LexDEEPAK KUMAR versus RAVI VIRMANI AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A DEEPAK KUMAR v. RA VI VIRMANI AND ANR. FEBRUARY I, 2002 B [UMESH C. BANERJEE AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] Criminal Trial: Murder case-Examination of witnesses-Trustworthiness-Witnesses C though interested can be relied upon provided the evidence available on record leads to the guilt of the accused-Independent witness-Availability or non- availability needs to be recorded-Reason has to be furnished for non- examination of independent witnesses. D Appreciation of Evidence-Article 136-ln the event of winks of doubt, the Court in the interest of justice, can re-appraise evidence before recording its concurrence with the findings, challenged in the appeal under Article 1 36 of the Constitution-Held, Burden of the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubts has not been discharged, there are lacunae in the evidence and in the totality of circumstances, the prosecution case raises a definite doubt E in the matter of involvement of accused-Hence accused acquitted-Pena/ Code, 1860-Sections 302, 452, 386 and 324, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 313. According to the Prosecution, respondent-complainant when F returned to his house in the night, found the door of his house closed from inside. As there was no response even after knocking the door, he peeped through the glass pane and saw the body of his father lying smeared with blood. Therefore he knocked the door with force when accused came towards the door with 3 months' old child of the complainant in one hand and knife in the other hand. Accused opened the latch fitted inside the G door to come out, respondent entered the room and shouted at him. On seeing the respondent inside the room, accused bolted the door again and demanded a sum of Rs. S lacs .as ranson failing he will kill the child. While complainant was grappling with accused, his child fell on the ground. At that moment, younger brother of the complainant pushed the door forcibly H and opened it. 786 > ' DEEP AK KUMAR v. RA VI VIRMANI 787 Accused allegedly injured the complainant and his younger brother. A .· Complainant's younger brother snatched the dagger type hacksaw blade from accused to save the life of his brother. At that time complainant shouted "Mar Diya Mar Diya", the accused inflicted injuries on the younger brother ~f the complainant and getting himself freed, ran away. However, on hearing the noise of 'S' one of the residents of the colony, B arrived at the gate of the house and caught hold of the accused. In the meanwhile complainant and his younger brother went inside the room and found their parents and wife of the complainant lying dead and another brother lying seriously injured in a pool of blood, who died subsequently. Accused immediately informed the police over phone. c On receiving information, police reached the spot and accused along with blood stained weapon was handed over to police. Police recorded the statement of complaimmt and registered F.I.R. at 9.15 a.m. on the same day. The prosecution alleged accused as the murderer. The prosecution's definite evidence was that one part of the hacksaw blade was used in the commission of crime whereas other part was recovered on the basis of D disclosure statements. Accused faced trial along with his father before the Sessions Court under Section 302, 452, 386 and 324 I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 3/96. The Sessions Court found accused guilty of offence under Ss. 452, 324 and 302 E I.P.C and sentenced him to death. It, however, acquitted father of the accused. The death reference came before the High Court for confirmation. High Court upon consideration of material declined to confirm the death sentence and modified the same to life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. Aggrieved, the accused moved this Court in appeal against the order of conviction and sentence. Complainant and the F State have also preferred appeals against the order of acquittal/ modification of sentence. It was contended for the appellant-State that complainant and his younger brother had a providential escape and in the event of accused G being let off he would not only be a meance but a danger to complainant and his family, as also to the Society; that the recovery of blood stained clothes from the body of the accused and the fact that the accused left his car at a distance and came to the place of occurrepce on a rickshaw, and the discovery of a piece of sharpening stone which was
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.