Delhi District Court
State vs Tahir Ali on 16 March, 2026
IN THE COURT OF ANURAG THAKUR
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)
EAST DISTRICT, DELHI
Session Case No.: 1952/2016
State Vs : Tahir Ali
FIR No. : 34/2016
U/s : 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)
PS : Kalyan Puri
CNR No.: DLET01-006282-2016
Date of Institution : 21.04.2016
Date of Judgment reserved on: 17.01.2026
Date of Judgment : 16.03.2026
Brief Details Of The Case
Details of accused : Tahir Ali
S/o Jabir Ali,
R/o H.No.9/58, Khichripur,
Delhi-110091
Offences complained of : 302 IPC
Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final order : Convicted
JUDGMENT
1. Succinctly, the case of the prosecution is as follows:-
(a) On 22.01.2016, a call was received regarding dead bodies of two girls at House No.7A, Gali No.1, Pepsiwali Gali, Village Khichripur, Delhi and the same was entered at DD No.17A (at PS Kalyan Puri) which was marked to SI Deepak for inquiry.
Information regarding the same was also given to beat staff as well FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 1 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:41:37 +0530 as to SHO. The beat staff, SI Deepak and SHO separately reached at the spot and at ground floor in a room, the dead bodies of two girls were found lying next to the door. The heads of both the dead bodies were in north-east direction and their feet were towards south-west. Upon inquiry, the names of both the girls were revealed as Poonam and Swati aged 20 and 12 years respectively (both daughters of Ajit Saxena). Blood like spot was seen on the mouth of Swati and bruises were visible on the neck of Poonam. Crime team was called at the spot and the spot was got inspected as well as photographed. Upon further inquiry, it came to light that a boy named Tahir used to visit that house/room but no eye-witness was found at the spot.
(b) On the basis of the information available, SI Deepak prepared a tehrir u/s 302 IPC and handed over the same to Ct.
Devender for registration of FIR. Thereafter, Ct. Devender came back to the spot with the original rukka and the copy of FIR which he handed over to SHO PS Kalyan Puri for investigation. The dead bodies were shifted to LBS Hospital where the doctor declared both Poonam and Swati as 'brought dead'. Both the dead bodies were shifted to Mortuary of LBS Hospital.
(c) From the spot, a plate containing some pasta and a glass containing tea like substance were seized. Dust and some pieces of pasta scattered on the floor were lifted and their pullandas (parcels) were prepared, thereafter, the same were seized. Site plan of the place of the incident was prepared. Statement of landlord Yogesh was recorded wherein inter alia he stated that one boy named Tahir used to come to the house of Ajit Saxena in his and his wife's FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 2 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:41:51 +0530 absence. He also informed the IO that on 22.01.2016 at about 09:00-09:30 a.m, he saw Tahir leave the house of Ajit Saxena and shortly thereafter, the crowd gathered at the spot who informed him that Poonam and Swati were lying dead in the room, so he immediately called 100 number.
(d) Statement of Rekha Saxena (mother of both girls) was also recorded by IO wherein among other things she stated that Poonam had told her (on the night before the incident) that Tahir who plied a TSR and who used to take her to work, was pressurizing her to marry him and threatened her that in case she did not marry him then he would not let her get married to anyone else. She also told that Tahir used to make phone calls to Poonam. She suspected that Tahir had killed both her daughters Poonam and Swati.
(e) On 22.01.2016 itself, Tahir was interrogated wherein he confessed about his involvement in the crime and he was arrested.
His medical examination was got conducted. His blood sample and hair sample were provided by the doctor to the IO which were duly seized. During medical examination of accused, abrasions and bruises were found on his forehead and neck. The IO requested the doctor to give an opinion regarding the nature of injuries. Pointing out memo of place of incident was prepared by the IO at instance of the accused. The jacket of the accused containing blood spot was also seized by the IO. Seized case properties and samples etc. were deposited in the malkhana.
(f) Postmortems of both dead bodies were got conducted. Sealed pullandas qua deceased Poonam and Swati as well as sample seals were provided by the doctor to the IO which were duly seized.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 3 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:42:03 +0530 Exhibits were sent to the FSL for forensic examination. As per postmortem report of deceased Poonam, the cause of death was due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem manual strangulation and sufficient to cause the death in ordinary course of nature. Similar cause of death was mentioned by the doctor in the PM report of deceased Swati. The CDRs and CAFs of mobile phone number 7289903214 (from which accused used to call Poonam) and mobile number 9811797989 (used by Poonam) were collected. IO got prepared the scaled site plan from the draughtsman. He seized the TSR No.DL-1RM-1211 and prepared the corresponding seizure memo. He recorded the statements of witnesses u/s 161 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C'). Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed for commission of offence punishable u/s 302 IPC.
2. The court of Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offence. After completion of necessary formalities u/s 207 Cr.P.C, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Pursuant to the order of Learned District & Sessions Judge (East), the matter was fixed for hearing arguments on point of charge. On 17.05.2016, charge was framed against the accused for offence punishable u/s 302 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Upon receipt of FSL result, the same was filed by the IO on 27.04.2017.
