NAFIS ALIAS BABLI Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of a Learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 28-01-1998 in FIR No. 490/1992, P. S. Seelampur, convicting the appellant for having committed the offence under Section 302 IPC.

(2.) The prosecution alleged that on 08.09.1992, at about 02:40 A.M. intimation was received from the police control room about a lady named Ruksana informing that someone had been shot dead in the Jhuggies near K- Block, PS Seelampur. The police who reached the spot were met by one Kalu (PW-3); a statement was recorded. It was alleged that Chotey Khan, a rickshaw puller was related to PW-3; he was the latter s mama. The night intervening 07/08.09.1992, Chotey Khan, Kalwa, Babli Panwala and one Yunus were playing cards. PW-3 was sitting there and witnessing the game. At about 02:30 AM in the morning, when the game of cards stopped and they were leaving for their houses, Babli Panwala @ Nafees (the Appellant, referred to as such hereafter) stated that Chotey Khan had spoiled his brother Anis, and that they all would kill him (Chotey Khan). Thereafter, the appellant and Kalwa caught hold of the deceased and Yunis fired a shot at him with a country made pistol. PW-3 raised an alarm upon which they ran away. The injured, Chotey Khan, went out of the jhuggi and fell down; he was later lifted and kept on a cot, where he breathed his last breath. Ruksana (PW-2) informed the police. The first information report (FIR) was registered, and the police investigated the matter. The appellant was arrested on 08.09.1992; his statement was recorded, pursuant to which the country made pistol was recovered. Kalwa was arrested; pursuant to his statement, a packet of cards was recovered. Yunis could not be arrested; he was declared as a proclaimed offender.

(3.) The appellant and Kalwa were charged for having committed the murder of Chotey Khan; they claimed to be not guilty and were therefore tried. The prosecution relied on the testimony of 20 witnesses besides material objects and forensic reports which were placed on the record. After considering the materials and the depositions, the Trial Court concluded that Kalwa was not guilty as charged. It proceeded however, to convict the appellant and awarded life imprisonment.