LAWS(DLH)-2009-8-386

SANJAY SINGH SANDHU Vs. STATE

Decided On August 28, 2009
Sanjay Singh Sandhu Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Sanjay Singh Sandhu has been convicted for having committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by his judgment dated 02.11.1992 delivered in Sessions Case No. 46/1991, which, in turn, arose out of FIR No. 150/83 registered at Police Station Badar Pur under Section 302/34 IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. By virtue of the order on sentence dated 04.11.1992, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years in respect of the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and to imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs 5,000/ - in respect of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of the fine, the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the appellant's revolver Exhibit P -16 was also directed to be confiscated. The charge -sheet was against four persons - (i) Sanjay Singh Sandhu (the present appellant); (ii) K. L. Shekhar (iii) Arvind Passi and (iv) Nikhil Kumar. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had, however, acquitted all the accused other than the present appellant.

(2.) THE case as set out in the charge -sheet was that on 31.07.1983, information was received at police post Okhla, Phase -I which was recorded in DD No. 15 that one person with blood stained clothes was lying on the shooting range road on the right side of Tughlaqabad. On receiving this information, Sub -Inspector Ashok Kumar, who was in -charge of the said police post, went to the spot along with Constable Dharambir Singh and Constable Kanwarjit Singh. The said spot was near the Tughlaqabad shooting range on the Surajkund Road on the Delhi -Haryana Border. The said police personnel are said to have found a blood stained dead body of a young male sikh by the side of the road. The body had bullet injuries on the left armpit and on the chest. Apparently, from the back pocket of the trouser of the dead person, one purse was found which contained cash and documents, from which it came to be known that the dead body was of Khushwant Singh, resident of E -7, Kailash Colony. Seven empty beer bottles were also found lying near the body. Inasmuch as the circumstances indicated the commission of the offence of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC, the said Sub -Inspector Ashok Kumar sent a ruqqa through Constable Kanwarjit Singh to the police station and on the basis of the said ruqqa, the FIR No. 150/1983 came to be registered. The investigation of the case was done by the said Sub -Inspector Ashok Kumar. Apparently, the dead body was identified at the spot by Vijender Singh and Harjinder Singh, brothers of the deceased. After conducting inquest proceedings, the dead body was sent to All India Institute of Medical Sciences for the post mortem examination. The charge -sheet reveals that from the spot, the Investigating Officer seized the blood of the deceased, the blood stained soil, sample soil, seven empty beer bottles, three empty cartridge shells out of which two were of .38 special calibre and one was Magnum Federal .357. A turban, ribbon, chappal and pieces of dhoti lying near the dead body were also said to have been taken into possession.

(3.) IT is further the case of the prosecution that according to the post mortem report, Khushwant Singh's death was caused because of the firearm wounds. The co -accused Arvind Passi and Nikhil Kumar refused to participate in the Test Identification Parade while the remaining two accused including the present appellant Sanjay Singh Sandhu were said to have been identified by the alleged eye witnesses PW1 Ernest Deepak Lal and PW2 Rajan Jacob in the Test Identification Parade conducted by the Metropolitan Magistrate. It is on the basis of the aforesaid allegations and the purported evidence collected against the four accused persons that the charge -sheet was filed.