3. To substantiate the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined twenty one (21) witnesses. The role of each prosecution witnesses is specified hereinafter:-
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 4 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:42:12 +0530 S. No. Name Nature of evidence PW-1 Ajit Saxena ➢ Identified dead bodies of his (Father of deceased daughters, received bodies of his Poonam and Swati) daughters after postmortem PW-2 Rekha ➢ Deposed that on 22.01.2016 she and (Mother of deceased her husband left for their duties at Poonam and Swati) 08:30 a.m leaving both her daughters behind at home ➢ At 10:00 a.m received a telephone call from a neighbour informing about death of both her daughters, she came back home where she found both daughters lying dead on floor in room ➢ Testified that night before 22.01.2016 her daughter Poonam told that Tahir was pressurizing her to get married to him or else he would kill her ➢ Stated that Tahir used to meet Poonam in her absence and that both her daughters were killed by accused Tahir ➢ She also revealed that Tahir and her mother came to their home on Holi and conveyed that he wanted to marry Poonam and also that Tahir was already married, upon refusal of this proposal by Poonam the accused had threatened her PW-3 Yogesh ➢ Deposed that Rekha, Ajit Saxena (Owner of house/place and their two daughters were of incident) residing (since 3-4 months prior to incident) in one room set which was let-out by him ➢ Tahir used to visit house of Ajit in his and Rekha's absence, he had seen Tahir visit the house of Ajit on 2 or 3 occasions ➢ On date of incident he saw Tahir coming out of room of Ajit between 09:00-10:00 a.m, Tahir had parked his TSR about 100 steps away from room of Ajit and after leaving the room of Ajit the accused went away FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 5 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:42:55 +0530 in that TSR ➢ He dialed 100 number upon seeing that daughters of Ajit were lying dead, he was present at time of seizure of articles like plate and glass, he signed seizure memo of floor dust, he identified plate and glass during trial, he also identified place of incident from 13 photo-
graphs available on judicial file PW-4 Jitender Saxena ➢ He identified dead bodies of (Uncle of deceased Poonam and Swati at Mortuary, Poonam and Swati) LBS Hospital ➢ Was present during their last rites at Kondli Cremation ground PW-5 ASI Sushil Kumar ➢ He was MHC(M) PS Kalyan Puri (Police witness) and on 22.01.2016 and 23.01.2016 he received parcels and sample seals which he deposited in malkhana and made corresponding entries in register no.19 ➢ On 22.03.2016 he sent 12 parcels to FSL through Ct. Narender ➢ On 25.04.2017 result of FSL along with 12 parcels was received at PS, entry regarding the same was made by HC Pradeep Kumar, he identified the handwriting of HC Pradeep Kumar during trial PW-6 W/Ct. Kalpana ➢ On 22.01.2016 she was channel (Police witness) operator at CPCR PHQ, New Delhi and at about 10:43 a.m she received information from one Pooja regarding death of two ladies at Khichripur Village, Pepsiwali Gali ➢ Call was dispatched by her to wireless operator and Form No.1 was filled by her through computerized system PW-7 Manoj Kumar Mahto ➢ Deposed that on 22.01.2016 he was (Public witness) present at private parking situated by side of drain at Kuda Khatta Dhobighat Road, Pandav Nagar, Delhi and he saw Tahir park his auto in that parking FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 6 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:43:08 +0530 ➢ On next day in evening police and accused came to the parking and police officials seized and took away the said auto/TSR ➢ He identified the auto during trial PW-8 Jabir Ali ➢ He produced the auto/TSR during (Superdar of TSR/ trial and also placed on record four father of accused) photographs of the TSR PW-9 ASI Phire Ram ➢ On 22.01.2016 he was duty officer (Police witness) at PS Kalyan Puri when PCR call was received regarding dead bodies at Gali No.1, House No.7, Khichripur, Delhi, he recorded the same at DD No.17A ➢ He received rukka sent by SI Deepak, he recorded the FIR and made endorsement on the rukka, he signed the certificate u/s 65B Evidence Act qua computerized FIR PW-10 Sunil Sharma @ Ankit ➢ Deposed that Poonam was his girl (Friend of deceased friend, he had given SIM having Poonam) Mobile No.9811797989 issued in his name to Poonam, he was told by Poonam that Tahir harassed her ➢ Tahir used to pick-up and drop Poonam from her house to office, Tahir used to threaten Poonam, he got issued duplicate SIM of No.9811797989, ported the same into Airtel from Vodafone, he had identified his signature and photo- graph on CAF of No.9811797989, he produced his original DL PW-11 Dr. Arti Yadav ➢ On 22.01.2016 she examined Tahir (CMO, LBS Hospital) Ali, he was conscious and oriented, she found multiple injuries on person of Tahir Ali which were simple and fresh in nature ➢ She gave first-aid to Tahir, prepared his MLC and referred him to Forensic Deprtment, blood and hair sample of Tahir were sealed and handed over to IO PW-12 Dr. S.Lal ➢ He conducted postmortems on dead FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 7 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:43:20 +0530 (HOD, Department of bodies of Poonam and Swati on Forensic Medicine, LBS 23.01.2016. He mentioned in detail Hospital) the external injuries present on the bodies of Poonam and Swati, he also commented on viscera of the deceased girls ➢ He opined that the cause of death of Poonam and Swati was due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem manual strangulation, all the injuries present over bodies of Poonam and Swati were antemortem in nature and fresh in duration, he also opined as to which of the injuries were caused by blunt force impact and which were caused by nails ➢ He proved the reports qua postmortems of Poonam and Swati, he also proved the inquest papers ➢ On 24.01.2016 on application made by IO he examined Tahir, he deposed regarding the injuries on person of Tahir, he also opined as to which injuries were caused by blunt force impact and which were produced by nails, he gave opinion that duration of injuries was two days approx.
PW-13 Israr Babu ➢ He produced CAF and CDRs for (Alternate Nodal the period 20.12.2015 to 22.01.2016 Officer ,Vodafone) of Mobile No.7289903214 ➢ He also produced CAF and CDRs for period 20.12.2015 to 22.01.2016 of Mobile No.9811797989 ➢ Mobile No.7289903214 was in name of Mohd. Tahir while mobile No.9811797989 was allotted to Sunil Sharma, he also furnished certificates u/s 65B Evidence Act qua CDRs of both these numbers PW-14 Ct. Surender ➢ Was Beat Constable of the area, (Police witness) reached the spot upon receipt of information, took tehrir (given by IO) to PS, came back to spot with FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 8 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:43:28 +0530 copy of FIR and original tehrir and handed over the same to IO ➢ Deposed regarding shifting of dead bodies of Poonam and Swati to LBS Hospital where the doctor declared them brought dead, he collected the MLCs of Poonam and Swati and handed over the same to IO PW-15 ASI Manoj ➢ On 22.01.2016, he went to spot and (Photographer, Crime clicked 13 photographs of scene of Team) crime, he handed over the photographs to IO, he brought negatives of those photographs during trial PW-16 Dr. Gunjan ➢ On 22.01.2016 she examined (Casualty Medical Poonam and Swati, she declared Officer, LBS Hospital) them as brought dead, she prepared their respective MLCs PW-17 HC Narender ➢ On 22.03.2016 he took 12 sealed (Police witness) parcels along with 5 sample seals from PS Kalyan Puri and deposited the same at FSL Rohini ➢ He returned to PS Kalyan Puri and handed over acknowledgment given by FSL to MHC(M) concerned PW-18 HC Lokender ➢ On 23.01.2016 he was present at (Police witness) time of postmortem of deceased Poonam and Swati, he received five sealed pullandas and three sample seals qua Poonam from doctor ➢ He also received four sealed pullandas and two sample seals qua Swati from doctor, he handed over all pullandas to IO who seized the same and prepared seizure memos in that regard PW-19 ACP Mahesh Kumar ➢ On 10.02.2016 on request of (Draughtsman, Crime Inspector Narender Singh he visited Branch) place of incident and took measurements as well as prepared rough notes ➢ On 08.03.2016 on basis of notes and measurements he prepared scaled site plan which he handed FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 9 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:43:39 +0530 over to the IO PW-20 SI Deepak ➢ Reached the spot on receipt of DD (Inquiry Officer) no.17A, saw the dead bodies of Poonam and Swati lying on floor, also saw blood like spot on mouth of Swati and bruises on neck of Poonam ➢ Prepared tehrir and handed over the same to Ct. Surender, was present when crime team clicked photographs of spot, saw SHO/IO seize plate and steel glass, saw the IO lift hair, dust particles and pieces of pasta from the floor and prepare pullanda regarding the same ➢ Saw the IO record statements of Yogesh and Rekha at the spot ➢ Was present at the time of apprehension, interrogation, arrest and personal search of Tahir ➢ Signed the disclosure statement of Tahir, was also signatory to seizure memo of jacket of Tahir, was present at time of postmortem of Poonam and Swati, was also present at time of preparation of pointing out memo of spot of occurrence at instance of Tahir ➢ He identified the case properties i.e. clothes of both the deceased, jacket of Tahir, steel plate and steel glass. Auto bearing registration No.DL- 1RM-1211 through its photograph PW-21 Insp. Narender Singh ➢ He reached the spot, called crime (SHO PS Kalyan Puri/ team, sent dead bodies to LBS IO of the case) Hospital, seized steel plate containing pasta and one steel glass, lifted dust particles and hair from the floor, prepared seizure memos regarding aforementioned articles ➢ He recorded the statement of landlord Yogesh, arrested accused Tahir, prepared arrest memo and personal search memo of Thair, recorded disclosure of Tahir, seized FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 10 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:43:50 +0530 jacket of Tahir as well as the TSR No.DL-1RM-1211 ➢ He prepared pointing out memo of place of incident at instance of Tahir, also prepared pointing out memo of the place where Tahir had thrown his SIM, got conducted medical examination of Tahir and also obtained opinion regarding injuries on the person of Tahir ➢ He collected blood sample, hair sample of Tahir and sample seal provided by doctor at LBS Hospital, he also obtained report prepared by crime team, got conducted postmortem of Poonam and Swati, collected postmortem reports of both girls, recorded identification statements qua dead bodies ➢ He handed over the dead bodies of Poonam and Swati to their father Ajit Saxena and prepared handing over memos in that regard ➢ He got prepared scaled site plan of the place of incident, deposited the case property in the malkhana, obtained PCR form PHQ, sent all exhibits to FSL for forensic examination, he obtained CAF and CDRs of mobiles used by Poonam and Tahir Ali, prepared and filed the charge-sheet, he identified accused and case properties during trial The prosecution evidence was concluded on 14.08.2025.
