LexR.P. TYAGI versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 1147 R.P. TYAGI A ---.... v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1440-1441 of 2008) NOVEMBER 12, 2009 B [HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: .. ..f: s. 304 (part II ) - Conviction under for custodial death - A person accused of stabbing a police constable, beaten in c police custody resulting in his death - Erring police officer convicted uls 302 and sentenced to death - High Court modifying the conviction to s.304 (part-I/) with sentence of 8 years RI and fine of Rs. 2 lacs - HELD: This case exemplifies the repeated observations that delay in the disposal of a D --\ criminal case leads to the destruction of the prosecution case ' ¥ ,- - The incident happened in the year 1987, and the evidence was recorded in the year 2004 - Little wonder, therefore, that almost all the prosecution witnesses including the relatives of deceased declared hostile as they had not supported the E prosecution - It is in this background that both the courts below had· to stretch the evidence slightly in order to arrive to a conclusion of guilt against the appellant - However, the ~ reasons recorded by trial court and High Court are germane ,,. and there is no reason to interfere with finding of the fact F recorded by courts below -. As regards quantum of sentence, it has been pointed out that the matter was of the year 1987 - The appellant is presently in jail and has undergone about 3 years of sentence and has paid the fine of Rs. 2 lacs - He has also been denied his retrial benefits on account of his G conviction and is 67 years of age, and is in extremely indigent circumstances - Conviction as recorded by High Court _j( confirmed, but sentence reduced from 8 years to 5 years, and fine increased from Rs. 2 lacs to 5 lacs - Delay in trial - Effect on evidence. 1147 H 1148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A Virsa Singh vs. State of Punjab 1958 SCR 1495; Harjinder Singh vs. Delhi Administration AIR 1968 SC 867; l<r.,-, and Laxman Kalu Nikalje vs. The State of Maharashtra AIR 1968 SC 1390, cited. 1- B Case Law Reference : 1958 SCR 1495 cited Para 7 AIR 1968 SC 867 cited Para 9 ... AIR 1968 SC 1390 cited Para 9 .... c CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1440-1441 of 2008. From the Judgment & Order dated 05.03.2008 of the High D Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2007 and Death Reference No.1 of 2007. '1· r - Ranjit Kumar, Anil K. Chopra, for the Appellants. P.P. Malhotra, ASG, Anil Katiyar, Swa Qadri, P.K. Dey, E R. Bastian, S. Bakshi, for-the Respondent. The following Order of the Court was delivered ORDER l -4-. 1. This appeal by way of special leave has been filed ) F ..... impugning the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 5th March, 2008, whereby the death reference with respect to the \'-- appellant's case has been declined and his appeal has Jieen allowed to the extent that the conviction under Sectic-~. 302 of G the IPC recorded by the Additional Sessions Judor: has been modified to a conviction under Sec.304 Part II of the IPC and a sentence of 8 years RI. along with a fine of Rs.2,00,000/-. 2. As per the facts of the case the in~ident happened on 16th August, 1987, (on the day of the Janmashtami festival) H when Constable Rishipal (OW .1) who was posted in_ police '!, R.P. TYAGI v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) 1149 station Vivek Vihar, where the appellant was the SHO was A stabbed by the deceased Mahender and his accomplice Ram -"'" Kumar. Information about the stabbing incident was received in the police station and a case under Sec.307 etc. was registered against the two. The police thereafter launched a manhunt to trace the culprits but were unable to do so and B enraged by the turn of events the police officers allegedly picked up the family members and neighbours of Mahender and Ram Kumar and confined them in the police station Vivek Vihar .. where they were beaten and humiliated and were told that until 'II- and unless the absconding duo surrender they would not be c released. It is the case of the prosecution that two persons were produced in the police station on 24th August, 1987 at 7.45 a.m. and were administered a very severe beating by the appellant and by some of the others present at his instance. On account I of the severe beating, Ram Kumar and Mahender sustained D I serious inju
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.