Delhi District Court
State vs . : 1) Sunil Ravi Dass on 20 December, 2018
IN THE COURT OF ASJ/PILOT COURT/NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI
COURTS: DELHI
Sessions Case No:566/18
FIR No. : 368/18
U/s : 302/34 IPC
P.S. : Narela
State Vs. : 1) Sunil Ravi Dass
S/o Sh. Rasik Ravi Dass
R/o Village, Jharudih, PS:
Balihar, PO Nimya, District
Banka, Bihar
2) Ajit Kumar Dass
S/o Sh. Suresh Dass
R/o Village Gohkara, PS: &
District Banka, Bihar.
Offence complained of : 302/34 IPC
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Convicted
Date of committal : 01.09.2018
Date of Judgment : 20.12.2018
JUDGMENT
1. On 20.05.2018 at 6:35 am information was received at PS: Narela that a person is lying unconscious in front of Aggarwal Mall in G-Block Narela and is bleeding from his head. Police reached the spot. They found dead body of 25 years male, height approximately 5.7 inches, normal built, round face, shallow complexion wearing blue colour jeans pants, blue colour full sleeves shirt, red colour vest, black State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 1 ::
colour sport shoes in the feet. There were injury marks on the right cheek and head. In the jeans pants one black colour wallet containing Rs.790 and two railway tickets from Sultan Ganj to Delhi dt. 16.05.2018 and black colour micromax phone were recovered. From the mobile phone of the deceased call was made on mobile phone No.9340190855. The person on the other side disclosed his name as Vikas and told that the number from which call is made belongs to Shravan. Vikas was called on the spot who identified the dead body as of Shravan. FIR was registered. No eye witness was found. During investigation it was revealed that on 19.05.2018 in the night deceased was seen in the company of Sunil and Ajeet in the Shani Bazar, Narela. Both Sunil and Ajeet were apprehended. They confessed about commission of offence. They got recovered the clothes which they were wearing at the time of incident and also the weapon of offence. After completion of investigation the charge sheet against accused persons was filed. Ld. MM after complying with the provision of 208 Cr.PC committed the case to the Sessions Court as offence punishable u/s 302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.
2. Both the accused were charged for the offence punishable u/s 302 IPC r/w 34 IPC. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter, the case was State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 2 ::
fixed for prosecution evidence.
3. Sh.Shambhu Singh was examined as PW-1. He deposed that on 20.05.18 he was performing duty as security Supervisor of PNC. At about 6.15 AM Security guard Mohd. Shamim informed him that one boy is bleeding from his head and lying unconscious injured at G Block Park, near Aggarwal Plaza, DSIIDC, Narela Delhi. He made a call at 100 number to the police from his mobile phone number 8527733227.
4. During cross-examination by Ld. amicus nothing material came on record to discredit the witness.
5. Sh. Shiv Kumar Dass was examined as PW-2. He identified the dead body of his son Shravan Kumar Dass on 23.05.18 vide memo Ex.PW-2/P-1. After post mortem he received the dead body vide memo Ex.PW-2/P-2.
6. During cross-examination by the defence counsel nothing material came on record to discredit the witness.
7. Sh. Shyam Sunder Dass was examined as PW-3. He identified the dead body of his nephew Shravan Kumar Dass on 20.05.18 vide memo Ex.PW-3/P-3. After post mortem the dead body was handed over to them vide memo Ex.PW-2/P-
2. In reply to a leading question he admitted thet he identified the dead body on 23.05.2018.
8. Nothing material came on record to discredit the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 3 ::
witness during cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus.
9. Sh. Karu Dass was examined as PW-4. He deposed that he was working in factory No.C-451, DSIDC Bhorgarh, Delhi for last 14-15 years. His cousin brother Shravan son of Shiv Kumar Dass came to Delhi on 18.05.18 from Bihar. On 19.05.18 at about 4/4.30 PM he was standing outside the factory no.C-451 where he was working. He saw Shravan passing in front of his factory to whom he called. He asked Shravan where he was going. Shravan told him that he was going to the factory of his uncle Sunil at factory no.H-1190. Thereafter he had not seen Shravan.
10. On 20.05.18 Vikas who is residing in his neighborhood informed him that he had received a telephone call from police that Shravan is lying in a park. He along with Vikas, Gopal and Pintu reached at petrol pump known as Madam wala petrol pump where they met police official. The said police official took them to the park of G Block where he saw dead body of Shravan.
11. During cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus he deposed that he was residing in tenanted premises situated in village Kureni, Delhi, Narela. He has no documentary proof to show that he is residing in village Kureni, Delhi. He had not handed over any documentary proof to the police that he was residing in Delhi. He used to leave for his duty at 8 AM State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 4 ::
and return at 8 PM. He can show the document that he was working in factory no.C-451 but at present he has no document. He is receiving salary and factory had issued a card of employment. Police did not take the said card of his employment from his factory and also from him.
12. Shravan was his uncle's grandson. Shravan was not residing with him in village Kureni, Delhi. Shravan did not inform him that he came to Delhi on 18.05.18. Gopal and Pintu, who were residing with him in the tenanted premises of village Kureni informed that they along with Shravan came to Delhi from their native village on 18.05.18. Shravan did not inform him that he would pass in front of his factory and that he had brought Rasgullahs for him. He denied the suggestion that Shravan did not tell him that he is going to factory of Sunil. Police did not prepare any document at the place where the dead body was lying. Police did not mark the place where the dead body was lying. They stayed for 5 minutes in the G Block park and from there they were taken to PS in police vehicle. He did not sign any document in the PS.
13. Sh.Vikas was examined as PW-5. He deposed that he is working as laborer in Narela. On 20.05.18 at 7.15 AM he received a call on his mobile phone no.9340190855 from the mobile phone no.8521312325 of Shravan Kumar, who was State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 5 ::
son of his brother in law. One police official made a call from mobile phone of Shravan and inquired from him as to who owned this mobile number to whom he informed that this mobile number belongs to Shravan. The said police official asked him to reach at G Block Park, DSIDC near Aggarwal Plaza. He informed this fact to Karu. He along with Karu, Gopal and Pintu reached at Madam ka petrol pump where they met police official. They accompanied the police and reached at G block Park, DSIDC near Aggarwal Plaza where they saw the dead body of Shravan Kumar who was bleeding from his head. He identified Shravan Kumar who was son of his brother in law.
14. During cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus he deposed that he does not has any documentary proof to show that he is tenant in the house of Rajbir. He was confronted with his statement where it was not found mentioned that he along with Karu, Gopal and Pintu went to petrol pump and from there to the place where the dead body was lying.
15. Sh. Sanjay Kumar Dass was examined as PW-6. He deposed that he is working in factory no.D-1552, JIO lite Pvt.ltd. DSIDC Narela. His cousin brother Sudhir is working in a factory of Sunil and Ajeet. On Saturday in this year about 3 months ago at about 6 PM he went to the factory of State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 6 ::
cousin brother Sudhir. In the factory he met Ajeet, Sunil and his brother Sudhir. Many persons were working in the factory. Ajeet asked him to stay with them in the factory and he may go to his factory in the morning hours. He along with Ajeet and Sunil and one more boy who later on died went to Shani Bazar, Narela, Delhi. Sunil and Ajeet were carrying a gas cylinder for filling gas in it from Shani Bazar therefore, they all went to Shani Bazar. Gas Cylinder was handed over to a shop in the Shani Bazar. At about 8 PM they met Shiv Kumar. Sunil and Ajeet requested Shiv kumar to prepare food/meals for them in their factory and they would come soon. Sunil and Ajeet also requested him to accompany Shiv Kumar for preparing food/meal at their factory. He along with Shiv Kumar reached at the factory where Sunil and Ajeet were working. They started preparing food in the factory. Sunil and Ajeet along with one another boy remained in the market/Shani Bazar. Both Sunil and Ajeet reached the said room of their factory after about one hour since he along with Shiv Kumar reached there. Both Sunil and Ajeet also took dinner which was served by us. After taking meals both Sunil and Ajeet went to perform their duties. He along with Shiv Kumar went to bed in the said room after taking meal. Later on police official had shown him the photograph of a dead person to whom he identified as the person seen with both State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 7 ::
Sunil and Ajeet on 19.05.18 in Shani Bazar, Narela, Delhi.
16. Later on he came to know the name of said person as Shravan, who was with Sunil and Ajeet on 19.05.18 in Shani Bazar, Narela, Delhi. He correctly identified both the accused persons i.e. Sunil and Ajeet.
17. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for the accused persons he deposed that he along with two other persons Pradeep and Pawan was residing in village Bhorgarh, Delhi in tenanted premises. Ajeet is his co-villager. Accused Ajeet is residing in a room situated in the factory where he was working. Pulses are polished in the factory of Ajeet. Many boys were working in the factory where Ajeet was working. He had gone only to the room of Ajeet situated in the said factory. He had not seen other room in the said factory. Ajeet did not tell him the name of other boys present in his room. He stayed for one hour in the room of Ajeet i.e. upto 7 PM. He along with Sunil, Ajeet and Shravan left the room with gas cylinder. He has told the police that Sunil, Ajeet and Shravan left the room for filling the gas cylinder. He along with Sunil and the other boy Shravan drank liquor at a rehri in Shani Bazar and Ajeet purchased liquor. After purchasing fish they went to the factory of Ajeet where number of other workers were working. Only Sunil and Ajeet reached at the room for taking dinner which was prepared by State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 8 ::
them.