4. Statement of accused Tahir u/s 313 Cr.P.C was recorded on 29.08.2025 wherein all incriminating evidence was put to him. He stated that he was not acquainted with Poonam. He claimed that on the day of incident, his TSR had broken down at Khichripur. He stated that he did not know how the police zeroed in on him. He FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 11 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:04 +0530 received a telephone call from his home informing that his father had been taken to PS, so he reached PS Kalyan Puri where he was made to sit, thereafter he was interrogated and arrested. He maintained that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. Statement of accused u/s 294 Cr.P.C was also recorded wherein he admitted the documents i.e. (i) Letter sent by Director, FSL to SHO PS Kalyan Puri and (ii) Result & Analysis of biological examination of exhibits dated 25.07.2017. Accused elected not to lead defence evidence. Final arguments concluded on 17.01.2026.
5. Learned Addl. PP for State submitted that all PWs have fully supported the case of the prosecution and their testimonies are creditworthy. He avowed that cogent documentary evidence has also been adduced to substantiate the charge framed against the accused. He argued that even the medical evidence duly ties in with the case canvassed by the State. He claimed that the case against the accused is proved beyond a shadow of doubt, so the accused be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 IPC.
6. Per-contra, Ld. Amicus Curiae for accused submitted that the case of prosecution is inherently weak. He claimed that there are material discrepancies and contradictions in the testimonies of witnesses. He argued that accused is innocent, he had not committed any offence and he had been falsely implicated in this case. He adumbrated that documents prepared by police had been fabricated. He stated that no circumstantial evidence has come on record against the accused. He canvassed that the prosecution has FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 12 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:11 +0530 miserably failed to prove the case against the accused. He prayed that the accused be acquitted of the charge framed against him. He filed written submissions and relied upon the judgments rendered in the cases of Babu vs State, (2010) 9 SCC 189; LIC vs Ram Pal Singh, 2010 (2) Civil Court Cases 315 SC; Riaz Ali vs State, 2012 (2) JCC 1092 Delhi (DB); Maghavendra Singh vs State, IV (2023) SLT 664; State vs Lallu Ram, 2016 (4) LRC 324 Delhi; Gurcharan Singh vs State, 2021 (1) RCR (Cr.) 778 SC and Kailash Gaur vs State, 2012 (1) LRC 81 SC; to buttress his submissions.
7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the record. In the present case, accused has been charged for commission of offence punishable u/s 302 IPC. Relevant portion of section 302 IPC is reproduced as under:-
302. Punishment for murder.-Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
The relevant portion of Section 300 IPC which defines 'Murder' reads as follows:-
300. Murder- Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or -
Secondly- If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused , or - Thirdly- If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or Fourthly- If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury is aforesaid.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 13 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:21 +0530 Further, the relevant portion of Section 299 IPC which defines 'Culpable homicide', having reference in the definition of 'Murder' reads as follows:-
299. Culpable homicide-Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
In the absence of an eye-witness regarding commission of crime, the prosecution has to rely upon indirect evidence which is known as circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence, though admissible in a criminal trial but the same has to be treated with caution and circumspection by the court because of the inherent subjectivity in drawing conclusions. The Apex Court in the case of Hanumant vs State of Madhya Pradesh, (1952) 2 SCC 71; while dealing with circumstantial evidence held that the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. It must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by accused.
8. In the case of Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda vs State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622; the apex court propounded the following principles regarding circumstantial evidence:-
• The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. • The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say. they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty, • The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 14 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:34 +0530 • They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved, and • There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
In the light of these golden rules, the scrutiny of the evidence tendered shall be conducted. It is a cardinal principle of our criminal justice system that the case against the accused must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the prosecution has to prove that Tahir strangulated both Poonam and Swati with the intention of causing their deaths. My observations on the evidence adduced are delineated hereinafter.
9. The factum of deaths of Poonam and Swati is not disputed. Even otherwise, PW-1 Ajit Saxena and PW-4 Jitender Saxena duly identified the dead bodies of Poonam and Swati at Mortuary, LBS Hospital and the identification statements made by them were Ex.PW1/E and Ex.PW1/D respectively. PW-16 Dr. Gunjan had testified that on 22.01.2016 she examined both Poonam and Swati and she declared them as 'brought dead'. PW-12 Dr. S.Lal from LBS Hospital conducted post mortem on the bodies of Poonam and Swati. The relevant extract of his testimony regarding the postmortem of Swati is as under:-
I had observed the following external injuries on the body of the deceased: -
1. Reddish bruise 3.5X1.0cm present over midline middle lower front of neck, horizontally placed more on left side placed 5.0cms below tip of chin and 7.0cms above the supra sternal notch.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 15 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:44 +0530
2. Reddish bruise of size 2.5X1.0cm middle upper front of neck placed horizontally 2.5 above the upper border of injury No.1 and 3.0 cms below tip of chin.
3. Nails mark 0.3 X 0.1cm left side lower front of neck placed 4.0cms above the mid point of clavicle and 3.5cms left to pidline.
4. Reddish bruise 4.0X1.5cms over left side lateral aspects of neck placed 3.0 cms below angle of mandible and 5.0cms from midline.
