ATUL SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugned judgment of 22 nd November, 2014 holds appellant guilty of the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and vide impugned order of 24th November, 2014, appellant has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine with default clause for offence under Section 302 IPC and for the offence under Section 201 of IPC, he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine with default clause. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The case set up against appellant is that on 24th March, 2014 at about 11:15 p.m., at Mange Ram Park Extension, Gadda, Ara Machine Plot, Vijay Vihar, appellant had committed murder of Mukesh Sharma by giving blows with chorsi and axe on his stomach and after having committed the murder, appellant had caused disappearance of the aforesaid weapons of offence and his blood stained clothes. The prosecution case set up against appellant rests on the testimony of wife of deceased- Ms. Ranjana (PW-16) and her father Sharvan (PW-17). Apart from their evidence, there is deposition of Raju (PW-21), who had last seen the deceased with appellant and that of Girish Chand (PW-18), who had given the ID to Ajay Sharma to obtain the sim card for the mobile from which the call was made by appellant to Ms. Ranjana (PW-16) after the incident. As per prosecution case, the mobile call was made by appellant from mobile no. 8377823767 to Ms. Ranjana (PW 16) on mobile no. 87262964524 just after the incident.

(3.) The Nodal Officer-Saurabh Aggarwal (PW 13A) has deposed that the mobile No.8377823767 is in the name of Girish. Another Nodal Officer-Pawan Singh (PW 15) has deposed that mobile No. 87262964524 was in the name of Sovaran. Regarding recovery of weapon of offence, there is evidence of Investing Officer-Inspector Sunil Kumar (PW 25), SI Ajay Kumar (PW 24) and HC Parvinder Kumar (PW 23). The medical evidence comprises of deposition of Dr. Bhawna Jain (PW 19), who had first examined the deceased and of Dr. Vijay (PW 24A), who had conducted the post mortem on the body of deceased. The crux of prosecution evidence has been tabulated by trial court in paragraph No. 75 of impugned judgment, which needs no reproduction.