CHETAN PRAKASH Vs. STATE ( GOVT NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall decide an Appeal under sec. 374(2) read with sec. 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dtd. 19/1/2019 and order on sentence dtd. 31/1/2019 passed by Court of ASJ-02, North District, Rohini courts, Delhi in State Case No. 57372/2016 arising out of FIR bearing No. 115/2013 under sec. 302 Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at P.S Swaroop Nagar whereby the appellant was convicted for offence under sec. 302 IPC and accordingly sentenced.

(2.) PW20 SI Naresh Kumar along with Ct. Rakesh on 17/4/2013after receipt of DD No. 71B Ex. PW22/A regarding hanging of the wife of caller with fan at D-62, near Durga Mandir, Rama Property Dealer, Swaroop Nagar and theft of jewellery and other house hold articles, reached there.PW25 Inspector Dharampal also reached at the room where dead body of the deceased was lying on bed and a chunni was found tied around neck of the deceased. PW20 SI Naresh Kumar recorded statement Ex. PW1/A of PW1 Sunil Kumar (hereinafter referred to as "the Complainant") and prepared rukka Ex. PW25/A and on basis of rukka Ex. PW25/A, FIR under sec. 302/392 IPC Ex. PW3/A was got registered. After registration of FIR, investigation was handed over to PW25 Inspector Dharampal (hereinafter referred as "the Investigating Officer"). The Investigating Officer seized bed sheet Ex. P5 on which dead body of the deceased was found to be lying and chunni Ex. P7 vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/C. The Investigating Officer during course of investigation recorded statement of PW4 Meenakshi and collected CDR (Certified copy of which is Ex. PW10/B) pertaining to mobile no. 7838435927 issued in name of the complainant wherein mobile bearing no. 8375860869 issued in the name of Raj Kumari was found to be mentioned which on inquiry was found to be used by Chetan Parkash @ Vicky, son of maternal uncle of the complainant. Chetan Parkash @ Vicky during interrogation admitted to strangulate the deceased on 17/4/2013 and removed her jewellery articles and also having illicit relations with the deceased. Chetan Parkash @ Vicky was arrested (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant/convict") and made disclosure statement Ex. PW19/C. The appellant/convict in pursuance of disclosure statement Ex. PW19/C got recovered black colour bag Ex. P8from his house which was found to be containing one black coloured mobile phone make Samsung Ex. P4, one plastic box containing a pair of pajeb (anklet) Ex. P1, three pairs of ear rings Ex. P2, one pair of golden coloured tops Ex. P3 and said bag along with articles was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW19/E. The appellant/convict vide proceedings Ex. PW18/Refused to participate in Test Identification Parade (TIP) despite warning of adverse inference. The complainant during TIP of articles stated to be recovered at the instance of the appellant/convict also identified those articles vide proceedings Ex.PW1/B. PW4 Meenakshi also identified the appellant/convict as the person who on 17/4/2013 was going towards the room of the deceased. PW21 Dr. Sudesh Kumar who conducted post mortem on dead body of the deceased opined cause of death as Asphyxia as a result of constriction of neck due to strangulation by ligature material consequent upon neck can be possible by soft flexible material. All injuries i.e. ligature mark and internal injuries were opined to be ante-mortem. The Investigating Officer after conclusion of investigation filed charge sheet under Sec. 302/392 IPC before the court of concerned Metropolitan Magistrate who took the cognizance vide order dtd. 18/7/2013.

(3.) The court of the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS), North District, Rohini Courts vide order dtd. 12/9/2013 ordered to frame charges for offence under sec. 302 IPC and under Sec. 392/411 IPC to which the appellant/convict pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant/convict examined 25 witnesses including the complainant PW1 Sunil Kumar, PW4 Meenakshi, recovery witness PW19 SI Govind, PW20 SI Naresh Kumar who recorded statement of the complainant PW1 Sunil Kumar, PW21 Dr. Sudesh Kumar who conducted post mortem on dead body of the deceased and Investigating Officers PW25 Inspector Dharampal. The prosecution also proved necessary documents which were prepared during course of the investigation. The appellant/convict was also identified by the relevant witness including the complainant PW1Sunil Kumar and PW4 Meenakshi. The statement of the appellant/convict was recorded under sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") wherein the appellant/convict pleaded innocence and false implication. The appellant/convict denied factum of recovery of exhibits/case properties at his instance in pursuance of disclosure statement Ex. PW19/A. The appellant/convict preferred not to lead defence evidence.