5. Nails mark 0.3 X0.1cms over right side upper part of neck placed 9.0 cms right to midline and 1.0cm below the angle of mandible.
6. Nails Mark 0.5 X 0.1cms over right side of neck placed 0.8 cms posterior to injury No.5 and 2.5cms below the ear lobule.
7. Nails mark 0.1X0.1cms over right side of neck placed 1.8cms below injury No.6.
8. Nails mark 0.8 X0.1 cms over right side of neck placed 3.0cms below angle of mandible 9.0cms from midline.
On internal examination, all the viscera of the deceased were congested, petecheal haemorrhage seen a places over lungs and heart, the stomach contained full of semi digested food material (pasta and other food particles is identifiable) and the walls were NAD.
On fine dissection of neck, sub-cutaneous tissue shows bruising. The soft tissue of neck showed extra-vassation of blood of both side of neck and more on left side. The underlying hyoid cartilage and thyroid cartilage were intact. Mucosa of trachea was congested and petecheal haemorrhage seen on base of tongue.
The cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante mortem manual strangulation and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All the injuries present over body were ante-mortem in nature and fresh in duration. Injury No.1, 2 and 4 were caused by blunt force impact and injuries No.3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were caused by nails. The time since death was about 24 hours.
My report bearing No.34/2016 is Ex.PW12/A, which bears my signatures at points A. Total nine inquest papers were seen and produced before me and inadvertently I had written the said inquest papers in total as 10 instead of 9. The relevant extract of testimony of PW-12 regarding the postmortem of Poonam is reproduced as follows :-
I had observed the following external injuries on the said dead body.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 16 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:44:56 +0530
1. Reddish bruise 7.0X1.5cms present over midline upper fornt of neck, horizontally placed more on right side placed 4.5cms below tip of chin and 8.0 cms above the supra sternal notch.
2. Reddish bruise of size 1.0X0.4cms midline upper front of neck placed 3.0 cms below tip of chin.
3. Nails mark 0.3X0.1cms over injury No.1 placed 3.5 cms right to midline of neck.
4. Reddish bruise 5.0X3.5cms over right side laternal aspects of neck placed 3.0cms below angle of mandible and 5.5cms from midline.
5. Reddish bruise 1.0X0.5cms over left side upper middle front of neck placed 3.5cms left to midline and 3.0cms below the angle of mandible.
6. Reddish bruise 2.0 X 1.0cms over left ide upper middle front of neck placed 3.0cms below angle of mandible and 6.0cms from midline.
7. Reddish bruise 2.5X1.5cms over left side upper middle front of neck placed 2.0cms below ear lobule and 7.0cms from midline.
8. Reddish bruise 0.8X0.3cms over left side upper middle front of neck placed 3.5cms below ear lobule and 8.0cms from midline.
9 Reddish bruise 5.5 X3.5cms over right side medial end of clavicle on chest placed 2.0cms from midline.
10. Reddish abrasion 0.8X0.3cms over dorsum of left wrist.
11. Reddish bruise 4.5X1.5cm over left side face just outer to angle of eye.
12. Reddish contused abrasion 7.5X1.5cms over left side black of shoulder placed 5.5cms below the tip of shoulder and 16cms from midline back of chest.
On internal examination, all the viscera of the deceased were congested, petecheal haemorrhage seen a places over lungs and heart, the stomach contained full of semi digested food material (pasta and other food particles is identifiable) and the walls were NAD.
On fine dissection of neck, sub-cutaneous tissue shows bruising. The soft tissue of neck showed extra-vassation of blood of both side of neck and more on left side and in around the thyroid cartilge. The underlying hyoid cartilage was intact an thyroid cartilage was fractured. Mucosa of trachea was congested and petecheal haemorrhage seen on base of tongue.
The cause of death was due to asphyxia as a result of ante mortem manual strangulation and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All the injuries present over body were ante mortem in nature caused by blunt force impact except FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 17 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:06 +0530 injury no.3 by nails. All the injuries were fresh in duration. The time since death was 24 hours.
My report to this effect, bearing No. 33/16, is Ex.PW12/B, which bears my signature at points A. Total ten inquest papers were produced and seen by me.
From the testimony of PW-12 qua the deaths of Swati and Poonam, it is evident that their deaths were unnatural, homicidal in nature and were caused by manual strangulation.
10. PW-3 Yogesh was the landlord of Ajit Saxena. He resided in the building adjacent to room of Ajit Saxena. He had unequivocally stated that on 22.01.2016 between 09:00-10:00 a.m, he had seen Tahir when he was coming out of room of Ajit Saxena. He also testified that Tahir boarded his TSR (which he had parked 100 steps away) and left. He further deposed that after some time of Tahir leaving the room, public persons gathered there and then he saw that both daughters of Ajit Saxena were lying dead on the floor of that room. During cross-examination he revealed that he came to know about deaths of both girls about half an hour after he had seen Tahir leave the room. PW-3 duly identified Tahir during trial as the person who used to visit house of Ajit Saxena in his absence as well as absence of his wife. He stated that he had seen Tahir visiting the house of Ajit more than once in their absence. This testimony of PW-3 is in teeth of the claim made by accused Tahir in his statement u/s 313 Cr.PC wherein he stated that he was not acquainted with Poonam. The testimony of PW-3 appears to be natural and inspires confidence as even when he was again cross-
examined after about eight and a half years of the incident, he did FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 18 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:17 +0530 not budge from his statement and largely reaffirmed his stand.
11. PW-10 Sunil Sharma testified that Poonam was his girlfriend and he had given SIM bearing mobile No.9811797989 to Poonam and she used to talk with him through that number. The CDRs of mobile phone number 9811797989 and mobile phone number 7289903214 were collected from Vodafone Ltd and tendered in evidence. Perusal of the same shows that from mobile number 7289903214 SMS and calls were being made to mobile No. 9811797989 on 19.01.2016, 20.01.2016, 21.01.2016 and on the morning of 22.01.2016. The last call from mobile No.7289903214 was made to 9811797989 at 08:57 a.m i.e. barely less than an hour before Tahir was seen leaving the room of Ajit Saxena and less than two hours before the time of death of Poonam and Swati.
12. As per testimony of PW-13 Israr Babu, Nodal Officer, Vodafone Idea Ltd. and from CAF of mobile number 7289903214 Ex.PW13/A, it is evident that this mobile number was issued in the name of accused Mohd. Tahir s/o Jabir Ali. The photograph along with election ID Card of accused were also available with the CAF.
It is not the defence of the accused that he used to talk multiple times a day with PW-10 Sunil Sharma or send SMS to him. No explanation was put forward by the accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C for calling at mobile number 9811797989 multiple times each day. Had an explanation been given by the accused in this regard then the fact that after the incident PW-10 collected his mobile number from the house of Poonam, would have assumed FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 19 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:27 +0530 significance but the stoic silence of the accused has made this circumstance almost insignificant. There is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of PW-10. It is not extra-ordinary in our country to find mobile phone issued in name of one person being used by other person. Hence, it can be safely inferred that calls made from 7289903214 to 9811797989 were made by Tahir to Poonam.
