Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Aggrieved by the said decision, appellant- State of Haryana has preferred the present application for seeking leave to file an appeal against acquittal of the accused.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that there is ample circumstantial evidence on record for connecting the accused with the crime in the present case. He pointed out that on 07.01.2019, after getting information regarding the murder, when SI Jai Singh reached at the spot, he collected physical evidence including blood lying on the floor, some pieces of bangles, a bloodstained brick immersed in water and a DVR. He has further contended that after his arrest, accused suffered disclosure statement initially on 10.01.2019 and then on 11.01.2019, resulting into recovery of his bloodstained clothes and bloodstained pieces of shoes which were worn by him at the time of crime. As per FSL report Ex.PH, all the aforesaid articles which had been converted into sealed parcels and had been sent for analysis were found having human blood, blood group 'B' on most of the parcels, though on 9 of 27 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:109431-DB some articles, the blood group could not be ascertained. As clothes of the deceased as well as clothes of the accused and pieces of his shoes had stains of human blood group 'B', it connects the accused with the crime. While referring to the other disclosure statement of the accused Ex.PC, he has contended that besides recovery of his bloodstained clothes and shoes, the accused also got recovered currency notes and coins, mobile and a diary of the deceased. The SIMs inserted in the recovered mobile was found to be that of deceased Baba Shyam Nath. The scooty of the deceased was also recovered at the behest of the accused. He has urged that CCTV footage retrieved from the DVR recovered from the spot was also produced on record by the prosecution, in which accused could be seen entering in the room of the temple along with the deceased and coming out of the room alone and moving out hurriedly. He has argued that during investigation, accused tried to set up the plea of commission of sodomy by the deceased, but on medical examination, no evidence could be found. He has further contended that learned trial Court erred in not appreciating the evidence brought on record by the prosecution in the right perspective. The trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence regarding the disclosure statement and the recoveries got effected in pursuance of said disclosure statement Ex.PC. He has vehemently contended that trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence qua CCTV footage and wrongly held that same was not proved as per law, whereas the hard disk in which the retrieved data was converted from the original DVR was produced in the Court as Ex.PAX in sealed condition and hard disk was also played in the Court where the accused was seen entering the room in the temple premises and in other clip he was found entering the room in temple along with deceased and was 10 of 27 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:109431-DB found coming outside the room alone and moving out hurriedly. He has contended that the forwarding letter sent by CFSL Ex.PAX/1 clearly proved that the CCTV footage data retrieved from DVR/1 was being provided in one hard disk in sealed condition and also submitted that the CFSL report Ex.PAW was perse admissible, which proved that the retrieved data from DVR and the CCTV footages of 06.01.2019 was being provided in the hard disk. He has submitted that the aforesaid report proved the presence of accused with deceased on 06.01.2019 and on the next morning the dead body of deceased was found with multiple injuries, which leads to the inference that the said crime had been committed by the accused. He has also argued that the Investigating Officer of the case could not be examined as he unfortunately expired during the trial. But the other witnesses who remained associated with the Investigating Officer, PW14-HC Rakesh Kumar, PW18-HC Pardeep Kumar remained consistent in their statements, which has not been correctly appreciated by learned trial Court. He has contended that the trial Court has failed to appreciate that as per postmortem report Ex.PJ, nine injuries were found on the person of deceased and has wrongly assumed the timing of death of accused, whereas as per postmortem report Ex.PJ, duration between death and postmortem was 24 hours and the postmortem was conducted on 07.01.2019 at 4:10 P.M., the occurrence was of the night of 06.01.2019. He has contended that the chain of evidence/ circumstances has been fully proved as per law by the prosecution and the learned trial Court has wrongly acquitted the accused of the charges framed against him.

PW13-HC Narender Singh, MHC Police Station Kalka deposed regarding depositing of sealed sample parcels with him by SI Jai Singh. All the sealed parcel except parcel of DVR recording were handed over by him on 05.02.2019 to HC Pardeep Kumar vide RC No.45 for depositing the same at FSL, Madhuban, who deposited the same there and handed over the receipt to him on the same day. He further deposed that he handed over the sealed parcel containing DVR recording to HC Pardeep Kumar on 22.03.2019 vide RC No.78 for depositing the same with Director, CFSL Chandigarh, which was returned by CFSL authorities on the same day. Then again on 09.04.2019 he handed over the sealed parcel to HC Pardeep Kumar, who after depositing the same with CFSL Chandigarh, handed over the receipt to him on the same day. He has also deposed about handing over of one blank hard-disk alongwith sealed parcel on 11.04.2019 to HC Pardeep Kumar. He deposed about depositing of one sealed parcel containing finger print expressions collected by Ct. Bintu Ram from the spot on 16.01.2019. The said sealed parcel was handed over to Ct. Sunil Kumar on 26.02.2019 for depositing the same at SCRB, Madhuban and the receipt regarding its depositing was handed over to him by Ct. Sunil Kumar on the same day. He deposed that during the period the case property remained in his possession, neither he tampered with the same nor allowed anyone to do so.

14. The prosecution has also relied upon CCTV footages of the spot. As per seizure memo Ex.PE, a DVR make HIKVISION was found at the spot which was sealed with the seal 'JS' and was taken into possession. PW4- Kamal Kumar and PW5 Mohinder Singh Chaudhary stated that police had inspected the CCTV installed in the temple on 07.01.2019 itself, but none of these witnesses have stated that accused was found visible in the CCTV footage. There is nothing in memo Ex.PE that said DVR was played at that time. PW14 HC Rakesh Kumar, who is the attesting witness of Ex.PE is also silent regarding playing of the DVR containing the CCTV footages.

24. Prosecution has also relied upon the CCTV footage retrieved from a DVR found from the spot on 07.01.2019. During the statement of 25 of 27 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:109431-DB PW18 ASI Pardeep Kumar a sealed parcel Ex.PAX sealed with seven seals bearing impression DPG of CFSL Chandigarh alongwith specimen seal letter Ex.PAX/1 was produced. When the said parcel was opened in the Court, it was found to contain a hard disc having data retrieved from DVR Ex.MO/3. The hard disc was played in the Court, which was found to contain many footages of CCTV clippings. In one of the clippings, the accused was found entering the temple premises and in the other clipping, accused was found entering the room in the temple premises alongwith the deceased; yet in an another clipping, accused was found coming outside the room alone and moving hurriedly. The prosecution has tried to connect the accused with the crime on the basis of these clippings. But this CCTV footage and the DVR have not been proved by the prosecution as per law. No witness has been examined to prove as to who had examined the DVR and who retrieved the data to the hard disc from the said DVR and who converted the same in the CDs. Certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act has not been produced. It is not proved that clippings of the CCTV contained in the hard disc were of the relevant time i.e. intervening night of 6/7.01.2019. Date and time of the CCTV footage is not proved, thus, on the sole basis of these clippings, accused cannot be connected with the crime in question.