Q. Why you did not ask as to where the third boy/Shravan had gone?
Ans. I did not ask as I had not seen Shravan before that.
18. He came to know the name of Shravan in PS from the police. Sunil and Ajeet did not tell him the name of third boy as Shravan when he initially reached in their room situated in factory where Sunil and Ajeet were working.
19. The witness was recalled for re-examination wherein DVD Ex.MO-1 was played on the desktop. In the footage of camera no.1 from 19.36.03 to 19.36.32 he correctly identified four persons i.e. accused Ajeet and Sunil, himself and deceased Shravan. He stated that the person having cylinder in his hand is Ajeet with him is Shravan and Sunil and he is also visible. In camera no.1 from 21.35.25 to 21.35.29 two persons are visible entering the gate of the factory. He stated that he himself along with Shiv Kumar are visible entering in the gate of the factory again said he can not identify those two persons due to poor visibility.
20. In the footage of camera no.2 dt.19.05.18 from 19.36.03 to 19.36.20 four persons are visible going out of the factory from the main gate. He stated that firstly Shravan came followed by another person with the bucket in his hand, whom he can not identify, Ajeet having cylinder in his hand State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 9 ::
and thereafter he followed by Sunil.
21. In the footage of camera no.2 dt.19.05.18 from 21.35.24 to 21.35.33 two persons are visible entering the main gate of the factory and remained in the frame upto 21.35.33 hours and seems to be Ajeet and Sunil.
22. During cross-examination by Ld.Amicus for both the accused persons.he deposed that the CD Ex.MO-1 was not shown to him by the police at any point of time. He had first time seen the CCTV footage of Ex.MO-1 only in the court on 04.10.18. The DVD Ex.MO-1 was played on the desktop of the court and after seeing the footage of camera no.1 of dt.19.05.18 from 19.36.03 to 19.36.32 he deposed that the faces of four persons are not visible. The colour of the clothes worn by those four persons is not visible.
Q. Whether any thing is visible in the hand of any of the four persons visible on the screen (camera no.1)? Ans. There is a cylinder in the hand of the boy who is going ahead.
Q. Is it correct that the face of the person is not visible in whose hand you say that there is a cylinder? Ans. It is correct that face is not clearly visible.
23. He denied the suggestion that the four persons visible on the screen in the CCTV recording of camera no.1 are not Sunil, Ajeet, Shravan and him.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 10 ::
24. He admitted that in the recording of camera 02, the faces are not clearly visible. He admitted that the face of the person, who was carrying cylinder was not clearly visible.
25. Sh. Keshav Dass was examined as PW-7. He deposed that he is working in the factory where pulses are polished. He is residing in a room in the factory premises. On 19.05.18 at about 4 PM he woke up and saw Sunil, Ajeet and Shravan were present in the said room. At about 4.30 PM Sanjay came to that room. At about 7 PM Sunil, Ajeet, Shravan and Sanjay left the room for going to Shani Bazar to get the gas filled in the gas cylinder. At about 9.30/10 PM Sunil and Ajeet came back in the room and started working in the factory.
26. Next day police came to the factory at 8 AM. Police took Sunil to the PS. At about 1.00/2.00 PM police again came to the factory and took him and Ajeet to the PS. He told all these facts to the police also. When police inquired as to where is Shravan, Sunil told the police that Shravan had left for village Kureni, Delhi. Police had shown him one photograph in the mobile phone and he identified that photograph as of Shravan. He also told the police that he does not know that Shravan had been murdered.
27. There are CCTV camera installed in the factory. Police had also taken away the DVR from the factory on the same State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 11 ::
day. He had not seen that CCTV footage. The CCTV footage of camera no.1 from DVD was played on the desktop. In the footage witness has correctly identified four persons i.e. accused Ajeet, Sunil, Sanjay and deceased Shravan.
28. In the footage of camera no.2 dt.19.05.18 from 19.36.03 to 19.36.20 four persons are visible going out of the factory from the main gate. The witness was not able to identify those persons as their back is visible in the footage.
29. In the footage of camera no.2 dt.19.05.18 from 21.35.24 to 21.35.33 two persons are seen visible entering the main gate of the factory. The witness correctly identified both the persons as accused Sunil and Ajeet.
30. Witness stated that the footage of camera no.1 and 2 are showing the premises of factory where he is working and showing the main gate and entry.
31. During cross examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused person she deposed that he is working in the said factory since Jan.2018 and is residing in a room situated in the factory. He is not paying any rent or charges for staying in a room situated in the factory. There is no document of his employment in the said factory. He used to mark his attendance in the register maintained in the factory for the employees. There were 8 laborers working in that factory in the month of May 2018. Five of the employees were residing State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 12 ::
in a room situated in the factory and other three employees used to reside some where else. Digan, Ajeet, Sunil, Mukesh and he himself used to stay in a room situated in the factory. He along with Mukesh and Sunil used to work in the night shift and other employees used to work in the day shift. He admitted that he along with Mukesh and Sunil was on night shift duty on 19.05.18. After performing their duties in the night shift they used to go to bed in the room. Ajeet, Sudhir and other employees were on day shift duties on 19.05.18. The employees of day shift started their work at 8 AM and their duties were over at 8 PM. His eye sight is not weak. Cameras are installed inside and outside the factory.
The camera inside the factory near the main gate is installed opposite the main entrance. There is a distance of about 15 feet in between main entrance and position of camera. The said camera is facing the gate. The other camera is installed outside the main gate of the factory. On 19.05.18 Sunil was wearing white shirt and black colour jeans. He does not remember the colour of the clothes worn by other persons on 19.05.18. He had seen the back side of all the persons entering and going out of the gate as visible in the CCTV footage. He has not seen the faces of those persons. He was present in the room situated at second floor when Sunil, Ajeet, Sanjay and Shravan went outside the gate. On the first State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 13 ::
floor there are machines where employees used to work. There is a distance of 10 steps in between the main gate and stair case. He had not seen Sunil, Ajeet, Sanjay and Shravan going outside the main gate of their factory on 19.05.18. However he had seen them in the CCTV footage. He can not tell as to who went outside the room first in time. Q. I put to you that you have wrongly identified the accused persons in the CCTV cameras?
Ans. It is correct that I wrongly identify the persons Ajeet, Sunil, Sanjay and Shravan in the CCTV cameras.
32. He does not know where Ajeet, Sunil, Sanjay and Shravan had gone. However he had seen them together going out of the room. Police made inquiry from him on 19.05.18.
33. Ld. APP for state re-examined the witness qua the date when police made inquiries and playing CCTV footage with the permission of the court. During re-examination by Ld. APP he deposed that Police met him on the next day i.e. Sunday and made inquiries from him and also recorded his statement. The CCTV footage is played and shown to the witness and he stated that their faces are not visible and therefore he can not recognize them.
34. No question was put to the witness by Ld. Amicus during cross-examination.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 14 ::
35. Ct. Ram Saran was examined as PW-8. He deposed that on 19.06.18 on the direction of SHO he received three sealed pullandas along with sample seals from MHC(M) for depositing the same in FSL vide RC no.315/21/18. He deposited the same in FSL and obtained the copy of RC and acknowledgement of FSL which he handed over to MHC(M) on his return to the PS. During the period the case property/exhibits remained in his possession no one tampered the same in any manner.
36. Nothing material came on record to discredit the witness during cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus.
37. Ct. Hem Chander was examined as PW-9. He deposed that on 07.08.18 on the direction of SHO and IO he received two sealed parcels, one hard disk and two pen drives from MHC(M) for depositing the same in FSL vide RC no.425/21/18. He deposited the same in FSL and obtained the copy of RC and acknowledgement of FSL which he handed over to MHC(M) on his return to the PS. During the period the case property/exhibits remained in his possession.
No one tampered the same in any manner.
38. Nothing material came on record to discredit the witness during cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus.
39. Ct. Parveen was examined as PW-10. He deposed that on 26.06.18 on the direction of SHO and IO he received State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 15 ::
one sealed parcel from MHC(M) for depositing the same in Dr.BSA hospital vide RC no.340/21/18. He also received application from IO for subsequent opinion. He deposited the same in Dr. BSA hospital and obtained the copy of RC, which he handed over to MHC(M) on return to the PS. During the period the case property remained in his possession no one tampered the same in any manner.
40. Nothing material came on record to discredit the witness during cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused.
41. Ct. Rakesh was examined as PW-11. He deposed that on 20.05.18 He delivered the copies of FIR to the Senior Police Officers and Area MM on Motorcycle no.DL1SAB 6187. The testimony of the witness has gone unchallenged and uncontroverted.
