Vinod Kumar v. State

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

ARUNA SURESH, J. March 30, 2009

dk/rk

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI % Judgment reserved on : 23.03.2009 Judgment delivered on: 30.03.2009 + CRL.A. No.730/2008 VINOD KUMAR …Appellant Through : Mr.Manish Kumar, Advocate. versus STATE …Respondent Through : Mr.Pawan Sharma, Advocate. + CRL.A. No.945/2008 SUNITA DEVI …Appellant Through : Ms.Anu Narula, Advocate. versus STATE …Respondent Through : Mr.Pawan Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ARUNA SURESH 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. 1. Since co-accused Om Prakash absconded when he was granted interim bail and declaring him to be a proclaimed offender, vide impugned decision dated 26.7.2008, the learned Trial Judge has convicted the appellants for the offence of having entered into a conspiracy to murder Budh Narain. Appellant Vinod Kumar has additionally been convicted for the offence of having murdered Budh Narain. 2. We may note that Budh Narain is the husband of appellant Sunita. 3. In a nut shell, the case of the prosecution is that Sunita developed illicit relations with Vinod and her husband Budh Narain, got knowledge of the same, which fact they learnt, to carry on their amorous relationship, Sunita and Vinod, decided to do away with Budh Narain. Vinod knew Om Prakash who agreed to help them to liquidate Budh Narain. The three hatched a conspiracy to murder Budh Narain. Sunita gave logistic support i.e. made available the movements of her husband to Vinod and Om Prakash on the day when Budh Narain was murdered i.e. 1.11.2001. Vinod drove the scooter, on the pillion seat of which, Om Prakash was sitting with a country made pistol in hand. Om Prakash shot Budh Narain when he was riding on his scooter at around 8.30 PM. Rajesh Kumar PW-14, a nephew of the deceased and Ishwar Chand PW-23, employed in the factory of Budh Narain, happened to be nearby. The gun shot attracted them. They chased Vinod and Om Prakash. The wheel of the scooter on which they i.e. Vinod and Om Prakash were riding got stuck in a drain and the two abandoned the same and ran away, taking along the country made pistol. 4. Involvement of the police commenced when DD No.27, Ex.PW-17/A, was recorded at the police station at 8.45 PM pursuant to a telephonic call made by Harish PW-7 who resides near the place of occurrence. SI Rajbir Singh PW-24, accompanied by HC Kishan Lal PW-9 and Const.Ram Pratap PW-22, left for the place of occurrence and were informed that the injured had been removed to Maharaja Agrasen Hospital. They went to the hospital and learnt that the patient had been brought dead, as recorded in the MLC Ex.PW-1/A. They collected a copy of the MLC and the clothes of the deceased which were removed by the doctor on duty and recorded the seizure of the clothes as per seizure memo Ex.PW-9/A. They met Ishwar Chand PW-23 in the hospital who claimed to be an eye-witness. SI Rajbir Singh recorded the statement Ex.PW- 13/A made by Ishwar Chand and after making an endorsement thereon, sent the same, at around 11.00 PM for an FIR to be registered. The dead body was seized and was sent for post- mortem. 5. Insp. Inder Singh PW-33, was entrusted with further investigation on the same day after the FIR was registered. He went to the place of occurrence and with the help of Ishwar Chand prepared a rough site plan Ex.PW-33/A and from the spot where the deceased was shot, as recorded in the seizure memo Ex.PW-23/A, seized a scooter bearing registration No.DL 4SW-9035 which was being driven by the deceased and from a distance of about 100 meters therefrom, a scooter bearing registration No.DL 4SAB-1433 which was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-23/B. The dickey of the scooter bearing registration No. DL 4SAB-1433 was opened and from within, an application Mark 'A' for issue of a learner's license and a registration certificate Mark 'B' of the sco