Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: missing of file in Manoj Kumar Singh vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 6 April, 2011Matching Fragments
20. It is further pleaded on behalf of appellant Javed that Nathni who allegedly treated him of his gun wound, had not been examined. PW33 had taken Javed, the appellant to hospital, but there is no medical evidence on record to prove that the appellant sustained a foot injury. Pleas raised by Mohd. Akhtar
21. Learned counsel for Mohd Akhtar has also contended that the delay in filing the missing report is reflective of the abnormal conduct of the family in the facts and circumstances, as on 6th January, 2000 at 12.15 PM first ransom call was made and by 9th January, 2000, 12 ransom calls were received. However, the complaint, Ex. PW 49/A, was made only on 11th January, 2000. As per the deposition of PW-25 Babli, wife of the deceased, she was confident that Akhtar due to enmity with her husband had abducted him, however, in spite of this she did not make any attempts to lodge a complaint. Thus it has been urged that the conduct of the wife does not seem to be very probable and creates a doubt about the entire prosecution version and benefit of doubt should be given to Mohd. Akhtar. Reliance was placed on her deposition that her husband, deceased, used to inform her whenever he left for 2-3 days. He had not done so in January, 2000 which was abnormal conduct on his part yet the wife did not attempt to file the missing person report or of abduction of her husband after receiving ransom call on 6th January, 2000. It is also contended that even though the family members knew the address of the appellant Mohd. Akhtar, and they were suspicious about him, still the police did not go to his house in Motihari. This could only imply that the said appellant was falsely implicated. Learned counsel also urged that as per PW-23 Smt Santresh, sister of the deceased, she had recorded the ransom calls on a tape recorder on 13th January, 2000, however she had handed it over to the police only on 16th January, 2000. This gap of three days has remained unexplained and is enough time to have tampered with the evidence.