42. Ct. Arun was examined as PW-12. He deposed that in the intervening night of 19/20.05.18 on receipt of DD no.8B regarding one person lying unconscious and bleeding from his head infront of Aggarwal Mall, G block, Narela, he along with SI Vijay Dahiya reached G Block park near Aggarwal Plaza, DSIDC Narela. On the spot they found a dead body of a young boy, facing downward and blood was found on the head. The height of the dead body was 5 feet 7 inch, aged about 25 years, normal built, face round wearing blue colour State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 16 ::
jeans pants and blue colour full sleeves shirt and red colour vest. Black colour sport shoes were found in the feet of the dead body. There was ear ring in the left ear of the dead body. There were injuries on right side cheeck, ear and head. One black colour wallet was found in the jeans pants containing Rs.790/-, two railway tickets from Sultan Ganj to Delhi dt.16.05.18, one black colour micro max phone X-802. On checking the mobile phone, contact was made on mobile number 9340190855, who informed that this phone belongs to Shravan son of his brother-in-law (sala). Vikas was asked to reach at the scene of crime. Crime team was called. Crime team inspected the scene of crime and photographer took the photographs from different angles. Vikas also reached at the spot and identified the dead body as of Shravan. No eye witness was found at the spot.
43. SI Vijay Dahiya prepared an application for depositing the dead body of deceased in the hospital. He took the dead body to the mortuary of Dr. BSA hospital and deposited the same.
44. On 23.05.18 Inspector Rajinder Singh reached the hospital. The dead body was identified by relatives of deceased i.e. father and uncle of the deceased. Post mortem was conducted on the body. After post mortem dead body was handed over to the relatives of deceased. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 17 ::
Doctor/hospital handed over 6 pullandas duly sealed and two sample seals to IO, who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW-12/P-4.
45. On 29.05.18 he along with IO Inspector Rajinder reached at factory no.1190 DSIDC Narela where they met owner Rajiv Goel and other factory workers including Keshav Dass. They checked the CCTV footage of camera no.1 and 2 and viewed the same in presence of Rajiv Goel and Keshav Dass. In the footage of CCTV camera no.1 at 19.36.03 one boy was seen going outside the factory and identified as deceased Shravan. At 19.36.15 accused Ajeet was visible going outside carrying small gas cylinder. At 19.36.16 one person by the name of Sanjay was visible going outside. At 19.36.20 accused Sunil was visible going outside. At 21.35.29 accused Sunil and Ajeet were seen entering the factory. The footage of dt.19.05.18 from 19.30 hours to 21.45 hours were taken in a pen drive and in one DVD. The DVR make Hik vision along with adopter were put in a carton box, wrapped with piece of cloth, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo PW-12/P-5.
46. The pen drive make Sandisk 60 GB was put in a plastic container, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo PW-12/P-6.
47. The DVD make Writex was taken in possession vide State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 18 ::
seizure memo Ex.PW-12/P-7.
48. On 24.07.18 on the direction of SHO and IO, He received three sealed parcels along with sample seals from MHC(M) for depositing the same in FSL vide RC no.393/21/18. He deposited the same with FSL and obtained the acknowledgement of FSL and copy of road certificate which he handed over to MHC(M) on his return to PS. During the period exhibits remained in his possession, no one tampered the same in any manner.
49. He identified the case property. The DVD Ex.MO-1 was played on the desktop. After seeing the CCTV footage he deposed that in the footage of CCTV camera no.1 at 19.36.03 one boy was seen going outside the factory, at 19.36.15 accused Ajeet was seen going outside carrying small gas cylinder, at 19.36.16 one more person was seen going outside, at 19.36.20 accused Sunil was going outside, at 21.35.29 accused Sunil and Ajeet were seen entering the factory.
50. During cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus he deposed that he along with SI Vijay reached at Aggarwall Mall, G Block, Narela at about 6.40 AM. Public persons were standing at some distance from there. IO made inquiries from them but they were not able to tell any thing about the incident. IO did not note down their names and addresses. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 19 ::
The body was lying in the middle of the park at a distance of about 50 feet from the road and the head of the body was towards Mall. There is a road about 30 to 40 feet wide in between the park and the Mall. The factories are about 100 mtrs.away from the park. In his presence IO did not make any inquiry from the Railway about the tickets found in the pocket of the deceased. In his presence IO did not try to find out as to who was the owner of mobile phone Micro Max black colour X-802. In his presence IO did not try to find out in whose name the mobile phone number was issued which was found in the mobile phone Micro Max black colour X-
802.
51. Crime team reached at the spot at about 8 AM. IO was preparing some documents but he does not know what documents were prepared by the IO. IO also recorded the statements including the statement of Vikas. He does not know the names of other witnesses whose statements were recorded by the IO. He left the spot at about 8.45/9.00 AM.
52. On 23.05.18 Inspector Rajender Singh reached the hospital at about 10/10.30 AM. Post mortem on the dead body was conducted at about 12 noon and immediately after post mortem dead body was handed over to the relatives.
53. On 29.05.18 they reached factory no.1190 DSIDC Narela at about 1/1.30 PM. He did not make any departure State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 20 ::
entry while leaving the PS. In his presence IO also did not make any departure entry. They reached the factory in the personal vehicle of Inspector Rajender Singh. He does not know the registration number of the car but it was Alto of white colour. Only he and IO went to the factory. There were other factories nearby. The factory no.1190 is constructed on a plot area of approximately 200 to 250 mtrs. It was a triple storey building. On the first floor there were two rooms and the open area was used as godown and some machines were also there. On the ground floor there was one office, some machines and the godown. He doesn't remember what was there on the second floor. The staircase for going to the first floor is about 40 ft.away from the main entrance. About 50 to 60 persons were working in the factory. They work in shifts. In one of the room on first floor some goods were lying and some labors were also residing including the accused persons. He has not seen any record as to what was the duty of the accused persons and what was their salary.
54. He met the factory owner on 29.05.18 only. Factory owner was present in the factory when they reached there. He does not know since when the accused persons were working in the factory. He was sitting with the IO when IO was making inquiries from the owner. He does not know since when Keshav Dass was working in that factory. One State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 21 ::
camera was found installed at the entrance of the factory and the other camera was found on the left side after entering the factory near the stair case. He had seen the cameras from distance and hence can not tell the make of the cameras. Only the owner of the factory and Keshav Dass were present when they viewed the CCTV footage. IO did not call any other worker of the factory while watching the CCTV footage. They watched the CCTV footage while sitting in the office situated on ground floor. He himself had identified the deceased and the two accused persons after watching the CCTV footage. He recognized them on the basis of their faces.
Q. Is it correct that in the CCTV footage played from 19.36.03 hours to 19.36.20 hours the back and side is visible and the faces are not visible?
Ans. Faces are also visible.
Q. Is it correct that the CCTV footage is dark and there is poor visibility?
Ans. No, visibility is there.
55. He can not tell the colours of the clothes worn by the persons visible in the CCTV footage as the footage is not so clear to find out the colours. He can not identify the person who came out of the factory with the bucket in his hand. Q. Is it correct that faces are not visible in the CCTV State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 22 ::
footage recorded in camera no.2 ?
Ans. Faces are visible from the side.
56. HC Bhupesh Kumar was examined as PW-13. He was working as duty officer. He proved the copy of FIR as Ex.PW- 13/P-8. He proved the endorsement made on rukka as Ex.PW-13/P-9. The certificate under Sec.65B of Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW-13/P-10. He handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to HC Kishan for handing over the same to Inspector Rajinder Singh for further investigation. The copies of FIR were handed over to Ct. Rakesh for delivering the same to DCP, Joint CP and Ilaqa Magistrate. Ct. Rakesh left the PS and delivered the same to the above named Sr. officers and Ilaqa Magistrate.
57. The testimony of the witness has gone unchallenged and uncontroverted.
58. ASI Ram Kumar was examined as PW-14. He deposed that on 20.05.18 he was posted in Mobile Crime Team, Rohini District. On that day on receipt of a call from control room, he along with HC Virender and other staff reached at G block, Park, near Aggarwal Mall, DSIIDC Narela, Delhi where they met SI Vijay and other police official of PS Narela. One male dead body was found lying near Chabutra of park, found wearing dark blue shirt and jeans, black sport shoes and belt. One gamchha of gray colour State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 23 ::
check was lying on the body and ear ring in the left ear. Under the head of the dead body there was blood. There were sharp injuries on left cheek and behind the right ear and head. One black colour ear phone lead and red colour band on right hand. The photographer took the photographs of the dead body and scene of crime from different angles. He inspected the scene of crime and gave report Ex.PW- 14/P-11. They remained at the spot from 7.30 AM to 8 AM.
59. The testimony of the witness has gone unchallenged and uncontroverted.
60. HC Palwinder was examined as PW-15. He was working as MHC(M). He proved the enteries in register No 19 as Ex.PW-15/P-12 and Ex.PW-15/P-13. He proved the enteries in register no 21 as Ex.PW-15/P-14, Ex.PW-15/P- 16 and Ex.PW-15/P-18. He proved the photocopies of the acknowledgements received from FSL as Ex.PW-15/P-15 and Ex.PW-15/P-19. The receipt from Dr. BSA Hospital is received as Ex.PW-15/P-17
61. On 14.09.18 six pullandas and FSL result was received from Ct.Jai Prakash. He handed over the FSL result to IO and case property was deposited in the malkhana. He made relevant entry in register no.19 in this regard.