13. PW-2 Rekha had testified that on the night before the date of incident, Poonam had confided in her that Tahir was pressurizing her to marry him else, he would kill her. This testimony ties in with the call detail records of mobile of accused Tahir and the mobile used by Poonam as multiple calls were made by Tahir on phone used by Poonam in evening of 21.01.2016 and a few SMSes were also sent that night by him to her. PW-10 Sunil Sharma had also testified that Poonam had told him that she was harassed by a person namely Tahir who also used to threaten her. Hence, it can be deduced that not only Tahir knew Poonam very well but he used to also pester her and threaten her.
14. In a case based on circumstantial evidence, existence of motive assumes significance and plays important role in completing the chain of circumstantial evidence. In judgment rendered by Apex Court in case of Suresh Chandra Bahari vs State of Bihar, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 80; it was held that if motive is proved that would supply a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence but the absence thereof cannot be a ground to reject the prosecution case. As regards the motive for commission of crime, FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 20 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:35 +0530 PW-2 Rekha had disclosed in her cross-examination that on previous Holi Tahir and his mother came to her home. They conveyed that Tahir wanted to marry her daughter Poonam and his mother also informed that Tahir was already married. She also deposed that Poonam clearly told her that Tahir was already married, had children and she did not like Tahir and did not want to marry him. PW-2 further revealed that on that very day Tahir had threatened her daughter that he would see her. PW-2 had also stated that she had instructed her daughter Poonam to leave the job as Tahir used to threaten her whenever she used to go to work. There is no reason for Rekha to falsely implicate Tahir in the murder of her daughters. It seems that the murders were committed as Poonam was not yielding to Tahir's persistent nagging and pressure to marry him. It is noteworthy that the motive for the murders was revealed by PW-2 in response to question (during her cross- examination) by defence counsel and she had made no attempt in examination-in-chief to improve her statement made to IO.
15. PW-7 Manoj Kumar Mahto testified that on 22.01.2016 he had seen Tahir park his auto/TSR in private parking situated by the side of drain at Kuda Khatta, Dhobighat Road, Pandav Nagar, Delhi and on the next day in the evening, accused Tahir and police officials came there and took away the parked auto/TSR. He admitted his signature on seizure memo of TSR Ex.PW7/A. He correctly identified Tahir before the court and he also identified the TSR of the accused. Though, he admitted that in the year 2016 there was no authorized parking by EDMC at that spot as the same FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 21 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:46 +0530 started only in the year 2018 (but it is common knowledge that people in Delhi park their vehicles illegally on government land or in unauthorized parking), yet his testimony is trustworthy regarding the parking of TSR and seizure of TSR at instance of Tahir as the credit of this witness was not impeached during cross-examination.
16. It was argued on behalf of the accused that the PCR Form Ex.PW6/A is not duly proved as the same is a printout of electronic record but it is not accompanied by the requisite certificate u/s 65B Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short IEA). It is a matter of record that this PCR Form was exhibited by PW-6 W/Ct. Kalpana without production of any supporting certificate u/s 65B IEA. In the absence of the requisite Section 65B(4) IEA certificate, the printout is not even a document as per IEA. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the judgment of Apex Court in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and Ors., (2020) 7 SCC 1; wherein, it held as under:-
30.Coming back to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, sub-section (1) needs to be analysed. The sub-section begins with a non-obstante clause, and then goes on to mention information contained in an electronic record produced by a computer, which is, by a deeming fiction, then made a "document". This deeming fiction only takes effect if the further conditions mentioned in the Section are satisfied in relation to both the information and the computer in question;
and if such conditions are met, the "document" shall then be admissible in any proceedings. The words "...without further proof or production of the original..." make it clear that once the deeming fiction is given effect by the fulfilment of the conditions mentioned in the Section, the "deemed document"
now becomes admissible in evidence without further proof or production of the original as evidence of any contents of the original, or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 22 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:45:57 +0530
31.The non-obstante clause in sub-section (1) makes it clear that when it comes to information contained in an electronic record, admissibility and proof thereof must follow the drill of Section 65B, which is a special provision in this behalf Sections 62 to 65 being irrelevant for this purpose. However, Section 65B(1) clearly differentiates between the "original" document - which would be the original "electronic record" contained in the "computer" in which the original information is first stored and the computer output containing such information, which then may be treated as evidence of the contents of the "original"
document. All this necessarily shows that Section 65B differentiates between the original information contained in the "computer" itself and copies made therefrom - the former being primary evidence, and the latter being secondary evidence.
32.Quite obviously, the requisite certificate in sub-section (4) is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced. This can be done by the owner of a laptop computer, a computer tablet or even a mobile phone, by stepping into the witness box and proving that the concerned device, on which the original information is first stored, is owned and/or operated by him. In cases where "the computer", as defined, happens to be a part of a "computer system" or "computer network" (as defined in the Information Technology Act, 2000) and it becomes impossible to physically bring such network or system to the Court, then the only means of proving information contained in such electronic record can be in accordance with Section 65B(1), together with the requisite certificate under Section 65B(4). Unless the conditions laid down in Section 65B IEA are satisfied, the deeming fiction does not take effect and the printout of electronic record cannot be termed as a document in terms of IEA. This objection qua admissibility of Ex.PW6/A is sustained and it is held that Ex.PW6/A is not proved and the same is thus eschewed from consideration. However, the oral testimony of PW-6 regarding her receiving a call at 10:43 a.m on 22.01.2016 from one Pooja qua death of two ladies at H.No.7A, Gali No.1, Pepsiwali Gali, Village Khichripur is unrebutted and can not be disregarded.
17. The IO Inspector Narender Singh as PW-21 had testified that FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 23 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:46:09 +0530 he did not remember whether any inquiry was made by him from the caller Pooja or not and whether any statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C of the said person was recorded or not. Ld. Amicus Curiae had also argued that the benefit of this lacuna must accrue to the accused. He further argued that the phone number of Pooja and the phone number of informant mentioned in DD.No.17A dated 22.01.2016 are different. Though both the numbers are indeed different but it seems more a case of typographical error while recording the DD rather than two different informants, as only one digit in both the mobile numbers is different. Even assuming arguendo that two different persons had called police regarding the incident then the same duly supports the testimony of the landlord (PW-3 Yogesh) who had categorically stated in his examination-in-chief that he had called at 100 number regarding the incident.
18. The non-joining of Pooja in investigation at best is a lacuna which had prevented the prosecution from bringing more evidence on record but the same in no way helps the accused in proving his innocence. In any case, if the accused was desirous of bringing Pooja before the court then he could have sought help from the court in order to summon her as a defence witness.
