Deepak vs State of Haryana

Hemant Gupta, J.—The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 05.09.2007, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Panipat, whereby the appellant was convicted for an offence punishable u/s 302 IPC and sentenced on 6.9.2007 to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one year.

Dead body of one Pardeep son of Data Ram aged about 25/26 was found in the park in the morning on 21.02.2006. The prosecution case was set in motion on the basis of statement (Ex.P1) of Radha wife of Pardeep (deceased) made to ASI Ishwar Singh on 21.02.2006 at 9.00 p.m. On the basis of such statement, ruqa was sent to the police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat. FIR (Ex.P1/1) was lodged at about 9.15 p.m. on 21.02.2006. PW-10 ASI Ishwar Singh, has carried out the inquest proceedings and prepared inquest report Ex. PK. The post mortem on the dead body of Pardeep (deceased) was carried out by PW9 Dr. Rekha Verma on 21.02.2006.

During the course of investigation, it was found that present appellant Deepak, Radha and one Shiv Charan have conspired together to eliminate Pardeep as Deepak was having illicit relations with Radha. The prosecution has sought to prove the allegations against the appellant on the basis of extra judicial confession made before PW-6 Satish Kumar and recovery of Nanchak on the basis of disclosure statement suffered by the appellant. The handle of Nanchak allegedly recovered on the disclosure statement of the appellant was sent for chemical examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory. In the report Exhibit PQ, it was found that blood was detected in Ex.2 (blood stained earth) and Ex.4 (Nanchak) whereas blood could not be detected on Ex.3 (Nanchak). The result of serological analysis of blood is Ex.PQ/1. It was found that the material was disintegrated on Ex.2 (blood stained earth) and Ex.4 (Nanchak).

PW-6 Satish Kumar did not support the prosecution version in its entirety. PW6 Satish Kumar is a sweeper and resident of Chander Nagar, Sanoli Road, Panipat. In his cross-examination conducted on behalf of the appellant, he has deposed that only Shiv Charan and Deepak came to him and they remained with him for about 20 minutes and thereafter he took them to the police Station on the same day. He has admitted that he has not good relations with the police but some police officials were known to him because they had visited Chander Nagar on some complaints and he used to go to police station as and when required by the police. Recovery of Nanchak on the basis of disclosure statement Ex. PM was sought to be proved by examining PW-10 ASI Ishwar Singh, the Investigating Officer and PW-11 Inspector Ram Phal.

The learned Trial Court acquitted Radha as there was no incriminating circumstance found against her, but on the basis of depositions of PW-12 Rajinder, PW-13 Dalip, PW-9 Dr. Rekha Verma and PW-11 Ram Phal coupled with recovery of weapon of offence and wallet of Pardeep, the learned trial Court held the appellant guilty for an offence u/s 302 IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the appellant was charged for an offence of conspiracy with Radha for the reason that Radha was said to have been illicit relations with the appellant. Once the conspiracy is not proved, then the conviction of the appellant is not sustainable. The prosecution has examined PW-12 Rajinder and PW-13 Dalip, brothers of Pardeep (deceased) to the fact that Radha was having illicit relations with the appellant. However, the testimonies of these witnesses cannot be relied upon for the reasons that PW-12 Rajinder in his cross examination has admitted that he was not on speaking terms with his brother Pardeep Kumar (deceased) for the last three months nor they pointed out Pardeep Kumar about the usual (Sic unusual) visits of accused Deepak and Shiv Charan to his house in his absence. They never made any panchayat of family members regarding the usual (Sic unusual) visits of accused Deepak in the house of Pardeep in his absence. They have never gave any beatings to the accused Deepak. Similarly, PW-13 Dalip is a witness examined to prove the illicit relations of Radha with the appellant. He is also a witness of disclosure statement, in pursuance to which Nanchak and wallet were got recovered. In his cross-examination he has admitted that they did not make any complaint regarding visits of Deepak to any family members or any neighbourer or to the police.

We find that the statements of PW-12 Rajinder and PW-13 Dalip cannot be said to be an evidence of a truthful witnesses and that the same cannot be relied upon. Both of the said witnesses are real brothers of the deceased. Such statements are not sufficient to prove the factum of illicit relations between Radha and Deepak and the motive of Deepak to take life of Pardeep Kumar (deceased). Still further the learned Trial Court has acquitted Radha of the conspiracy. Therefore, the circumstance of motive of Radha conspiring with Deepak is not established on record.

The prosecution has not been able to show that Ex.3, which is found to contain blood was recovered from the appellant in pursuance of disclosure statement Ex. PM. Even, if the material is disintegrated but in the absence of any evidence of recovery of Ex.3 from the appellant, even the said fact cannot be taken into consideration against the appellant.

The only other evidence is of extra judicial confession made before PW-6 Satish Kumar. Satish Kumar has not supported the prosecution version in its entirety. The appellant is said to have been made extra judicial confession before him simply for the reason that he belongs to his community. From the cross-examination of PW-6 Satish Kumar, it is apparent that he is known to the police officials. He is a stock witness. Extra judicial confession is a weak evidence. In the absence of any corroboration, the conviction of the appellant cannot be sustained only on the basis of extra judicial confession.

In view thereof we find that the prosecution has failed to prove the complete chain of circumstances pointing out the guilt of the accused. Consequently, we set aside the judgment of the learned trial court and acquit appellant Deepak of the charges framed against him by granting him benefit of doubt. He shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.