PREM CHAND Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 08.07.2009 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC as also under Section 25 read with Section 27 of the Arm Act. He had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life specifically stating that the appellant shall not be considered for parole till he has served twenty years of incarceration. He was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. No separate sentence had been passed under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is based on the statement of the deceased Rajesh Yadav @ Talli. On the fateful day of 28.11.2003 he was gun shot by the appellant in the Tis Hazari Complex on his way to the lock up after he had gone to attend a hearing as an under trial in FIR No.102/2002 PS Jahangirpuri. As per this version (Ex.PW-1/B) when the deceased reached in front of the lock up one person from behind him fired a bullet at him; the appellant Prem Chand was specifically named as the assailant; further version of the deceased being that after firing the appellant ran towards the road leading to the Central Hall of Tis Hazari; he was over-powered by two persons and his pistol was snatched. Further version being that since the deceased was an eye-witness in FIR No.66/2001, P.S. Jahangirpuri in which there were five accused persons namely Mahender Pehlwan and his accomplices; the deceased had been threatened through Mahender Pehlwan and Mohd. Akhtar that he should not depose in this case against Mahender Pehlwan else he would be killed; version of the deceased being that the appellant had shot him on the instructions of Mahender Pehlwan and Mohd. Akhtar. This statement had been recorded at the Hindu Rao Hospital by SI Sanjay Bhardwaj (PW-30) after the deceased had been declared fit for statement by Dr. R.N. Sahai (PW-1).

(3.) Ex. PW-1/B had formed the basis of the rukka (Ex.PW-30/A), pursuant to which present FIR (No.331/2003) under Section 307 of the IPC) was registered. After recording the statement, PW-30 returned to the spot. Crime team was summoned. The photographs of the scene of crime were taken. At the scene of crime some hitting marks of bullets on the road were noted; an Alto car was also found parked and its rear side window glass had been hit by a bullet.