19. Another discrepancy pointed out on behalf of accused is that the site plan Ex.PW21/B is signed by SI Deepak (PW-20) as a witness but IO/SHO Inspector Narender Singh as PW-21 stated that the site plan was prepared by him on his own. During his cross- examination PW-20 had clarified that the site plan was prepared by FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 24 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:46:19 +0530 the IO at the spot which shows that he was a witness to the preparation of Ex.PW21/B. Hence, his signing the site plan being a witness to the preparation of the same is not out of the ordinary. Moreover, SI Deepak had reached the spot just prior to arrival of IO/SHO and he had prepared the rukka which led to the registration of the present FIR. Hence, his presence at the spot can hardly be disputed and his signing Ex.PW21/B as a witness does not in any way obfuscate the case of the prosecution.
20. Interestingly, in the photocopy of inquest papers the same site plan Ex.PW12/C5 is not signed by the IO but it appears more of an anomaly as an unsigned copy of site plan was provided to the doctor conducting the postmortem. Even otherwise, the presence of IO at the spot cannot be negated as upon registration of FIR, the case was marked to him. This anomaly in giving unsigned site plan at the time of the inquest seems more of a result of oversight or carelessness. Even otherwise, the scaled site plan Ex.PW19/A was prepared by the Draughtsman Inspector Mahesh Kumar (PW-19) at the instance of the IO. Moreover, it has not been established at all that any of the site plans were not as per the spot of incident. This instance of inadvertence in investigation by IO is in itself insufficient to exculpate the accused.
21. It has been forcefully argued by the learned Amicus that the Scene of Crime report has not been proved by the maker thereof i.e. SI Kaushal Ganguly and the same was exhibited by IO PW-21 in his testimony, so the same can not be relied upon. It is noteworthy FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 25 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:46:29 +0530 that summons were issued to PW SI Kaushal Ganguly during trial for recording of his testimony on 31.07.2019 but the same were received back with the report that he had died in the year 2017 and a DD entry in that regard was recorded at No.18A dated 10.08.2017 PS Kalyanpuri. Since SI Kaushal Ganguly had passed away before the date fixed for recording of his evidence and the IO had seen him writing and signing in the course of his duties, so he identified his signature on the Scene of Crime report and exhibited the same as Ex.PW21/A in his testimony. No illegality was committed by the prosecution in proving Ex.PW21/A.
22. In the written submission filed on behalf of accused some instances of purported contradictions are pointed out. In one instance it has been argued that SI Deepak PW-20 had noticed blood type spot on mouth of deceased Swati but PW-2 Rekha had not seen any blood on the floor of the room wherein dead body of Swati was found. Firstly, it is not necessary that if some blood comes out due to some injury then it necessarily must get spilled on ground and secondly, in the photograph of Swati exhibited as Ex.PW15/B-8 a red mark is visible over the left side of upper lip, so there is no contradiction in statements of PW-2 and PW-20.
23. It has been contended that the printout of FIR Ex.PW9/B has not been duly proved as the same was not typed into the CIPA (Common Integrated Police Application) system by PW-9 Duty Officer, HC Phire Ram but the certificate u/s 65B(4) Ex.PW9/C had been signed by him. In his testimony PW-9 stated that he had FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 26 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:46:39 +0530 got recorded the FIR thus implying that the same was typed into the system by someone else (most probably a typist). However, the certificate Ex.PW9/C clearly mentions that the computer system on which the FIR was recorded was under supervision of PW-9 on that day. It is also mentioned therein that the computer was connected with CIPA system and the FIR automatically got uploaded on the CIPA system. The cumulative effect of testimony of PW-9 and Ex.PW9/C is that the FIR is duly proved. Even this contention of the accused does not hold water.
24. It is also argued that on 24.01.2016 the accused was simultaneously produced before two doctors at 11.20 a.m i.e. Dr. S.Lal for giving opinion regarding injuries on person of accused and before Dr. Suraj who prepared MLC of accused on 24.01.2016 bearing No.001082, which is impossible. It is noteworthy that both doctors were of LBS Hospital and as per the documents prepared by them they examined the accused on 24.01.2016. The MLC dated 24.01.2016 showed that it was prepared upon routine examination of accused. It is not out of the ordinary that two doctors may examine a patient either at the same time or one after the other and probably in the same room or in adjoining enclosures. Hence, same time being indicated on two different papers by two doctors of the same hospital is not improbable especially if both doctors examine the patient one after the other. This fact in itself or coupled with some other minor discrepancies does not show that any prejudice is caused to the accused which goes to the root of the matter and which allows him to demolish the case of prosecution.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 27 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:46:51 +0530
25. As PW-12 Dr. S.Lal testified the following about the injuries found on the person of accused when he was produced before him:-
On 24.01.2016, on the application Mark A was moved by the IO regarding given opinion on the injuries of the accused Tahir and he was also produced before me by the IO for his examination.
On examination, I found following injuries:-
1. Partially healed brownish black colour contused abrasion of size 1.5 X1.2cm over middle front of left tibia.
2. Partially healed abrasion suggestive of nail mark 0.3X0.8cm over left side forehead just below the hairline.
3. Partially healed abrasion suggestive of nail mark of size 0.3X0.1cm over the dorsum of left index finger.
4. Brownish bluish bruise 2.5X1.5cm over middle back of chest, just left to midline and placed 14cm below the base of neck.
After examination, I opined that the injuries No.1 and 4 were produced by blunt force impact and injuries No. 2 and 3 were produced by nail. The duration of the injuries was approximate two days. The above said examination and my opinion on the back side of the MLC No. 001029 of the accused Tahir Ali, which is Ex.PW12/E bearing my signature at point A. There is no reason for this court to hold that observations and opinion qua injuries of accused Tahir given by PW-12 is not genuine or the same is tarnished by bias or ulterior motive. Again, no plausible explanation was given by the accused qua the injuries found on his person. The nature and time of injuries are also in consonance with the case of the prosecution.