62. During this period the exhibits/case property remained in his possession no one tampered the same in any manner. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 24 ::
63. Nothing material came on record to discredit the witness during cross-examination by Ld. Amicus.
64. HC Sushil Kumar was examined as PW-16. He deposed that on the intervening night of 19/20.05.18 he was working as DD writer. On that day at about 6.35AM he received telephonic information from control room that one person is lying unconscious and bleeding from his head at G Block, Narela, in front of Aggarwal Mall. This information was given to Incharge PP SI Vijay Dahiya, who left for the spot with staff for taking necessary action. ERV Incharge and SHO were also informed. He recorded DD no.8B Ex.PW- 16/P-20.
65. The testimony of the witness has gone unchallenged and uncontroverted.
66. Sh. Pankaj Sharma, Nodal Officer, Reliance JIO was examined as PW-17. He proved the record of mobile phone no. 8810254065. As per the Customer Application Form Ex. PW-17/P21 this number was issued in the name of Sanjay Kumar Dass son of Jamuna Dass. The call detail record of this number from 15.05.18 to 21.05.18 running into 3 pages is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-22. The Cell ID chart of this mobile number is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-23. The certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-24.
67. He also proved the record of the mobile State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 25 ::
no.9267979020. As per Customer Application Form Ex.PW- 17/P-25 this number was issued in the name of Sunil Ravi Dass son of Rasik Ravi Dass. The call detail record of this number from 15.05.18 to 21.05.18 running into 3 pages is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-26. The Cell ID chart of this mobile number is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-27. The certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW-17/P-28.
68. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused he deposed that he is authorized being Nodal Officer to produce the documents and furnish the same to the police.
69. Ms. Anita Chhari, Sr. Scientific officer, FSL, Delhi was examined as PW-18. She conducted the biologically and DNA examination on the exhibits. The DNA profile STR analysis performed on exhibit 2a (t-shirt of accused Sunil Ravi Dass), exhibit 2b (pants of accused Sunil Ravi Dass), exhibit 4 (hammer) and exhibit 6 (blood gauze of deceased) provided is sufficient to conclude that the blood stains present on the source of exhibit 2a (t-shirt of accused Sunil Ravi Dass), exhibit 2b (pants of accused Sunil Ravi Dass), exhibit 4 (hammer) is similar with the source of exhibit 6 (blood gauze of deceased). She also prepared annexure 1 i.e. Allele chart. She proved the FSL report and allele chart collectively as Ex.PW-18/P-29.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 26 ::
70. During cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus for both the accused she denied the suggestion that she has not fairly and properly conducted the biological and DNA examination of exhibits or that report was prepared as suited to the prosecution.
71. Sh. Chander Shekhar, Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel Ltd was examined as PW-19. He proved the record of the mobile no.8521312325. As per Customer Application Form Ex.PW- 19/P-30 this number was issued in the name of Sarwan Dass son of Shiv Kumar Dass. The call detail record of this number from 01.03.18 to 21.05.18 is proved as Ex.PW- 19/P31.
72. He has also proved the record of the mobile no.7091889204. As per Customer Application Form Ex.PW- 19/P-32 this number was issued in the name of Sunil Ravi Dass son of Rasik Ravi Dass. The call detail record of this number from 01.03.18 to 21.05.18 is proved as Ex.PW- 19/P33.
73. He has also proved the record of mobile no.9599445177. As per Customer Application Form Ex.PW- 19/P-34 this number was issued in the name of Munarik Yadav son of Virahil Yadav. The photocopy of voter ID card annexed with Customer Applicaiton Form is proved as Ex.PW-19/P-35. The call detail record of this number from State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 27 ::
15.05.18 to 21.05.18 is proved as Ex.PW-19/P-36.
74. The Cell ID chart of Delhi circle of above mentioned mobile numbers is proved as Ex.PW-19/P-37. The certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW-19/P38.
75. During cross-examination by the Ld. Amicus for both the accused he deposed that he is working in the company since 2013 as Nodal Officer. It is not in his knowledge if notice under 91 Cr.PC was served on their company. Vol. Notice is served at the counter of their office and Nodal Officer used to supply the desired documents.
76. HC Virender Singh was examined as PW-20. He was the member of the crime team headed by ASI Ram Kumar, which visited the scene of crime on 20.05.18. He took 15 photographs Ex.PW-20/P-39 to PW-20/P-53 of the dead body and scene of crime from different angles. ASI Ram Kumar inspected the scene of crime. He proved the CD as Ex.PW-20/P-54. They remained at the spot from 7.30 AM to 8 AM. He proved the certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act as Ex.PW-20/P-55.
77. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused persons he deposed that he received the information at about 7 AM. He along with ASI Ram Kumar, ASI Kuldeep, HC Satender, Ct. Naveen and ASI Moti Ram reached at the spot in government vehicle. They reached the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 28 ::
spot at about 7.25 AM. Public persons was standing outside the park where the dead body was lying. When they reached the spot no public person was taking morning walk. He did not ask any public person with regard to dead body. In his presence the staff of mobile crime team did not discuss/ask from any public person. Incharge Mobile Crime team discussed with IO. No guard of the said park was called by the police in his presence.
78. SI Vijay Kumar was exxamined as PW-21. He deposed that in the intervening night of 19/20.05.18 he was posted as Incharge of Police Post DSIDC. He received telephonic information regarding DD no. 8B Ex.PW-16/P-20 on which he along with Ct.Arun and HC Kishan reached G Block park near Aggarwal Plaza, DSIDC Narela. On the spot they found a dead body of a young boy aged about 25 years. One black colour wallet was found in the jeans pants pocket containing Rs.790/-, two railway tickets from Sultan Ganj to Delhi dt.16.05.18, one black colour micro max phone X-802. On checking the mobile phone, contact was made on mobile number 9340190855, Vikas informed that this phone belongs to Shravan son of his brother in law (sala). Vikas was asked to reach at the scene of crime. Crime team was called. Crime team inspected the scene of crime and photographer took the photographs from different angles. Vikas also reached at State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 29 ::
the spot and identified the dead body as of Shravan. No eye witness was found at the spot.
79. He prepared application Ex.PW-21/P-56 for depositing the dead body of deceased in the mortuary of hospital and sent the body through Ct.Arun. He made endorsement Ex.PW-21/P-57 on DD no.8B. He prepared rukka and handed over the same to HC Kishan at about 9 AM on 20.05.18 with the request to hand over the investigation to Inspector Rajender Singh.
80. Inspector Rajinder Singh along with HC Kishan reached at the spot and made inquiries from the public persons gathered over there. Public persons refused to join the investigation. IO prepared site plan Ex.PW-21/P-58 at his instance. Blood stained earth and earth control were lifted from the spot, put in two plastic containers, and given serial no.1 and 2. Both the containers were sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-21/P-59.
81. Wallet and mobile phone micro max were taken in possession by mentioning the articles and IMEI number of the mobile phone and number of sim in the seizure memo vide seizure memo Ex.PW-21/P-60.
82. Karu Dass son of Ravi Dass informed that deceased Shravan met him and informed that he is going to the factory of Sunil to meet him. Thereafter he along with IO and HC State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 30 ::
kishan went to factory no.1190, DSIDC H Block, Bhorgarh, Delhi where they met Sunil Ravi Dass and Ajeet Kumar Dass. IO interrogated them and they both admitted commission of offence.
83. Accused Sunil Ravi Dass was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-21/P-61 and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW-21/P-62. Accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW-21/P-63.
84. Accused Ajeet Kumar Dass was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-21/P-64 and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW-21/P-65. Accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW-21/P-66. He correctly identified the accused persons.
85. Both the accused led them to second floor of factory no. H-1190 DSIDC Narela, where there was a room. Accused Sunil Ravi Dass produced one washed t-shirt of cream colour having sticker of Kitkat long length and a pants of grey colour. The pants and shirt produced by accused Sunil Ravi Dass were wrapped in a piece of cloth, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW- 21/P-67.
86. Accused Ajeet produced washed white strip shirt having sticker of DK Tailor and blue colour jeans. The clothes produced by accused Ajeet were wrapped in a piece of cloth, State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 31 ::
sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-21/P-68.
87. Both the accused led them to park G Block to the south side, where there was a wall and a small pit. Both the accused pointed out the pit as the place where they had hidden hammer used in commission of offence. Both the accused produced said hammer. The sketch of hammer Ex.PW-21/P-69 was prepared. The hammer was wrapped in a piece of cloth, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-21/P-70. Both the accused Sunil Ravi Dass and Ajeet pointed out the scene of crime vide pointing out memos Ex.PW-21/P-71 and P-72.
88. On 25.07.18 he along with Ct. Naveen and IO reached the scene of crime where Ct. Naveen took measurements and prepared rough notes at his instance for scaled site plan.
89. He identified the wallet and mobile phone found in the pocket of deceased as Ex.MO-2/1 and Ex.MO-2/2 respectively, the clothes got recovered by accused Sunil Ravi Dass are identified as Ex.MO-3, the clothes got recovered by accused Ajeet are identifiedd as Ex.MO-4 and the hammer is identified as Ex.MO-5.
90. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused he deposed that he received DD no.8B at 6.35 AM. At about 6.40 AM he along with Ct. Arun reached at the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 32 ::
scene of crime in his i-10 car and HC Kishan reached there on his motorcycle. There was no public witness in the park when he reached the park. Crime team reached the spot at about 7.30 AM. He did not sign any document prepared by mobile crime team. Vikas reached the spot at about 8 AM. Signature of Vikas was not obtained on any paper. In his presence IO did not record the statement of Vikas at the spot. At about 12.30 PM he along with IO and HC Kishan left the spot. At about 10.15 AM HC Kishan and IO came to the spot. IO made inquiries from the public persons gathered near the spot but did not record their statements.
