Sirnu vs State
2009 Latest Caselaw 753 Del

*               HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                               Crl. Appeal No. 409/2007

%                                Date of Order : March, 05, 2009

SIRNU                                     ..... Appellant
                           Through : Mr. A.S. Rajput, Advocate

                                     VERSUS

THE STATE OF NCT DELHI           .....Respondent

Through : Mr. Pawan Sharma, APP

CORAM :-

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ARUNA SURESH

(1) Whether reporters of local paper may be allowed to see the judgment?

(2) To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

(3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Yes

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral)

1. The police swung into action on 24.8.2004 at 21:37

hrs pursuant to a phone call received by PCR at the police

head quarters from the Central Railway Hospital regarding an

injured with stab injuries being admitted to the hospital. ASI

Bhoop Singh PW-21, and Ct.Sushil Kumar PW-19, of PCR Van

„Oscar‟ proceeded to the Central Railway Hospital.

2. They reached the Central Railway Hospital within 5

minutes of receipt of the information and saw a man holding a

blood stained churra in his hand being chased by people, who

were rebuking him for having the courage to come to the

hospital after the quarrel. ASI Bhoop Singh and Ct.Sushil

immediately over powered and apprehended the man whose

name was later revealed to be Sirnu.

3. In the meantime, the information about the patient

admitted at Central Railway Hospital with stab injuries was

forwarded to PS Pahar Ganj. Constable Himmat Singh

recorded DD No.78-B, Ex.PW-16/A, on the same day at 21:52

hrs. HC Onkar Prasad PW-16 and Ct. Satya Prakash were sent

to the hospital from the police station and Addl. SHO Anil

Sharma PW-25 who was on patrolling duty was informed

about the incident through a wireless message.

4. On reaching the hospital at about 20:00 hrs, Addl.

SHO Anil Sharma was informed that the injured, Ramji Sahai,

had already expired and his wife Smt. Budhi Devi was unfit for

statement. The MLC Ex.PW-9/A of the deceased Ramji Sahai

and the MLC Ex.PW-9/E of Smt. Budhi Devi were collected

from the hospital. The custody of accused Sirnu was handed

over to ASI Anil Sharma by ASI Bhoop Singh along with the

churra seized from the accused. The accused was arrested

vide Arrest memo, Ex.PW-17/B, and the churra was seized

vide seizure memo Ex.PW-3/D.

5. MLC Ex.PW-9/E of Budhi Devi records the following

injuries:-

"(1) Cut and CLW Rt index finger, rt. Middle finger cut tendon injuries, Rt right finger.

(2) Cut and CLW over midline, scalp 5 cm over mid line.

(3) Cut and CLW c fracture middle, distal pharynx left thumb."

6. ASI Anil Sharma proceeded to the place of

occurrence i.e Jhuggi no. 36 South End Road from the hospital

along with the crime team and Shilpi Devi the daughter-in-law

of the deceased who was at the hospital. He recorded the

statement Ex.PW-3/A of Shilpi Devi and made an endorsement

Ex.PW-25/A thereon and forwarded the same for registration

of an FIR. The duty constable at the police station HC Naresh

Kumar registered the FIR, Ex.PW-2/B at 12:20 AM.

7. At the spot ASI Anil Sharma, with the help of Shilpi

Devi prepared the site plan Ex.PW-2/E of the place of

occurrence.

8. In her statement, Ex.PW-3/A, the daughter-in-law of

the deceased informed that accused Sirnu was a bad

character of the area and her father-in-law being the

pradhan/president of the resident‟s welfare association had

asked the accused not to visit the area on account of his

frequent misbehaviour with the women of the area. That on

the day of incident, when she was taking meals along with

her father-in-law and mother-in-law, accused Sirnu came and

stood in front of their jhuggi and started hurling abuses at her

father-in-law asking him to come out of his jhuggi. That as

soon as her father-in-law stepped out of his jhuggi, accused

Sirnu shouted "tu bada pradhan banta hai aaj tera kaam

tamam kar deta hoon". That on hearing this, she came out of

the jhuggi along with her mother-in-law and saw accused

Sirnu standing in front of the jhuggi with a churra in his right

hand. That accused Sirnu started attacking her father-in-law

with the churra. That when her mother- in-law intervened to

save her father-in-law, the accused attacked her as well. That

her father-in-law and her mother-in-law fell down in an injured

condition on the railway line. That the neighbours gathered

on hearing her cries for help. That the accused fled away,

when he saw the people from the neighbourhood coming.

That she took her father-in-law and her mother-in-law to the

Central Railway Hospital with the help of her neighbour

Dharmender, Suraj Kali and others. That the accused also

reached the hospital with the churra in his hand, where he

was apprehended by the police. That the doctor declared her

father-in-law Ramji Sahai brought dead at the hospital.

9. On the next day i.e 25.8.2004 Budhi Devi was

declared fit for statement and her statement was recorded by

ASI Anil Sharma in which she substantially informed the same

facts to the police as were disclosed by her daughter-in-law.

10. Since the deceased was declared brought dead at

the hospital, his body was sent to the mortuary, where

Dr.Sumit Seth conducted the post-mortem on 26.08.2004 and

gave his report Ex.PW-22/A which records that 13 ante-

mortem injuries were found on the person of the deceased;

that the cause of the death was haemorrhagic shock due to

multiple incised wounds which were caused by a sharp edged

weapon and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary

course of nature. Later, the doctor also gave an affirmative

opinion, Ex.PW-22/B, regarding the weapon of offence; that

the injuries could have been caused by the churra Ex.P-1.

