MOHD SHOKIN Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals are filed by the accused against the order of conviction recorded against them. Crl. A. 342/1998 is filed by Din Mohd @ Ram Kumar @ Ashok Kumar, Crl. A. 246/1998 is filed by Akbar Ali @ Javed, Crl. A. 327/1998 is filed by Mohd. Shokin @ Babbay and Crl. A. 345/1998 is filed by Dilshad @ Billi. The incident which led to the present appeals took place on the night between 4th and 5th March, 1993 leading to robbery and death of Bankey Bihari Vij in the incident at about 3.15 a.m. The Rukka recorded by the police at about 3.35 a.m. on the statement of Smt. Rekha Vij (PW-2) widow of Shri Bankey Bihari Vij, the deceased stated that there was an intrusion in the house by three persons, one of which held a pistol and he was of the most darkish complexion amongst the accused. In the course of the robbery, a bullet was fired by such person who was holding the pistol leading to the death of her husband. The FIR was recorded at 5.50 a.m. where Smt. Rekha Vij PW-2, widow of the deceased Bankey Bihari Vig deposed as under:-

(2.) Based on the FIR the prosecution set up the case as follows:-

(3.) In support of its case, the prosecution recorded the testimony of 25 witnesses. It was contended that the witnesses examined by the prosecution are independent public witnesses having no enmity against the accused persons. The accused persons refused to get themselves identified from the complainant in TIP proceedings. It was also contended that adverse inference is required to be drawn against the accused persons for refusing to participate in the TIP proceedings. The accused persons were duly identified by the prosecution witnesses in the court. It was further contended that the recovery of bangles at the instance of the accused persons further connects the accused with the commission of the offence.