91. From the spot they reached the factory at about 12.35/12.40 PM. The factory was approximately in the area of 350 sq.mtr. At that time owner of the factory was not present in the factory. The factory is constructed upto two storey. In his presence IO did not make any inquiry from the owner of the factory. He did not seize any document of employment and salary with regard to the accused Sunil and Ajeet.
92. He can not tell the exact length of the room situated at second floor of the said factory. No one was present in the room at the time of the recovery of clothes. Signatures of accused persons were not obtained on the seizure memo of the clothes. Seal after use was handed over to the HC State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 33 ::
Kishan on 20.05.18. No statement was recorded by the IO in his presence in the factory. They left the factory at about 6 PM.
93. They reached the park at G Block at about 6.05 PM. No site plan of the place of recovery of hammer was prepared.
94. HC Krishan Kumar was examined as PW-22. He fully corroborated the testimony of PW-21. He also deposed that SI Vijay handed over the rukka to him which he took to the PS and handed over to the duty officer. After registration of FIR duty officer handed over to him the original rukka and copy of FIR which he handed over to Inspector Rajender. He along with Inspector Rajender came to the spot. He corroborated the testimony about seizure of exhibits from the spot, arrest of both the accused persons, disclosure statements made by the accused persons, recovery of clothes of accused persons and the recovery of hammer the weapon of offence at the instance of accused persons. He identified both the accused persons and also the case property.
95. During cross examination by the Ld. Amicus for both the accused, he deposed that he reached the spot at about 7.30 AM. There was no public witness in the park when he reached. Crime team reached the spot at about 7.30 AM. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 34 ::
Vikas reached the spot at about 8.30 AM. Signature of Vikas was not obtained on any document. In his presence IO did not record the statement of Vikas on the spot. He left the spot at about 9 AM. He came back on the spot along with IO at about 10.15 AM. IO made inquiries from the public persons. IO handed over the seal after use to him.
96. From the spot they reached the factory at about 12/12.30 PM. The factory was approximately in the area of 350 Sq.mtr. IO did not seize any document of employment and salary card with respect to accused Sunil and Ajeet in his presence.
97. He can not tell the exact length of the room situated on the second floor of the factory. No one was present in the room at the time of recovery of clothes. They reached the room of accused at about 1 PM. The room was opened when they reached there. Signatures of other persons were not obtained on the seizure memo of clothes. They left the factory at about 6 PM and reached the park at G Block at about 6.05 PM.
98. No public persons signed the seizure memo of hammer. The site plan of place of recovery of hammer was not prepared. He denied the suggestion that hammer was planted upon the accused persons.
99. Dr.Jagjeet Singh, Sr. Scientific Officer, FSL, Rohini, State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 35 ::
Delhi was examined as PW-23. He deposed that on 07.08.18 two sealed parcels were received in the office of FSL. He opened the parcels and examined the digital data. The Hard Disk Drive marked as "HDD1" was forensically cloned with Tableau Forensic Duplicator model TD2u on previously sanitized hard disk drive and the cloned hard disk drive was analyzed by using Digital Video Recorder marked as "DVR1" along with forensic hardware. The six '6' CCTV footages of channel/camera no.'1' & '2' of dt.19.05.18 from 19.30.00 hrs to 21.45.00 hours which were present in pen drive marked "PD1" were also found on questioned hard disk drive marked as "HDD1" and were enclosed in one DVD marked "DVD1" with folder names "Exported data of HDD1" and "Exported data of PD1". He prepared the report Ex.PW-23/P-73. He gave certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act Ex.PW-23/P-
74. He prepared DVD (DVD-1) of the above mentioned data.
100. He identified the DVD-1 FSL.2018/CFU-7369, having Exported data of HDD1 and PD1 as Ex.MO-6. He identified the DVR HIK VISION as Ex.MO-7. The pen drive of Cruzer Blade, serial no.SD CZ50-016G is identified as Ex.MO-8.
101. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused persons he deposed that on 07.08.18 he did not receive the exhibit in the FSL.Vol. The same were received at the outer office of FSL. He did not mention the number of State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 36 ::
pen drive Cruzer Blade in his report, however he had marked the same as "PD1" and put his initials. The seal which he put on the exhibits after examining the same remains in his custody only.
102. Inspector Rajender Singh was examined as PW-24.
He deposed that in the intervening night of 19 th and 20th May 2018 he was posted at PS Narela. HC Kishan handed over to him the copy of FIR and original rukka for investigation. He along with HC Kishan reached the spot. SI Vijay and other staff met him there. SI Vijay briefed him. He prepared the site plan Ex.PW-21/P-58. He corroborated the testimony of PW- 21 and PW-22 with respect to the seizure of exhibits from the spot, arrest of the accused persons, disclosure statements made by the accused persons, recovery of clothes of accused persons and recovery of weapon of offence i.e. hammer.
103. He deposed that on 23.05.18 he reached the mortuary of Dr.BSA hospital. The dead body was identified by the relatives. He prepared inquest papers Ex.PW-25/P-75. Post mortem was conducted on the body. After post mortem dead body was handed over to the relatives. Doctor handed over him five sealed parcels and two sample seals which he seized vide memo Ex.PW-12/P-4. The case property was deposited in the malkhana.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 37 ::
104. He also corroborated the testimony of PW-12 regarding watching of CCTV footage. The seizure of DVR, pen drive and the DVD. He deposed that owner of the factory Sh. Rajiv Goel issued the certificate Ex.PW-24/P-76 under Sec.65 B Evidence Act. He sent the exhibits to the FSL and also sent application on 26.06.18 along with the case property for obtaining subsequent opinion of the doctor about the weapon of offence. The subsequent opinion was obtained. He also got prepared the scaled site plan through Ct. Naveen. He collected the copies of Customer Application Form, CDR, location chart and certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act. He collected the FSL result and placed the same on record. He identified both the accused persons and also identified the case property.
105. During cross examination by the Ld. Amicus he deposed that he received the copy of FIR and original rukka at about 10 AM. He along with HC Krishan reached the spot at about 10.15/10.20 AM in his own Alto car. HC Krishan reached on motorcycle. It was not mentioned in the DD that he is leaving for the spot in his private car. 2-4 public persons present near the spot. He made inquiries from those public persons but did not record their names and statements. The dead body had already been removed from the scene of crime. No public person was joined at the time of lifting and State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 38 ::
seizure of the exhibits from the scene of crime. Seal after use was handed over to HC Krishan. He recorded the statement of Karu Dass, Vikas and crime team officials on the spot. He left the spot at about 12 noon.
106. They reached the factory of Rajiv Goel at about 12.15 PM. The distance between the factory and the spot was about half km. Rajiv Goel was not present in the factory. Some laborers were there. The factory is in the area of 350 sq.yards and constructed upto second storey. Some laborers including the two accused were residing on the second floor of the factory in one room.
107. Owner of the factory told him that he is not having any record of the person working in the factory. Most of them were casual workers. He met Rajiv Goel on 29.05.18. He did not prepare any site plan of the factory. He did not call the owner of the factory at the time of arrest and personal search of accused persons. The owner informed that he is out of Delhi. Disclosure statements of accused persons were recorded on the ground floor of the factory. He did not obtain the signature of other employees of the factory when accused made the disclosure statements. No public persons or laborer was joined at the time of recovery of clothes of accused. The clothes of accused were found hanging on the peg on wall of right side. The clothes were sealed in the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 39 ::
room itself. Seal after use was handed over to HC Krishan. The clothes of accused Ajeet were hanging on another peg on the same wall.
108. They left the factory at about 6 PM and reached at G block park at 6.15 PM. No public person, gardner or watchman was present in the park when they reached there. On the way to the park he requested public persons to join but none agreed. No hawker or any other person met them near the park. He did not call any person from the any nearby factory to join the investigation. He denied the suggestion that hammer was planted upon the accused persons. They remained in the park for about 2 hours.
109. He reached the mortuary of Dr.BSA hospital at about 10.30 AM on 23.05.18 and returned to PS at about 3.30 PM. On 29.05.18 he along with Ct. Arun reached the factory at about 1 or 1.30 PM. He did not make any inquiry from the adjacent factories regarding accused persons. On that day about 10-12 workers were working in the factory. He only called Keshav Dass to join the investigation and not the other workers. One camera was found installed outside the main gate and one in the factory near the gate. The camera installed outside the factory was covering the area around the entrance of the factory. The monitor of the CCTV cameras was in the office situated on the ground floor of the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 40 ::
factory. He does not know if the factory was owned by Rajiv Goel or was on rent. The DVR make HIK VISION was seized by him. The DVR was sealed in the office of the factory. He did not obtain signature of any of the laborer of the factory at the time of seizure of DVR. Seal after use was handed over to Ct. Arun. He did not prepare any site plan of the places from where the clothes and hammer were recovered. He denied the suggestion that faces of person are not clearly visible in CCTV footage.
