SANJAY SONKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, correctness of the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, dated 11-11-2011 convicting the present appellants for the offences punishable under Section 302/34, and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life, has been impugned. Although the appeal was registered before this Court in 2011, the Court heard the matter finally since the incident took place in December, 2003, and the Appellants have been continuously in custody for over 8 years. The Trial Court records were called for, and considered, in the light of the submissions made by counsel for both parties.

(2.) The prosecution case is that in an incident which took place at 03:15 PM on 06.12.2003, one Ajay was shot dead by the present appellants. The prosecution alleged that the motive for the crime was that the deceased had complained and deposed against the accused in a previous incident, in which they were accused of and implicated in, having committed an offence punishable under Section 308 IPC. According to the prosecution, intimation about the commission of the offence was received by the police, through a PCR intimation on the day of the offence at 03:25 PM (Ex.PW-08/A). The prosecution alleged that as soon as intimation was received about the incident, PW-9 reached the spot of occurrence since the police post was less than a kilometer away. The injured Ajay was taken away to the hospital in a gypsy vehicle. It was alleged that the injured Ajay was taken to the PentaMed Hospital at 03:30 PM (EX PW-17/A). It is also alleged that the statement of the complainant/informant Sanjeev Kumar, who deposed during the trial as PW-7, was recorded at 05:30 PM after which the F.I.R. was registered. In the statement recorded by PW-7, it was alleged that the present appellants had approached Ajay, held out a threat that since he had deposed against them and that as they had now been cleared or acquitted, they would get rid of him from the world. After uttering these words, the deceased Ajay was fired upon with country- made pistols. Upon his being taken to the hospital, he was declared dead.

(3.) On the basis of the information collected, and statements recorded, the police started investigation into the crime; after its conclusion, the accused, who were arrested in the meanwhile, were charged with having committed the offences for which they stood trial. They entered the plea of not guilty; the prosecution, therefore, lead evidence in the form of oral testimony of 25 witnesses, besides other materials such as post-mortem report, ballistic report, seizure memos etc. After considering all this, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment held that the appellants were guilty as charged and sentenced them to undergo prison terms mentioned previously in this judgment.