VIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIJAY Singh, father of the deceased Vinod Kumar, has filed this first appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) against the judgment dated 8th May, 2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Session Case No. 90/2011 arising out of FIR No. 68/2011, Police Station, Begumpur. By the impugned judgment, respondent No. 2- Mandeep has been acquitted but the two other accused Rekha, wife of late Vinod Kumar and Naveen Dabas have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short).

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the impugned judgment and the trial court records, including the statement of PW-13 Anjali Sharma.

(3.) THE trial court rightly held that pointing out place or memo is not admissible in evidence as it does not fall within the scope and ambit of Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The place of occurrence was already known to the police. It has been further observed that mere recovery of blood stained knife or blood stained clothes does not complete the chain of evidence and implicate or establish that Mandeep was involved in the said offence. The prosecution had failed to establish that Mandeep was a friend of Naveen Dabas or he was present at the spot at the time of occurrence. Call details of the mobile phone of Mandeep were not placed on record. There was no evidence or material to show or establish that Mandeep was near or at the spot. Accordingly, Mandeep has been granted benefit of doubt and acquitted.