110. Dr. Vijay Dhankar, Specialist and HOD Forensic Medicine, BSA Hospital, Delhi was examined as PW-25. He deposed that on 23.05.18 he along with Dr. Deepak Prakash conducted post mortem on the body of Shravan Kumar Dass, 25 years male, on the request of Inspector Rajinder Singh of PS Narela. On examination, they found multiple external and corresponding internal injuries. They opined the cause of death in this case was cranio cerebral damage caused by blunt force injury which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. All the injuries were ante mortem in nature and fresh in duration prior to death. After post mortem viscera, blood sample, blood sample in gauze, clothes and sample seal of department were handed over to IO/police. Post mortem report is proved as Ex.PW-25/P-77.
111. On 26.06.18 an application with sealed parcel was State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 41 ::
received. He opened the parcel which contained a steal hammer with wooden handle having reddish brown stains at places. The same was measured. He examined the same and opined that the injuries as mentioned in post mortem report Ex.PW-25/P-77 can be caused by the hammer examined. After examining the weapon the same was sealed with the seal of department and handed over to IO/police. The subsequent opinion is proved as Ex.PW-25/P-78. He has also identified the hammer as Ex.MO-5. \
112. During cross-examination by Ld. Amicus for both the accused he deposed that the application for subsequent opinion along with sealed parcel were received by the staff.
He denied the suggestion that he had not examined the exhibit MO-5 or that he had not given any subsequent opinion as deposed by him.
113. W Ct. Monika was examined as PW-26. She was working in CPCR PHQ on extn.no.121 on 20.05.18. At 06.26.51 hours information was received from mobile phone no.8527733227 that one person is lying unconscious and bleeding from head at G Block, infront of Aggarwal Mall, Narela, Delhi. She fed the information in the PCR form and dispatched the information at 6.29.37 hours. She proved the computer generated copy of PCR form as Ex.PW-26/P-79. The testimony of witness has gone unchallenged and State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 42 ::
uncontroverted.
114. Ct. Ravi was examined as PW-27. He deposed that on 19.07.17 on the direction of IO he went to the mortuary of Dr. BSA hospital and collected the subsequent opinion and a sealed parcel having seal of hospital. He returned to the PS and handed over the subsequent opinion to the IO. He handed over the sealed parcel to the MHC(M). During the period case property remained in his possession, no one tampered with the same. Nothing material came on record to discredit the witness during cross examination by Ld. Amicus.
115. Sh. Shiv Kumar was examined as PW-28. He deposed that he worked in the factory no.H-1190 Bhorgarh, Narela for about 1 and half or two months as laborer. On the 19th day of the month which was Saturday at about 7.30 PM Sunil, Sanjay Kumar Dass, Ajeet Kumar and one more boy left the factory for going to weekly market. His duty hours were upto 8 PM. He took bath and left for weekly market for purchasing vegetables etc. Sunil, Sanjay Kumar Dass, Ajeet Kumar and that boy met him in the Shani market. Sunil asked him to reach the factory along with Sanjay Kumar Dass. He along with Sanjay purchased vegetables etc.and reached factory. He prepared fish at the factory. At about 9.30 PM Sunil and Ajeet returned to the factory. After taking State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 43 ::
meal he went to sleep. He was using mobile phone no.8527880257. He correctly identified both the accused persons. He identified the fourth boy, who was with Sunil, Sanjay Kumar Dass and Ajeet in the photographs Ex.PW- 20/P-39 to PW-20/P-53 i.e. the photographs of the deceased. The DVD was played on the desktop wherein he identified the accused persons and the deceased boy going outside the factory and only Sunil and Ajeet returning to the factory.
116. During cross examination by Ld. Amicus he stated that he started working in the factory about one and half or two months prior to the incident. He does not remember the date, month and year when he started working in the factory. No document of his employment in the factory was prepared. His duty hours were from 8 AM to 8 PM. He received monthly salary of Rs.10,500/- in cash. He admitted that 19 th day and Saturday fall in every month but he stated that Saturday will not fall on 19th in every month. He left for market at 8.10 PM.
He can not point out the specific place in the market where he met the accused persons and the deceased along with Sanjay. Some of the vegetables he had already purchased and some vegetables he purchased with Sanjay. It takes 5 minutes on foot to reach the market from the factory. He and Sanjay returned to the factory at about 8.30 PM. Police made inquiries from him on 20 th in the factory as well as in the PS. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 44 ::
Police also made inquiries from Sanjay and Keshav in his presence. His statement was recorded in the PS. He admitted that CCTV footage is in black and white at 19.36.00 hours of camera no.2. He also admitted that the face of the persons who appears on the screen at 19.36.04 hours is not visible. The person visible on the screen was wearing blue colour shirt but he does not remember the colours of the pants worn by him. He had seen the deceased wearing blue shirt near the polisher installed in the factory. He does not know the name of the deceased. He saw the deceased while he (witness) was working on the Polisher. There was no other worker working on the polisher at that time. He denied the suggestion that he is recognizing the persons in the CCTV footage at the instance of the IO.
117. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Goel was examined as PW-29. He deposed that on 20.05.18 police officials of PS Narela visited his factory. He informed the police that CCTV cameras are installed in his factory which cover the main out gate. The footage of CCTV of 19.05.18 was watched by him, police and laborer. The copy of footage was taken in pen drive and DVD. The pen drive and DVD were seized vide memo Ex.PW-12/P-6 and PW-12/P-7 respectively. The DVR of HIK VISION was seized vide memo Ex.PW-12/P-5. He also issued the certificate under Sec.65 B of Evidence Act Ex.PW-
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 45 ::
24/P-76 dt.29.05.18. He identified the case property i.e. DVR, pen drive and the DVD. The DVD was played and he identified that the footage is of his factory. Leading question was put by Ld. APP wherein he admitted that the password of DVR is 1234.
118. During cross examination by Ld. APP he stated that his factory is in the area of 350 sq.mtrs. There is a basement, ground floor, first floor and second floor. Only 8 to 10 employees work in his factory. They maintain the salary payment record of the employees. There are only three permanent employees and the others are as per daily demand. The permanent employees are Jagdish, Sohan Singh and Pandit Ji. Pandit Ji had left the service. He does not know the name of the police official of PS Narela, who visited his factory. Police did not make any inquiry from the Manager and Pandit Ji in his presence. In his presence police did not make any inquiry from any of his labourer. The DVR was sealed in his factory. Police put the seal on it in his presence. He does not know what the police did with the seal after sealing the DVR. Police did not obtain signature of any of his employees. Police stayed in the factory for about 40 to 45 minutes. He admitted that he can not recognize the faces in CCTV footage. Thereafter the prosecution evidence was closed.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 46 ::
119. Statements of accused persons were recorded under Sec.313 Cr.PC wherein they denied the entire evidence and stated that they have been falsely implicated. They did not wish to lead evidence in defence. Thereafter the case was fixed for final arguments.
120. I have heard the Ld. APP for state, Ld. Amicus for accused persons and perused the record.
121. In the present case there is no eye witness. Case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is well settled law that a person can be held guilty and convicted even on the basis of circumstantial evidence provided. All the circumstances are proved and established. The circumstances so proved and established point towards the guilt of the accused. The circumstances so proved and established form complete chain and at the same time inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused persons intend to establish the following circumstances.
i) Circumstance of last seen.
ii) Recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused persons.
iii) Recovery of weapon of offence.