26. Accused Tahir was the last person seen entering the room of Poonam and Swati shortly before their deaths, so it was imperative upon him to give a plausible explanation (for his presence at their room on 22.01.2016) in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs Kashi Ram, AIR 2007 SC 144; observed as follows about the importance of last seen FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 28 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:47:00 +0530 evidence and the duty cast upon the person last seen with the victim to explain the same:-
The principle is well settled. The provisions of Section 106 of the Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within the knowledge of a person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him. Thus, if a person is last seen with the deceased, he must offer an explanation as to how and when he parted company. He must furnish an explanation which appears to the Court to be probable and satisfactory. If he does so he must be held to have discharged his burden. If he fails to offer an explanation on the basis of facts within his special knowledge, he fails to discharge the burden cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act. In a case resting on circumstantial evidence if the accused fails to offer a reasonable explanation in discharge of the burden placed on him, that itself provides an additional link in the chain of circumstances proved against him. Section 106 does not shift the burden of proof in a criminal trial, which is always upon the prosecution. It lays down the rule that when the accused does not throw any light upon facts which are specially within his knowledge and which could not support any theory or hypothesis compatiable with his innocence, the Court can consider his failure to adduce any explanation, as an additional link which completes the chain. Mere denial of prosecution case coupled with absence of any explanation is inconsistent with the innocence of the accused, but consistent with the hypothesis of him being perpetrator of crime. In the case of Chetan vs State of Karnataka, 2025 INSC 793; the Apex Court opined as under:-
10.15.1 In this regard, we may also refer to the decision in this Court rendered in Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra (2006) 10 SCC 681 it was held that where the circumstantial evidence is the basis for any case, where no eyewitness account is available, and when the incriminating circumstances are put to the accused, if the accused does offer any explanation or the explanation that is found to be false, it provides an additional link to the chain of circumstances as observed in para 21 of the aforesaid decision which is reproduced herein below: -
"21. In a case based on circumstantial evidence where no eyewitness account is available, there is another principle of FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 29 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:47:11 +0530 law which must be kept in mind. The principle is that when an incriminating circumstance is put to the accused and the said accused either offers no explanation or offers an explanation which is found to be untrue, then the same becomes an additional link in the chain of circumstances to make it complete. This view has been taken in a catena of decisions of this Court. [See State of T.N. v. Rajendran [(1999) 8 SCC 679 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 40] (SCC para 6); State of U.P. v. Dr. Ravindra Prakash Mittal [(1992) 3 SCC 300 :
1992 SCC (Cri) 642 : AIR 1992 SC 2045] (SCC para 39 : AIR para 40); State of Maharashtra v. Suresh [(2000) 1 SCC 471 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 263] (SCC para 27); Ganesh Lal v.
State of Rajasthan [(2002) 1 SCC 731 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 247] (SCC para 15) and Gulab Chand v. State of M.P. [(1995) 3 SCC 574 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 552] (SCC para 4).] 10.16 We may not also lose sight of the significance of the provision of Section 313 of the CrPC in the case. As a trial comes to a conclusive phase and all the evidence are adduced by the prosecution, the veracity and credibility of which are tested with the tool of cross examination and when a certain clear picture emerges based on the incriminating materials on evidence, as a procedural safeguard, the court draws the attention of the accused to these incriminating evidence to enable the accused to explain these facts and circumstances which point to his guilt. While the accused is not obligated to answer the questions put to him and still can maintain his silence or deny the evidence, yet silence or evasive or wrong answers to the questions put by the court provides a perspective to the court in properly evaluating the incriminating materials which have been brought forth by the prosecution by drawing necessary inference including an adverse one. [See, Manu Sao v. State of Bihar, (2010) 12 SCC 310].
The fact that the accused chose to give evasive and prevaricating answer to the evidence put to him in his statement u/s 313 Cr.PC and he even refused to acknowledge that he knew the deceased Poonam, provides this Court with additional link in the chain of circumstantial evidence against him.
27. The manner in which testimonies of witnesses are to be appreciated, has been laid down by the Apex Court in the case of FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 30 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:47:22 +0530 Balu Sudam Khalde vs The State of Maharashtra 2023 SCC Online SC 355; as under:-
25. The appreciation of ocular evidence is a hard task. There is no fixed or straight-jacket formula for appreciation of the ocular evidence. The judicially evolved principles for appreciation of ocular evidence in a criminal case can be enumerated as under:
"I. While appreciating the evidence of a witness, the approach must be whether the evidence of the witness read as a whole appears to have a ring of truth. Once that impression is formed, it is undoubtedly necessary for the Court to scrutinize the evidence more particularly keeping in view the deficiencies, drawbacks and infirmities pointed out in the evidence as a whole and evaluate them to find out whether it is against the general tenor of the evidence given by the witness and whether the earlier evaluation of the evidence is shaken as to render it unworthy of belief.
II. If the Court before whom the witness gives evidence had the opportunity to form the opinion about the general tenor of evidence given by the witness, the appellate court which had not this benefit will have to attach due weight to the appreciation of evidence by the trial court and unless there are reasons weighty and formidable it would not be proper to reject the evidence on the ground of minor variations or infirmities in the matter of trivial details.
III. When eye-witness is examined at length it is quite possible for him to make some discrepancies. But courts should bear in mind that it is only when discrepancies in the evidence of a witness are so incompatible with the credibility of his version that the court is justified in jettisoning his evidence. IV. Minor discrepancies on trivial matters not touching the core of the case, hyper technical approach by taking sentences torn out of context here or there from the evidence, attaching importance to some technical error committed by the investigating officer not going to the root of the matter would not ordinarily permit rejection of the evidence as a whole. V. Too serious a view to be adopted on mere variations falling in the narration of an incident (either as between the evidence of two witnesses or as between two statements of the same witness) is an unrealistic approach for judicial scrutiny. VI. By and large a witness cannot be expected to possess a photographic memory and to recall the details of an incident. It is not as if a video tape is replayed on the mental screen.
FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 31 of 37
Digitally
signed by
ANURAG
ANURAG THAKUR
THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16
16:47:32
+0530
VII. Ordinarily it so happens that a witness is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element of surprise. The mental faculties therefore cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb the details. VIII. The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. An object or movement might emboss its image on one person's mind whereas it might go unnoticed on the part of another. IX. By and large people cannot accurately recall a conversation and reproduce the very words used by them or heard by them. They can only recall the main purport of the conversation. It is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a human tape recorder. X. In regard to exact time of an incident, or the time duration of an occurrence, usually, people make their estimates by guess work on the spur of the moment at the time of interrogation. And one cannot expect people to make very precise or reliable estimates in such matters. Again, it depends on the time-sense of individuals which varies from person to person. XI. Ordinarily a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately the sequence of events which take place in rapid succession or in a short time span. A witness is liable to get confused, or mixed up when interrogated later on. XII. A witness, though wholly truthful, is liable to be overawed by the court atmosphere and the piercing cross examination by counsel and out of nervousness mix up facts, get confused regarding sequence of events, or fill up details from imagination on the spur of the moment. The sub-conscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates on account of the fear of looking foolish or being disbelieved though the witness is giving a truthful and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him.
XIII. A former statement though seemingly inconsistent with the evidence need not necessarily be sufficient to amount to contradiction. Unless the former statement has the potency to discredit the later statement, even if the later statement is at variance with the former to some extent it would not be helpful to contradict that witness." [See Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat 1983 Cri LJ 1096 : (AIR 1983 SC
753) Leela Ram v. State of Haryana AIR 1995 SC 3717 and Tahsildar Singh v. State of UP (AIR 1959 SC 1012)] The testimonies of all prosecution witnesses appear to have a ring of truth. Merely because some of the prosecution witnesses are FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 32 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:47:41 +0530 acquaintances or relatives (e.g. PW-3 Yogesh and PW-10 Sunil Sharma) of deceased Poonam and Swati, their testimonies cannot be discarded on this ground alone especially when the accused never stated that those witnesses had any enmity with him. Attention in this regard is invited to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Abdul Nassar vs State of Kerala & Anr., 2025 INSC
35. The testimonies of immediate family members (mother and father) of deceased are also largely believable on material aspects of the case. The evidence of independent witnesses, doctors and police witnesses also seems to be true.
