MUKESH KUMAR ALIAS PILWA ALIAS CHAHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common order will dispose of the appeals directed against the judgement and order of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 21-09- 2010 in SC No. 49/08, by which the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. They were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay fine.

(2.) The prosecution had alleged that an information was received on 14- 02-2006 that foul smell was emanating from a room in Gali No. 20, East Ram Nagar, Shahdara. PW-14 was deployed; upon his reaching the spot, he found that the room was locked from outside. The police broke open the lock and found that the dead body of an unknown male was lying under the wooden cot, in a decomposed condition. The police recovered an empty bottle of rum, two glasses and another half glass of premium rum. These articles were seized and the crime scene was photographed. The police also discovered a bag near the body; it contained a card of one Deepak Sharma and some other articles. These were also taken into custody. The police alleged that some newspapers and magazines too were found at the spot; they contained the signatures of one Ritesh Kumar Ranjan (hereafter Ranjan). The body was sent to the morgue where it was preserved. The police recorded the statement of PW-6, the landlady of the premises. She stated that the deceased used to go to the room in question and stay with the tenants. It was alleged that she also mentioned the name of one Bhuntan and further stated that one Sachin Agarwal, owner of the bag shop in GT Road, Shahdara, went to the tenanted room some eight or ten days prior to the incident and had a quarrel with the tenants on account of some payment. Sachin was interrogated; it was said that Jyothi Prasad Sahi might knew the address of the tenants. According to the prosecution, the accused Hemant led the police to the house of Omvir, where Ranjan's brother, Naveen alias Tuntun met the police. He allegedly disclosed that his brother Ritesh and his associates were leaving to the native place in Bihar by train. The police rushed to the railway station, where the three accused were arrested. They allegedly made disclosure statements about their involvement in the offence. This also led to recovery of some articles, which included a wristwatch, a ring and some money.

(3.) The accused were later charged with having committed the crime, i.e. murder of Anil Kumar, whose body was identified by PW-13. They claimed to be innocent and wished for a trial. During the proceedings, the prosecution examined 22 witnesses and also relied upon several exhibits including the post-mortem report, forensic laboratory report and a Fingerprint expert's report. Upon an overall consideration of these materials, the trial court concluded that the prosecution had proved the appellants' guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt; they were accordingly convicted as charged and imposed with the punishments referred to earlier.