122. I take up the circumstances one by one. Circumstance of last seen.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 47 ::
123. Ld. APP submitted that in this case on 20.05.18 at 6.26.51 hours information was received from phone no.8527733227 that a person is lying unconscious in front of Aggarwal Mall having bleeding injury on the head. On this DD no.8B was recorded at PS Narela Ex.PW-16/P-20 at 6.35 AM. Police reached the spot. In the pocket of the body two railway tickets and mobile phone were found. The railway tickets were from Sultan Ganj to Delhi dt.16.05.18. One black colour purse was also found. From the mobile Ex.MO-2/2 Vikas was contacted, who was asked to come on the spot. Vikas identified the dead body as of Shravan son of Shiv Kumar, his brother in law. Ld. APP submitted that these railway tickets shows that he reached Delhi only after 16.05.18. During investigation the statements came on record, out of which Karu Dass was examined as PW-4. He is cousin brother of the deceased, who stated that Shrav reached Delhi on 18.05.18. On 19.05.18 he saw Shravan, who told that he is going to the factory of his uncle Sunil i.e. factory no.H-1190, DSIDC, Narela. Ld. APP submitted that Sanjay Kumar Dass PW-6 and Shiv Kumar PW-28 were examined. They have lastly seen the deceased in the company of Sunil and Ajeet i.e. the accused persons. Sanjay Kumar Dass stated that on 19.05.18 he had gone to the factory where his cousin brother Sudhir used to work. In the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 48 ::
factory he met Sunil and Ajeet and also Sudhir. Ajeet asked him to stay in the factory and that he may go in the morning to his factory where he was working. Thereafter he along with Ajeet, Sunil and one more boy whom he identified as Shravan (deceased) went to Shani Bazar, Narela. Ajeet was carrying a cylinder in which gas was to be got filled. He stated that at about 8 PM Shiv Kumar PW-28 met them. Shiv Kumar also corroborated the testimony of PW-16. He stated that on 19.05.18 at about 7.30 PM Sunil, Sanjay Kumar Dass, Ajeet and one more boy left the factory for weekly market. After finishing his work he also went to the market. Sunil, Sanjay Kumar Dass, Ajeet Kumar and that boy whom he identified as Shravan (deceased) met in the market. He along with Sanjay purchased some vegetables and thereafter reached factory. Sanjay Kumar also stated that Sunil and Ajeet requested Shiv Kumar to prepare meal for them and they would come soon. They also requested Sanjay Kumar to accompany Shiv Kumar and he also left with Shiv Kumar. Ld. APP submitted that according to the testimony of these witnesses, they have seen deceased Shravan Kumar in the company of both the accused persons in Shani market upto 8 or 8.15 PM. Ld. APP submitted that both Shiv kumar and Sanjay returned to the factory upto 8.30 PM. It takes only 5 minutes to reach the market from the factory and statement State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 49 ::
of Shiv Kumar is to be believed then deceased was lastly seen in the company of accused persons at about 8.25 PM. The testimony of PW-6 and PW-28 also shows that both the accused asked them to leave their company on the pretext of preparing meal at the factory and requested PW-6 to accompany PW-28. This clearly point towards their planning. Thereafter the dead body of Shravan Kumar was recovered next day at 6.26 AM. The distance between the place where the dead body was found and the Shani Bazar is about 500 mtrs. According to both these witnesses PW-6 and PW-28 at about 9.30 PM only Sunil and Ajeet returned to the factory and Shravan was not with them. The dead body was got preserved in the mortuary vide application Ex.PW-21/P-56. According to this application dead body was preserved at 9.38 AM on 20.05.18. The post mortem on the dead body was conducted and the report has been proved as Ex.PW-
25/P-77. According to the post mortem report probable time since death is half a day i.e. 12 hours when it was preserved. The post mortem was started on 23.05.18 at about 11 AM. If we count back the time of 12 hours from the time of preservation of dead body it comes around 9.30 PM i.e. around the time when the accused persons returned factory without the deceased. According to PW-7, Sunil and Ajeet came back at around 9.30/10 PM. According to PW-6 also State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 50 ::
they returned factory without Shravan and according to PW- 28 they returned at about 9.30 PM. Ld. APP submitted that the post mortem report shows that there is proximity of time when the deceased was lastly seen alive in the company of accused persons i.e. around 8.25 PM and the probable time since death is also 9.30 PM. There is also proximity of space and there is no explanation by any of the accused as to where they separated their ways after they were together in the Shani Bazar. Ld. APP submitted that here the statement of PW-7 is also important where he stated that accused Sunil told the police that Shravan had left for village Kureni which was not true fact as Shravan had already been murdered.
Ld. APP submitted that the prosecution has proved the factum of last seen and also that the place where they were last seen is near to the place where dead body was found and there is no explanation from any of the accused as to where they parted ways thereafter. ld. APP submitted that the onus which was on the prosecution has fully been discharged. The circumstance is proved which points towards the guilt of the accused persons and at the same time is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused, it is prayed that accused persons be held guilty and convicted.
124. Ld. Defence counsel submitted that the onus which State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 51 ::
was on prosecution has not been discharged. Prosecution has relied upon CCTV footage of the DVR installed in the factory of Rajiv Goel examined as PW-29. The DVR is Ex.MO7. The pendrive on which the copy of the CCTV footage was taken is MO8 and DVD is MO9. Ld. Counsel submitted that Sanjay Kumar Dass PW-6 has specifically stated that faces are not visible in the CCTV footage. Keshav Dass PW-7 also stated that faces are not visible and he is not able to identify the persons visible in the CCTV footage. Similarly, even Shiv Kumar is not reliable as the CCTV footage is not clear it cannot be said that the persons visible in CCTV footage are the accused persons and the deceased. There is also no evidence on record that Sunil Ravi Dass and Ajeet were working in the factory. No record of the attendance register has been seized in this regard. In the absence of CCTV footage it cannot be said that they were lastly seen together. The onus which was on the prosecution has not been discharged. So far as PW-6 and PW-28 are concerned. They are interested witnesses. They have not gone anywhere. PW-6 deposed that he had gone there to meet Sudhir but Sudhir has not been examined to establish that he had gone through to meet him. So far as Shiv Kumar PW-28 is concerned he is not certain as to what was the date he only says it was 19th of the month and was Saturday. State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 52 ::
Under the circumstances his testimony does not inspire confidence. The onus which was on the prosecution has not been discharged. The circumstance is not proved the benefit of the same be given to accused persons and they be acquitted.
125. After hearing the arguments and going through the record I found that so far as the CCTV footage is concerned that cannot be treated as last seen as at that time they were going to the Shani Bazar. Even if CCTV footage is not reliable, there are two more witnesses i.e. PW-6 and PW-28. There is no evidence on record that they are the relatives of the deceased or are interested witnesses. PW-6 stated that he accompanied accused persons and deceased to Shani Bazar and PW-28 met them there. They were with the accused persons and deceased in Shani Bazar up to 8:20/8:25 pm. They both have stood through the cross- examination. They are consistent and I do not found any reason to disbelieve them. They both are consistent that thereafter only Sunil and Ajeet returned to the factory. This testimony of PW-6 and PW-28 is further corroborated by PW7 when he stated that at about 9:30 or 10:00 pm Sunil and Ajeet came to the room. It is also important to note that PW-7 also corroborated the testimony of PW-6 that accused persons along with Shravan (deceased) and Sanjay left the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 53 ::
room to get the gas filled in gas cylender. Keeping in view all these facts it is clear that both accused along with Shravan were in Shani Bazar, Narela at about 8:20/8:25 pm as deposed by PW-6 and PW-28. According to post mortem report the time of death is approximately 9:30 pm which is proximate to the time when the deceased was lastly seen in the company of accused persons. The place where dead body was found is also not far away from the place where Shravan was lastly seen in the company of the accused. There is no explanation by any of the accused as to where Shravan had left or separated from them thereafter. It is important to note that as deposed by PW-6, PW-7 and PW- 28 that only Sunil and Ajeet returned to the factory and at that time Shravan the deceased was not with them. Once the prosecution has discharged the onus and established that deceased was lastly seen in the company of the accused persons the onus was upon them to explain as to when they part ways and separated. There is no explanation on record.
Ld. Defence counsel took the plea that according to PW-6 he has gone to meet Sudhir, But Sudhir has not been examined. There is also no such evidence that Sudhir was working in the factory. I found that according to PW-7 Sudhir was also working in the factory when he stated that "Ajeet, Sudhir and other employees were on day shift duties on 19.05.2018". State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 54 ::
This fact clearly shows that Sudhir was working in that factory. There is no cross-examination of PW7 on this point. So far as examination of Sudhir is concerned, he is not a witness of last seen hence, non examination of Sudhir does not effect prosecution case. In view of the defence of PW-6 and PW-28 in my opinion the circumstance of last seen is proved. There is also proximity of place and time between the last seen and the recovery of the body and time since death. In my opinion this circumstance point towards the guilt of the accused persons and at the same time is not in- consistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused persons.
Recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused persons.
126. Ld. APP submitted that on the same day both the accused persons were arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW21/P61 and Ex.PW21/P64. Accused Sunil and Ajeet made the disclosure statements Ex.PW21/P62 and Ex.PW21/P66 respectively. In pursuance to the disclosure statement accused Sunil got recovered his clothes i.e. green colour T-shirt and grey colour pants Ex.MO3 which he was wearing at the time of incident. The clothes were wrapped in a cloth piece, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide memo Ex.PW21/P67. Accused Ajeet also got recovered his clothes i.e. white stripped shirt and blue jeans Ex.MO4. The State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 55 ::
clothes were wrapped in a cloth piece, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide memo Ex.PW21/P68. The blood stains were not visible on the clothes. They got recovered these clothes from the room situated on the second floor of factory number H-1190, DSIIDC Narela. It is the room where accused persons were residing. Ld. APP submitted that prosecution has examined PW-22 HC Krishan, PW-21 SI Vijay Kumar and PW-24 Inspector Rajender Singh to prove the recovery of clothes. All the three witnesses are consistent and corroborated each other regarding the recovery of clothes. They have stood through the test of cross- examination. In view of testimony of these three witnesses, who are reliable and trust worthy the recovery of clothes stands established.
127. The clothes were sent to FSL for Biological and DNA examination. The report along with genotype analysis has been proved as Ex.PW18/P29. According to this report blood was detected on the clothes of accused Sunil Ravi Dass. The DNA was isolated from the blood detected on the T-shirt and pants of accused Sunil Ravi Dass, which matched with the DNA of deceased. Ld. APP submitted that the blood on the clothes of Ajeet could not be detected. Ld. APP submitted that so far as accused Sunil Ravi Dass is concerned as blood was detected on his clothes which also matched with the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 56 ::
DNA of deceased that clearly points and establish that it was accused Sunil Ravi Dass who was involved in the murder of deceased Shravan. There is no other explanation as to how the blood of deceased came on the T-shirt and pants of accused Sunil Ravi Dass. Ld. APP submitted that the onus which was on the prosecution has been discharged. The circumstance stands established which point towards the guilt of accused and is also inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused.
