Self-Preservation Is The First Instinct Of Any Human Being- Delhi HC Upholds Life Term Of Six Murder Convicts
The Delhi High Court has upheld the life imprisonment awarded to six people for shooting a man dead, due to personal enmity as the guilt of the convicts was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Poonam A. Bamba said that “At that stage when firing was started, the conduct of the two eyewitnesses in running away and hiding for sometime and immediately on the accused running away coming to the rescue of Sonu cannot be said to be unnatural as self-preservation is the first instinct of any human being.... Considering the evidence led by the prosecution as discussed above, this Court finds that the same proves beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the appellants.”
Advocate Aishwarya Rao appeared for the appellant and APP Prithu Garg appeared for the State-Respondent.
In this case, the appeal was preferred against the order of the Trial Court wherein the appellants were convicted of the murder of the deceased and were directed to undergo imprisonment for life.
The appellants-convicts had assailed the Trial Court’s order on the ground that the prosecution story relied upon the two eyewitnesses to the incident and the presence of both of whom was doubtful at the spot, and hence their testimonies were unreliable. It was also alleged that the conduct of the eyewitnesses was unnatural as they had run away when the shots were fired.
The Court said that the conduct of the eyewitnesses was not unnatural as when the convicts got hold of the deceased, gun shots were inflicted upon the deceased from a very close range and the eyewitnesses ran away to safe themselves from the gun shots.
Regarding the recovery of weapons, the Court noted that one of the knives by which stab injuries were inflicted had been recovered at the instance of Vinod @ Kake and the FSL report also opined that the blood of the deceased was found on the knife.
“It is further well established that if the testimony of the eye-witness is cogent and convincing merely because there is no recovery of weapon of offence, i.e. the two pistols used for commission of offence of firing, the same would not dent the case of the prosecution.” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and the conviction was upheld.
Cause Title- Vinod alias Kake & Ors. v. State