MUKESH ALIAS GIRDI Vs. STATE GNCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE judgment and order dated 19. 9. 2003, the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302/393/398/34 IPC. Two of the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Vide order on sentence dated 22. 9. 2003 the appellants have been sentenced as under:-

(2.) IN returning the finding of guilt, the learned Trial Judge has held that the testimony of Anil Sharma PW-6 establishes that when he i. e. Anil sharma and the deceased were travelling on a scooter after withdrawing Rs. 4,00,000/- from State Bank of Indore, Narela three persons on a motorcycle attempted to snatch the bag containing the money from the hands of the deceased and when the deceased resisted the attempt to rob him, one out of the said three boys fired a shot at his chest and the three boys on the motorcycle fled. That the testimony of Sanjay Sharma PW-10 establish that he was an eye witness to the murder which was preceded by an attempt to commit robbery and that appellant Mukesh fired the shot at the deceased and that the other two appellants were also armed with a country made pistol, and that the pistol in the hand of appellant Manjeet @ Kuldeep fell down at the spot. The learned Trial Judge has further held that pursuant to his arrest, appellant Surender made a disclosure statement Ex. PW-22/f and pursuant thereto got recovered a pistol Ex. P-1 and a fire cartridge ex. P-2 as recorded in the memo Ex. PW-9/h. That the bullet recovered from the body of the deceased was opined, vide CFSL Report Ex. PW-25/a to be fired from the pistol Ex. P-1. Lastly, the learned Trial Judge has held that the fact that the appellants, after they were arrested, pointed out the spot where the crime was committed was evidence of their conduct showing their knowledge of the place where the crime was committed. Since appellant mukesh was pointed out as the person who had fired the fatal shot, though the recovery of the weapon of offence was at the instance of appellant surender, Mukesh has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 27 of the Arms Act. Since the pistol which was recovered from the spot was stated to have been attempted to be used by appellant Manjeet @ kuldeep, he has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

(3.) INFORMATION pertaining to a person being shot at X-Ray Wali Gali, narela was received at PS Narela Industrial Area as recorded vide DD No. 12-A, Ex. PW-1/a by ASI Jagir Singh PW-1. SI Praveen Vats PW-22 accompanied by Const. Ram Prakash PW-8 reached the spot where the. shooting had taken place and found a scooter bearing registration No. DL 8sj 0780 on the road and a country made pistol lying nearby. He was told that the injured was removed to Jaipur Golden Hospital in a rickshaw. Leaving Const. Ram Prakash at the spot, SI Praveen Vats reached the hospital and learnt that the injured named Sanjeev was declared brought dead. He obtained the MLC of the deceased and met Anil Sharma PW-6 at the hospital. He returned to the spot with Anil Sharma, by which time the addl. SHO of the police station Shri S. K. Meena PW-24 had also reached the spot in the company of Const. Vijender PW-16. At the spot SI Praveen Vats recorded the statement Ex. PW-1/b of Anil Sharma and made an endorsement Ex. PW-22/a thereunder and dispatched the statement containing his endorsement through Const. Vijender PW-16 for FIR to be registered.