MANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this appeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."), the appellant seeks to challenge the judgment and order on sentence dated 14.01.1998 and 15.01.1998, respectively, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, has convicted the appellant for committing an offence punishable under Sections 302/307/324 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life together with imposition of fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the commission of offence punishable under section 307 IPC together with imposition of fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 324 IPC. The case of prosecution in brief is as under: -

(2.) TO substantiate the charge, the prosecution examined as many as 27 witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused denied his involvement in commission of the said crime and pleaded innocence. The accused did not produce any witness in his defence.

(3.) ADDRESSING arguments on the present appeal, Mr. R.K. Anand, learned counsel for the Appellant vehemently submitted that the prosecution miserably failed to prove charges against the appellant and yet he has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/307 and Section 324 IPC. Counsel for the appellant further submitted that it is the admitted case of the prosecution that accused Manjeet Singh and deceased Gurmeet Singh were not known to each other, and therefore, there could not have been any motive or intention to carry out the murder of Gurmeet Singh. Counsel for the appellant also submitted that the appellant in fact was a partner with one Mr. Mahender Aggarwal with whom he was doing a property business and his office was located near the flat of Smt. Harjinder Kaur, sister of the deceased. Counsel further argued that as per the case of the prosecution, the accused met the deceased at his flat and was asked by him to pay money, which he owed to his friend Munna Khan and then accused took Gurmeet Singh (deceased) on his scooter on the pretext of paying money to Munna Khan and after some time both of them came back along with Munna Khan to the said flat where, again Gurmeet Singh raised the same issue of paying money to Munna Khan. On this, the accused after dragging him from staircase to the gali by holding his collar, started abusing Gurmeet Singh and eventually stabbed him with a knife. The contention raised by the counsel for the appellant was that had the accused intended to kill Gurmeet Singh, then he could have easily taken him away on his scooter instead of murdering him near his flat in the presence of his family members and Munna Khan. Counsel for the appellant thus submitted that the entire prosecution story is totally unbelievable and without any credence.