ASHISH NANDWANA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Ashish Nandwana and co -accused Manoj Nandwana (his cousin) were charged for having entered into a conspiracy and thereafter murdered Shashi in room No.232, Central Guest House Nizamuddin in the morning of March 29, 2008 and thereafter as per the conspiracy they destroyed the evidence pertaining to the commission of the crime with the intention of screening themselves from legal punishment.

(2.) VIDE impugned judgment dated December 24, 2011 learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted Ashish for the offence of murder and for the offence of destroying evidence pertaining to the commission of the crime. Co -accused Manoj has been acquitted of the charge of murder but has been convicted for the offence of destroying evidence pertaining to the commission of the crime. The two have been acquitted of the charge of conspiracy. Manoj has not filed any appeal challenging his conviction and the sentence inflicted upon him probably for the reason by the time was decision was pronounced he had already undergone the sentence to undergo RI for three years and nine months inflicted upon him.

(3.) CONVICTING Ashish, the learned Trial Court has found that the FSL report Ex.PW -32/A proves that the exhibits, except one, seized during investigation from the room in question and further exhibits seized during investigation had human blood of group 'A', which was the blood group of Shashi. Shirt Ex.9 -b got recovered by Ashish which he was wearing when the offence was committed as also the knife Ex.P -4 got recovered by him was also found with human blood of group 'A' thereon. The injuries on the person of Shashi were opined as capable of being inflicted with the knife. Attempt made by the defence to prove that the injuries could be caused by glass if a person falls on glass has been negated by the learned Trial Court with reference to Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 29th ed. wherein it was mentioned that wounds by glass are lacerated wounds, which may resemble stab wounds, but the margins of the wound if caused by glass will always show tiny side cuts owing to the irregularity of the glass edges. Further, particles of glass may be found in the wound(s). Injuries from broken glasses show multiple irregular incised -type wounds, which would vary in length and severity; which were missing on the body of Shashi. The learned Trial Court has noted that the medical examination of the body of Shashi did not reveal a single glass piece in the body. Multiple cuts were absent. The injuries on the body of the deceased had regular margins which could not be in wounds inflicted by glass. The learned Trial Court has further noted that the face sheet Ex.5/B prepared at Shahi hospital where Shashi was removed for treatment also notes that there were stab -like injuries on the neck and the abdomen of Shashi. The learned Trial Court has referred to the testimony of Dr. Siva Prasad PW -16 and his post - mortem report Ex.PW -16/A and opinion Ex.PW -16/B wherein he had opined that injury No.1 on the neck and injuries No.2 and No.3 on the abdomen had been caused by a sharp -edged weapon. Injuries No.5, 6 and 7 were opined to have been caused by finger -nails. The learned Trial Court has further noted that the doctor had also opined that there was evidence of attempted smothering. The learned Trial Court has further noted that the crime team which was summoned for forensic examination of the room where Shashi's blood was seen splattered did not find broken pieces of glass anywhere in the room or the bathroom or elsewhere. Pertinently, no corresponding cuts resulting from the alleged fall over broken glass were found on the clothes of the deceased. (A finding which overlooks that even on the clothes of the deceased no corresponding cut marks relatable to the injuries on the abdomen were to be found. In respect of which it is relevant to note that the time when Shashi sustained the injuries was early morning of March 29, 2008 and Shashi was wearing a shirt Ex.7a and half pyjama Ex.7b and the possibility of the shirt buttons being open and hence no corresponding cut marks on the front of the shirt). The learned Trial Court has noted that in the DOT consent form Ex.PW -5/D at Shahi Hospital, required to be given when a patient is to be operated upon, both accused signed as Manoj Chaudhary and Vishal Chaudhary to hide their identity for the reason their surname was Nandwana. The phone number given by the two was the mobile phone number of Manoj as per the application form Ex.PW -22/C submitted to the service provider TATA Teleservices Ltd. The two could not explain why they gave incorrect names at the hospital. Lastly, the learned Trial Court has noted that as per Dr. Leena PW -4 who had examined Shashi at the Shahi hospital, Shashi could not speak because the voice pin box in her neck was cut, thereby belying the defence version that Shashi had walked up to the reception counter of the Central Guest House, holding a scarf on to her neck and told the manager Shahid Siddique that she had accidentally fallen on glass and as a result had sustained a cut on her neck and inquired whether there was a hospital nearby.