position or in a position of trust; (c) a murder is committed in the course for betrayal of the motherland. III. Anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime.
(a) When murder of a member of a Scheduled Caste or minority community etc., is circumstances which arouse social wrath. For -:91:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal instance when such a crime is committed in order to terrorize such persons and frighten them into fleeing from a place or in order to deprive them of, or make them surrender, lands or benefits conferred on them with a view to reverse past injustices.
(b) In cases of 'bride burning' and what are known as 'dowry -deaths' or when murder is committed in order to remarry for the sake of extracting dowry once again or to marry another woman on account of infatuation.
IV. Magnitude of crime.
When the crime is enormous in
proportion. For instance when multiple murders say of all or almost all the members of a family or a large number of persons of a particular caste, community, or locality, are committed.
-:92:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal V. Personality of victim of murder.
When the victim of murder is (a) an innocent child who could not have or has not provided even an excuse, much less a provocation, for murder. (b) a helpless woman or a person rendered helpless by old age or infirmity. (c) When the victim is a person vis-a- vis whom the murderer is in a position of domination or trust. (d) When the victim is a public figure generally loved and respected by the community for the service rendered by him and the murder is committed for political or similar reasons other than personal reasons."
9. Let, us see the circumstances relating to the present case in the light of the aforesaid guidelines as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. At the outset, I would like to draw a -:93:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances relating to this convict in the light of the guidelines of Bachan Singh's case.
(A) Mitigating Circumstances :-
(i) As per the defence version offence
was committed when this convict was under
mental disturbance due to heavy loss of his business.
(ii) Convict was aged about 41 years at the time of the commission of the offence.
(iii) That the family life of this convict has been ruined, due to this offence.
(iv) This convict has already suffered a lot as he has lost his entire family members i.e. his wife as well as 3 minor daughters.-:94:-
S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal (B) Aggravating Circumstances :-
(i) This is a case of quadruplicate murder as the number of victims are four in numbers.
(ii) This convict happens to be the husband of victim Smt. Anita and father of remaining 3 victims, namely, Kumari Alisha, Kumari Chamma and Kumari Jyoti.
(iii) The Manner of Committing of Offence :-
The convict found committed murder of his wife Smt. Anita by feeding the milk mixed with poisonous tablet (Aluminium phosphide sulphas) and committing murder of his 3 minor daughters, namely, Alisha Kumari, Chamma Kumari and Jyoti Kumari by feeding milk mixed with poisonous tablets (Aluminium phosphide sulphas) and by -:95:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal strangulating/throttling them.
(iv) There was no scope of any provocation from the side of the deceased warranting the convict to commit their murder.
10. Now, I shall discuss the fact of the present case in the light of the guidelines as reflected in Machhi Singh's case.
I. Manner of commission of murder :-
The convict committed murder of his wife Smt. Anita by feeding milk mixed with poisonous tablet (Aluminium phosphide sulphas) and committed murder of his 3 minor daughters by feeding milk mixed with poisonous tablet (Aluminium phosphide sulphas) and by strangulating/throttling them. -:96:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal II. Motive for Commission of murder :-
A very petty motive seems to have encouraged this convict to commit murder of his wife and his 3 minor daughters. As it is reflected from the record that this convict by finding himself running under financial crisis due to his business loss wanted to get rid of his wife and all the 3 daughters and ultimately committed their murder.
III Anti Social or Socially abhorrent nature of the crime :-
The convict in this case is found to have committed murder of his own wife and 3 minor helpless, defenceless daughters.
IV Magnitude of Crime :--:97:- S.C. NO. 264/05
St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal The number of victims in this case are
4. The convict is found committed murder of his own wife and all the 3 daughters, thereby, snatching four precious female lives.
V. Personality of Victim of murder :-
The victims in the present case were innocent, helpless, defenceless wife and 3 minor daughters of the convict himself, who could not have provided any excuse, muchless any provocation for their murder
11. The convict, who was supposed to protect and safeguard the lives of his wife and 3 minor daughters even at the cost of his own life, but suddenly by taking a reverse turn, did not hesitate to take lives of his own wife Smt. Anita and 3 minor daughters, namely, Alisha Kumari - aged about 10 years, Chamma Kumari - aged about 8 -:98:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal years and Jyoti Kumari - aged about 4 years only because he found himself running under business loss due to his mismanagement for which he himself was responsible and these victims had no concern. This convict is found to have committed cold blooded murder of his own wife and 3 minor daughters without having any scope of provocation from the side of the victims and only because the convict found himself running under financial crisis due to business loss and made up his mind to get rid of his wife and all the 3 minor daughters. This act of the convict is of extreme depravity and is not only inhuman and barbaric but also an affront to the human dignity of the society and is of utmost shocking in nature. The mitigating circumstances appears to be on much lower side as compared to the aggravating circumstances.
12. Therefore, by taking the cue from the aforesaid judgments of Bachan Singh and Machhi Singh, as rendered by -:99:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and applying the same to the facts and circumstances of the present case, I have no hesitation to safely conclude that the present case is duly covered under the category of "rarest of the rare" cases warranting death sentence. Resultantly, this convict is awarded sentence of death. I, therefore, order that this convict Raj Kumar Khandelwal be hanged by the neck till his death, which is subject to confirmation by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and it is ordered accordingly.
13. Let, a copy of the judgment dt. 14.02.2008 and copy of this order on sentences besides the complete set of copy of the relevant case record in compliance of direction of the order dt. 18.09.07 as passed by Hon'ble High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 73/07, titled "Jai Shanker @ Pappu Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi"
be given to this convict Raj Kumar Khandelwal free of cost -:100:- S.C. NO. 264/05 St. Vs. Raj Kumar Khandelwal immediately.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT (B.R. KEDIA) On 16th February, 2008. Addl. Sessions Judge Tis Hazari Courts Delhi.