28. From a threadbare analysis of evidence available on record, it can be stated with certitude that, (i) Both Tahir and Poonam were known to each other much prior to the date of incident, (ii) On 22.01.2016 accused visited the room of Poonam and Swati between 9:00 to 10:00 a.m, (iii) He had called on mobile phone used by Poonam on that morning, (iv) He had been calling Poonam for three days prior to the date of incident, (v) Poonam had told her mother in night of 21.01.2016 that Tahir had been pressurizing her to marry him and threatening her, (vi) Poonam and Swati were found dead after about half an hour of Tahir leaving their room,
(vii) Poonam and Swati had injuries on their bodies which were caused by blunt force impact and finger nails, (viii) Tahir also had injuries on his person which were caused by blunt force impact and finger nails, (ix) Both Poonam and Swati died due to asphyxia as a result of manual strangulation, (x) Tahir had motive to kill Poonam as she was not agreeing to marry him, (xi) Tahir lied about not FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 33 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:47:50 +0530 knowing Poonam at all despite at least three witnesses deposing to the contrary, (xii) Tahir did not reveal the name of the person to whom he repeatedly called at mobile number 9811797989 and
(xiii) No explanation offered by him regarding the injuries on his person (which as per the doctor were sustained on 22.01.2016).
From the chain of circumstances established during trial, the guilt of accused Tahir can be safely inferred and it has been proved beyond all reasonable doubt that Tahir had committed murders of Poonam and Swati by manual strangulation. Accordingly, accused Tahir is convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 IPC.
Digitally signed by ANURAG Dictated and announced ANURAG THAKUR in open court on 16th March, 2026. THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:48:03 +0530 Anurag Thakur Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC) East Karkardooma Courts, Delhi This judgment consists of 37 pages and each and every page of this judgment is signed by me.
POST SCRIPT LIST OF PROSECUTION DOCUMENTS S. Nos Exhibit Number Description
1. Ex.PW1/A Form of Mortuary of deceased Swati
2. Ex.PW1/B Form of Mortuary of deceased Poonam FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 34 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:48:17 +0530
3. Ex.PW1/C Death report of deceased Poonam
4. Ex.PW1/D Statement of PW-4 regarding identification of dead bodies
5. Ex.PW1/E Statement of PW-1 regarding identification of dead bodies
6. Ex.PW1/F Receipt regarding handing of death bodies
7. Ex.PW2/DA Statement of PW-2
8. Ex.PW3/A Seizure memo of plate, pasta and Glass
9. Ex.PW3/B Seizure memo of floor dust
10. Mark PW3/A-1 to Mark 13 photographs of spot PW3/A-13
11. Ex.P1 One steel glass
12. Ex.P2 One steel plate
13. Ex.PW5/A Copy of entry No. 3838 in register No.19
14. Ex.PW5/B Copy of entry No. 3839 in register No.19
15. Ex.PW5/C Copy of road certificate No. 46/21/16
16. Ex.PW5/D Copy of the acknowledgment of the case property of FSL 17. Ex.PW6/A Form No. 1
18. Ex.PW7/A Seizure memo of auto
19. Ex.TX TSR No. DL-1RM-1211
20. Ex.TXA to Ex.TXD Photographs of auto bearing No. DL-1RM-1211
21. Ex.PW9/A(OSR) Daily Diary Register containing DD NO.17A
22. Ex.PW9/B Print out of FIR No. 34/2016
23. Ex.PW9/C Certificate U/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act
24. Ex.PW9/D Rukka
25. Mark 10A CAF of mobile No. 9811797989
26. Ex.PW10/A(OSR) Photocopy of DL of PW-10
27. Ex.PW10/DA Statement of PW-10
28. Ex.PW11/A MLC of patient Tahir Ali
29. Ex.PW12/A Report bearing No. 34/2016
30. Ex.PW12/P1(colly) One T-shit, one dirty Pyjami and one dirty underwear of deceased Swati
31. Ex.PW12/B Report bearing No. 33/16
32. Ex.PW12/P2(colly) One pant with belt, full sleeves T-shit, half sleeves T-shirt, One Banyan, one brassier and FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 35 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:48:24 +0530 one underwear of deceased Poonam
33. Ex.PW12/C1 to Seven inquest papers Ex.PW12/C7
34. Ex.PW12/D(colly) Other inquest papers (running into 9 pages)
35. Mark A Application for given opinion on the injuries of accused Tahir
36. Ex.PW12/E MLC NO. 001029 of accused Tahir Ali.
37. Ex.PW13/A(OSR) Copy of CAF of No.7289903214 alongiwth election ID Card of accused
38. Ex.PW13/B(colly) Call detail record of mobile No.7289903214 for the period from 20.12.2015 to 22.01.2016
39. Ex.PW13/C Certificate u/s 65B IEA in respect of CDR of 7289903214
40. Ex.PW13/D(OSR) Copy of CAF of No.9811797989 alongiwth copy of DL
41. Ex.PW13E(colly) Call detail record of mobile No. 9811797989 for the period from 20.12.2015 to 22.01.2016
42. Ex.PW13/F Certificate u/s 65B IEA in respect of CDR of 9811797989
43. Ex.PW15/A-1 to Negatives of 13 photographs of scene of Ex.PW15/A-13 crime
44. Ex.PW15/B-1 to Print of 13 photographs of scene of crime Ex.PW15/B-13
45. Ex.PW16/A MLC of Poonam
46. Ex.PW16/B MLC of Swati
47. Ex.PW18/A Seizure memo of five sealed pullandas and three sample seal in respect of postmortem of deceased Poonam
48. Ex.PW18/B Seizure memo of four sealed pullandas and two sample seal in respect of postmortem of deceased Swati
49. Ex.PW19/A Scaled site plan of place of incident
50. Ex.PW20/A Arrest memo of accused
51. Ex.PW20/B Personal search memo of accused
52. Ex.PW20/C Disclosure statement of accused
53. Ex.PA-1 Seizure memo of jacket of accused
54. Ex.PW20/D Seizure memo of sealed pullanda containing blood sample of accused and hair sample of accused FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 36 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:48:33 +0530
55. Ex.PW20/E Pointing out memo of place of throwing sim card
56. Ex.PW20/F Point out memo of place of incident
57. Ex.P3 One blood gauze
58. Ex.P4 One half T-shirt, one pink Pajama and undergarments of deceased Swati
59. Ex.P5 One grey colour jacket of accused
60. Ex.PW21/A Crime scene report
61. Ex.PW21/B Site plan of places where dead body of deceased was found lying
62. Ex.A1 Letter sent by Director FSL to SHO PS Kalyan Puri
63. Ex.A2 FSL result and analysis of exhibits sent FIR No. 34/2016 PS Kalyan Puri State vs Tahir Pg. 37 of 37 Digitally signed by ANURAG ANURAG THAKUR THAKUR Date:
2026.03.16 16:48:42 +0530