PREM KUMAR Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order on sentence both dated 1st October, 1994 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi by which the appellant has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs 3000/ - and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. W.P.(Crl.) 1052/2008 Page 2 of 14

(2.) BRIEFLY stated case of the prosecution is that, on 1st December, 1992, at about 7.30 P. M, near Akbar Hotel, near Ganga Mai Mandir, A -Block, Madi Pur, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, deceased Arun Kumar was stabbed with a chhuri (dagger) by the accused/appellant Prem Kumar, while he was going towards his residence. The deceased was accompanied by PW -1 Panna Lal. On being stabbed, the deceased somehow ran and managed to reach his house. He was followed by Panna Lal. There he told his father Kartar Singh that he has been stabbed by accused Prem Kumar. Kartar Singh and Panna Lal then took the deceased Arun Kumar to ESI Hospital. The duty constable present at the hospital conveyed the information to the police station which was recorded as DD No. 30, dated 1st December, 1992. Copy of the DD report was handed over to ASI Jai Kishan who arrived at the hospital. In the meanwhile SI Harpal Singh also came to know about the information and reached the hospital. He obtained the MLC of Arun Kumar who was declared unfit for statement. SI Harpal Singh recorded the statement of PW -1 Panna Lal at the hospital and it was sent to the police station for registration of the case. SI Harpal Singh also collected the sealed packet of the clothes of the deceased from the duty constable. He also took possession of the blood stained pants of PW -1 Panna Lal and father of the deceased. Putting those pants into sealed packets, SI Harpal Singh, thereafter, came to the spot and lifted the blood stained earth and controlled earth which was taken into possession after placing them in sealed parcels. On the same night on pointing of PW -1 Panna Lal, investigation officer apprehended accused Prem Kumar near his house. On search it was found that he was in possession of one chhuri (dagger) Ex. P -9 which was tucked in the belt of pant of the accused and concealed under the shirt. There were blood stains on the chhuri (dagger). Sketch of the dagger was prepared and it was taken into possession. Investigating Officer also took into possession blood stained pant and the shirt of the accused after putting those clothes into a sealed packet. During investigation IO visited Akbar Hotel. There he met eye witnesses PW -6 Daulat and PW -7 Ismail Khan. He recorded their statements. The IO also prepared a rough site plan of place of occurrence Ex.PW 22/C on 2.12.1992 and got prepared scaled site plan Ex.PW 11/A from the draftman on 2.2.1993. He arranged for sending of blood stained clothes of the deceased, the accused, PW -9 Kartar Singh and PW -1 Panna Lal as also blood stained earth sample and the dagger to Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL). On serological examination human blood of blood group 'O' was found on all the samples except the control earth sample which gave no reaction for blood. The IO also sent the accused for medical examination and obtained his MLC which indicated linear abrasion (scratch) on medial aspect of his right thigh about 3.5 cm in size. On completion of the investigation the accused was sent for trial.

(3.) MS . Neelam Grover, learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the prosecution case is full of infirmities and it has failed to make out the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Inasmuch as PW -1 Panna Lal has not supported the case of prosecution and has even denied that the rukka was prepared at his behest. She has contended that names of the eye witnesses PW -6 Daulat and PW -7 Ismail Khan do find mention in the FIR and even their presence at the spot at the time of occurrence is highly doubtful. The learned Counsel for the appellant has further argued that the recovery of the weapon of offence i.e. dagger Ex.P -9 is also doubtful as it is most unnatural that the accused would carry the weapon of offence on his person after inflicting serious stab injuries to the deceased for hours after the occurrence. Thus, she has urged us to infer that prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubts and that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case.