128. Ld. Defence counsel submitted that no such recovery was affected. According to prosecution case the recovery was affected on 20.05.2018 from the room situated in the factory. There were many workers working in the factory. No public witness has been joined at the time of alleged recovery. Neither any worker working in that factory nor any person from the nearby factories has been joined. This itself creates doubt regarding the truthfulness of story of prosecution. Even the owner of the factory and some other workers such as Keshav Dass who had already joined the investigation were not joined despite their availability in the factory. This fact itself shows that no such recovery was affected from the factory and was infact planted upon the accused. Ld. Counsel further submitted that according to PW-6, PW-7 and PW-8 the accused persons have returned State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 57 ::
to the room/factory at about 9:30/9:40 pm and they no where stated that they noticed any blood on the clothes of any of the accused. Ld. Counsel submitted that keeping in view all these facts it is clear that firstly, the recovery has not been proved and secondly there was no blood on any of the clothes of accused. The blood has been lateron planted. Ld. Counsel submitted that the onus which was on prosecution has not been discharged. Prosecution has failed to prove and establish that the accused persons got recovered any clothes. The benefit of the same be given to accused persons and they be acquitted.
129. After hearing the arguments and going through the record I found that in this case there are only three recovery witnesses i.e. PW-21, PW-22 and PW24. All the three witnesses have fully supported and corroborated each other. Admittedly no public witness could be joined. But merely because no public witness was joined the testimony of police witness cannot be discarded. The law is well settled that a witness can be disbelieved only if the witness is unreliable and untrustworthy. In the present case all the three witnesses have stood through the test of cross-examination. There is nothing on record to disbelieve them. They are reliable and their testimonies inspire confidence. In view of testimonies of these three witnesses so far as recovery of State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 58 ::
clothes is concerned i.e. established.
130. It is mentioned in the seizure memos Ex.PW21/P67 & Ex.PW21/P68 itself that no blood was visible with bare eyes on these clothes. Therefore, even if the witnesses PW-6, PW-7 and PW-28 did not say that they did not find /notice blood stains on the clothes of accused persons that is inconsonance with Ex.PW21/P67 and ExPW21/P68.
131. The clothes were sent to FSL for analysis. The FSL result has been proved on record as Ex.PW18/P29. According to this report the blood was detected on the clothes of accused Sunil. The DNA was isolated from the blood found on the clothes of accused Sunil which matched with the DNA of deceased. The blood on the clothes of Ajeet could not be detected. There is no explanation by the defence as to how the blood of deceased reached on the clothes of accused Sunil Ravi Dass except that the investigating agency planted the same but I do not find anything on record to support the same. The case property was seized. The seals were found intact on the parcel when the parcels reached FSL. The seals also tallied with the specimen seal. The MHC(M) and the constable who deposited the case property after collecting from MHC(M) specifically stated that the case property was not tampered with till the same remained in their custody. Under the State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 59 ::
circumstances I do not find any basis to conclude that case property was tampered.
132. Keeping in view the submissions and the fact that the recovery of clothes has been proved. The FSL result further links the clothes of the accused Sunil Ravi Dass with the commission of offence. So far as accused Ajeet is concerned no blood was detected on his clothes. Keeping in view all these facts in my opinion the onus which was on prosecution has been successfully discharged. This circumstance points towards the guilt of the accused and is also inconsistence with any hypothesis of innocence of accused. Recovery of Weapon of Offence.
133. Ld. APP submitted that in this case on 20.05.2018 both the accused persons led PW-21 SI Vijay Kumar, PW22 HC Krishan and PW24 Inspector Rajender Singh to the park of G-Block Narela. From the park from near the wall on the southern side from a pit after removing the leaves and the earth they got recovered one hammer Ex.MO5. The sketch of the hammer is Ex.PW21/P69. The hammer was wrapped in a cloth piece, sealed with the seal of RS and seized vide memo Ex.PW21/P70. Ld. APP submitted that no public person could be joined at the time of seizure of hammer despite efforts. The three recovery witnesses examined have stood through the test of cross-examination. They are State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 60 ::
reliable and trustworthy. The defence has failed to breach their verocity during lengthy cross-examination. Ld. APP submitted that the prosecution has proved the recovery of hammer Ex.MO5 at the instance of both the accused persons by examining PW-21, PW22, & PW24.
134. Ld. APP further submits that the hammer was sent to FSL for examination. The biological and DNA examination report has been proved as Ex.PW18/P29. As per this report the blood was found on the hammer. The DNA was isolated from the blood found on the hammer, which matched with the DNA of the deceased. Ld. APP submitted that this fact proves and establishes that Ex.MO5 is the weapon with which the offence was committed. The recovery of this weapon at the instance of accused persons clearly shows that they concealed the weapon in the park after committing the offence and that is why they knew where the weapon was and got it recovered.
135. Ld. APP further submitted that subsequent opinion Ex.PW25/P78 was also taken from the autopsy surgeon, who conducted the post mortem on the dead body with respect to the weapon of offence. The autopsy surgeon opined that the injuries as mentioned in the post mortem report can be caused by the hammer examined. Ld. APP further submitted that the hammer was also shown to Dr. Vijay Dhankar who State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 61 ::
conducted the post mortem and he identified that Ex.MO5 is the same hammer which he examined and gave the subsequent opinion Ex.PW25/P78. Ld. APP submitted that keeping in view all this evidence the prosecution has proved and established the recovery of weapon of offence at the instance of accused persons. The circumstance points towards the guilt of accused persons and is also inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused.
136. Ld. Defence counsel submitted that according to the story the weapon was recovered from the park, a public place. Public persons were there but no independent witness was joined at the time of alleged recovery. No watchmen or gardner was joined from the park. The persons roaming in the park or the hawkers present outside the park were also not joined. There is no compliance of section 100 Cr.PC. These facts itself create doubt about the truthfulness of story of prosecution. Ld. Counsel further submitted that no such recovery was affected. There is no evidence as to from where the accused persons got that hammer as none of the witness stated that the accused persons were carrying any hammer with them when they left the factory or that they have seen any hammer with the accused persons when they were in Shani Bazar. Ld. Counsel further submits that the onus was upon prosecution to prove and establish this fact State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 62 ::
which the prosecution has failed. No finger prints were lifted from the hammer to link the accused with the commission of offence. Ld. Counsel submits that benefit be given to accused persons and they be acquitted.
137. After hearing the arguments and going through the record I found that in this case so far as the recovery is concerned three witnesses have been examined i.e. PW21, PW22 & PW24. No public witness was joined. Efforts were made to join the public witnesses but none agreed. Keeping in view this fact in my opinion the prosecution cannot be found fault with for not joining the public witnesses as none of them agreed despite efforts. The three witnesses examined are consistent, reliable and trustworthy. The defence was not able to shake the credibility of these witnesses during lengthy cross-examination. There is nothing on record that witnesses have any reason to depose falsely against accused persons. The testimony of witnesses inspires confidence. Keeping in view the testimony of PW21, PW22 and PW24 in my opinion prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of hammer Ex.MO5 at the instance of both the accused persons.
138. The hammer was shown to the autopsy surgeon who gave the subsequent opinion Ex.PW25/P78 that the injuries mentioned in the post mortem report are possible with this State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 63 ::
hammer. The autopsy surgeon had also identified the hammer Ex.MO5 as the same hammer which he examined and gave the opinion. Ex.MO5 is the same hammer which was got recovered by both the accused persons. This subsequent opinion links the weapon with the offence.
139. The hammer was sent to FSL for analysis. The report is proved as Ex.PW18/P29. According to this report the blood was detected on the hammer. The DNA was isolated from the blood found on the hammer. The DNA found on the hammer matched with the DNA of deceased. This report clinches the issue and establishes that it is the same weapon with which the injury on the person of deceased was caused resulting into his death. Keeping in view the above discussion in my opinion the circumstance is proved and established. The circumstance points towards the guilt of the accused persons and at the same time in-consistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused.
140. Keeping in view the above discussion on the various circumstances and also the post mortem report Ex.PW25/P77 it is clear that death of Shravan is homicidal as he died due to cranio cerebral damage caused by blunt force injury, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The injuries were ante mortem in nature. The deceased was lastly seen in the company of accused State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 64 ::
persons. The place where he was lastly seen with the accused persons is proximate to the place where dead body was found. There is also proximity of time when they were last seen together and the time since death. The accused persons got recovered the clothes and on the clothes of accused Sunil Ravi Dass the blood was found. The DNA isolated from the blood found on the clothes of Sunil Ravi Dass matched with the DNA of deceased. Both the accused persons got recovered the weapon of offence i.e. hammer Ex.MO5. On the hammer also the blood was detected. The DNA was isolated from the blood found on the hammer which matched with the DNA of deceased. Keeping in view all these circumstances which are proved and established in my opinion the chain is complete. The circumstances point towards the guilt of accused persons and are also in consistent with any hypothesis of innocence of accused persons. Therefore, both the accused are held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 read with 34 IPC.
141. Now to come up for arguments on quantum of sentence on 24.12.2018.
Digitally signed by
VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR
KUMAR BANSAL
Announced in the open court BANSAL
Date: 2018.12.20
16:36:31 +0530
today on 20.12.2018 (VIRENDER KUMAR BANSAL)
ASJ/Pilot Court/North District
Rohini Courts/New Delhi.
State Vs. Sunil Ravi Dass etc. SC No.:566/18 :: 65 ::