Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The bullet marked Ex. EB1 in case FSL no. 2014/B-6005/21- BA/15, FIR no. 601/2014, Police Station Sarai Rohilla had been discharged through the pistol marked Ex. F1 as the individual characteristics of riffling marks present on evidence bullet marked Ex. EB1 in case FSL no.
2014/B-6005/21-BA/15, FIR no. 601/2014, Police Station : Sarai Rohilla and on test fired bullets marked TB1 and TB2 were found identical when examined under the comparison microscope. The pistol marked Ex. F1 was a firearm and the cartridges marked Ex. A1 to A5 were ammunition as defined in Arms Act, 1959. My detailed report no. FSL-2014/F-6111 dated 28.04.2015 in this regard is Ex. PW25/A bearing my signatures at point A on both sides of my report. On 07.01.2015, one sealed parcel bearing no. 7 sealed with the seal of AC FSL Delhi was received in the Ballistics Division through the Biology Division of FSL. The seals on the parcel were intact and as per the specimen seal provided with the internal FSL Form. 
                                                                                  KUMAR     2024.11.28
                                                                                            16:45:21
                                                                                            +0530
out the pistol, the deceased Laxmikant started brandishing it while stating that "sabko maar dunga, nahi to apne apko maar lunga".

The deceased Laxmikant started waving the pistol from his face to chest and pulled the trigger of the same due to which he received bullet injury in his lower abdomen. DW2 Veer Singh, in his defence evidence, further states that at that time, Laxmikant was in a drunken position. DW2 has again stated that he does not know as to on which part of the body, Laxmikant received bullet injury but his wearing clothes smeared with blood. After receiving injury, Laxmikant fell down on the floor.

vi. Ld. counsel for the accused Veer Singh has further argued that as per the testimony of PW27 Dr. Kanak Lata Verma who proved on record her report as Ex. PW27/A has categorically stated that Ex. IC was found containing ethyl alcohol 111.5 mg/ 100 ml of blood. It has been argued that since the deceased was in a drunken state on the day of the incident, it was the deceased who snatched the pistol and the gunshot was fired. I am of the opinion that merely because the deceased was under the influence of alcohol on the date and time of the incident, it does not mean that it was the deceased who fired the bullet himself, keeping in view the ocular evidence which is fully corroborated by the medical and forensic evidence. As such, to my mind, the above said submission of the ld. Counsel for the accused Veer Singh is not plausible at all.