Prosecution Could Not Prove That He Committed The Murder: Delhi HC Sets Aside Conviction & Life Sentence Imposed On Police Constable
The Delhi High Court has set aside the conviction and order of life imprisonment imposed on a Delhi Police Constable accused of murder.
The Court noted that the prosecution miserably failed in connecting the constable with the weapon of the offence allegedly used. It also noted that there was no evidence on record to prove the commission of murder because of financial dispute between the constable and the deceased as alleged by the prosecution.
“… it is evident that the prosecution has not been able to prove that the appellant committed the murder of deceased beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence is set aside.”, observed Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Poonam A. Bamba.
As per the prosecution case, the appellant-constable was in possession of a pistol issued from PS Kanjhawala. The said pistol was issued to the said constable which remained in his possession till the date of the incident. On the intervening night, the appellant was on duty. After about one hour of duty, the constable left the picket in his Santro car and did not come back for his duty.
On the same day, the dead body of the deceased was found and three fired leads and two empty cartridges were found near the body. As per the post-mortem report, the death was caused by the projectile discharge from a fire arm weapon.
The dead body was identified by the father of the deceased, from the photographs shown to him and he also raised suspicion on the constable and alleged that there was some monetary dispute between the constable and the deceased.
Thereafter, the pistol issued to the constable was sent with the three fired leads and two empty cartridges recovered from the spot to the FSL. As per the FSL report, the empty cartridges were opined to have been fired from the 9mm pistol issued to the constable and thereafter, the appellant was arrested.
Advocate Kanhaiya Singhal appeared for the appellant-constable whereas APP Laksh Khanna appeared for the State.
The Court noted that the Asla Register showed major discrepancies in the manner of recording the issuance, carrying forward and return of the arms and ammunition. Thus the Court found it difficult to place reliance on the Asla Register as it is.
The Court further noted that the prosecution had miserably failed in connecting the constable with the weapon of the offence allegedly used.
On the submission of the prosecution that the motive of the constable to commit the crime was a financial dispute between the appellant and the deceased, the Court noted that the witness i.e., father of the deceased did not support the case of prosecution.
Thus the Court held that the prosecution was not able to prove that the constable committed the murder of deceased.
Cause Title- Surender Kumar Mathur v. State of NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation No. 2023:DHC:2423-DB)