The following injuries were found on the person of the

deceased:

"1. A deep incised wound of size 7cm in length, resulting in transcution of outer one third of pinna , at the level 8 cm below the upper end on the left side.

2. An incised wound is present over the left side of the over the scalp over the left occipital region of size 10cmx1cmxbone deep, located from the point where the incised wound of injury no. 1 ends, reaching till the point 2cm from occipital protuberance.

3. An incised wound of size 8cmx1cmxskin deep present behind the left ear lobe reaching towards the outer aspect of left neck on the back side (is shown in the diagram) reaches till the mid line over the back of the neck.

4. An incised wound size 6cmx2cmx0.5cm is present on the left side of the face over the jaw 2cm from the angle of mouth and the outer end is 4cm from the left ear lobe. The incised wound is spindle shaped, medial end is acute angled. The direction of the wound is from left towards right.

5. An incised wound of size 3cmx1cmxskin deep is present 1.0 cm below injury no. 4, spindle shaped, medial end is acute the direction of wound is from left towards right.

6. Scratch abrasion is present on the left side, front of neck of length 5cm, 3cm below the jaw line.

7. An incised wound is parallely placed below injury no. 6, 8cm below injury no. 6, 6cm in length the depth of the wound is skin deep and fish tailing is present over the medial side. The wound is linear shape.

8. A scratch abrasion is present over the deltoid region (shoulder) on left side of length 7cm.

9. A superficial incised wound is present on the outer aspect of left thigh of length 23 cm starting from the left buttock region and end till the mid region on anterior aspect of thigh.

10. A deep incised wound is present over the left calf region on the outer aspect 5cm below the knee joint of size 14cmx5cmx4cm with associated injury of underlying muscles, nerves and blood vessels.

11. Multiple incised wounds are present over the lateral aspect of left shin region in the lower half of lower limb, total five in number of respective dimensions from above downwards (a) 8 cm x 2.5 cm x 2 cm (b) 7 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm (c) 6 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm (d) 6.5 cm x 1 cm x 0.5 cm (e) 4 cm x 1 cm x skin deep. All the five incised wound are parallel placed with respects to each other and their direction is from lateral to medial aspect.

12. An incised wound is present on the right lower limb medial aspect, in the calf region of length 4 cm x 0.5 cm x skin deep present 4 cm below knee joint.

13. Chop wound is present over the medial aspect of right hand causing complete transaction of the medial one third of right hand at the level of base of metacarpals, the chop wound is 7 cm x 3.5 cm x 3 cm.

11. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements

of Dharmender PW-7, and Suraj Kali PW-8. Both of them were

at the hospital where the deceased Ramji Sahai and the

injured Budhi Devi were admitted.

12. Armed with the post-mortem report of the

deceased, the MLC of Budhi Devi and citing the daughter-in-

law of the deceased Shilpi Devi PW-3, injured Budhi Devi PW-4

and Dharmender and Suraj Kali as eye witnesses as also

listing various police officials who were associated in the

investigation, a charge sheet was filed charging the appellant

with the offence of having murdered Ramji Sahai and the

offence of attempting to murder Budhi Devi.

13. At the trial Shilpi Devi PW-3 and Budhi Devi PW-4

deposed in harmony with each other and disclosed the facts

noted hereinabove by us in the statement Ex.PW-3/A recorded

by the police soon after the incident. Relevant would it be to

note that Shilpi Devi stated that the accused followed them to

the hospital and was apprehended by the police along with

the churra i.e. the weapon of offence.

14. Since a submission has been urged by learned

counsel for the appellant, we note, that on being cross-

examined Shilpi Devi PW-3 stated, "On 25.8.2004 the weapon

of offence i.e. Churra was handed over to I.O. by a police

personnel whose name I do not remember."

15. PW-7 Dharmender did not fully support the case of

the prosecution. He deposed that on the night of 24-25

August, 2004 at around 9.00 P.M. he heard a noise outside his

house and on coming out saw Ramji Sahai lying outside his

house in an injured condition; his wife and daughter-in-law

were crying, "bachao bachao". He deposed that he took

Ramji Sahai to the hospital. He denied having seen anything

else.

16. Relevant would it be to note, on being cross-

examined by the learned Public Prosecutor he stated : "It is

correct that accused Sirnu later on came in the hospital

following us and was arrested by the police."

17. Suraj Kali PW-8 also did not support the case of the

prosecution. She deposed that on 24.8.2004, at about 9.00

P.M. she heard cries of "bachao bachao" and came out of her

jhuggi. She saw Ramji Sahai lying injured; his wife and

daughter-in-law were crying. Dharmender PW-7 also reached

and both of them took Ramji Sahai to the hospital. She stated

that : "In the hospital, accused Sirnu, present in the court,

also reached following us. The accused had some altercation

and "hatha pai" with the police and thereafter he was

arrested". Thereafter she stated that she did not see anything

else.

18. ASI Bhoop Singh PW-21, deposed that on 25.8.2004

he was posted as Incharge PCR van "Oscar 29" from 8.00 P.M.

to 8.00 A.M. and at 9.40 P.M. he got information that a person

who has been stabbed was admitted at Central Railway

Hospital, New Delhi. He along with the other members in the

van reached the hospital within 4-5 minutes and found some

persons chasing a boy who was having a churra (chopper)

containing blood-stains thereon and those persons were

shouting that how daring the accused is who has reached the

hospital after the quarrel. He deposed that he and the police

personnel accompanying him over powered the accused with

the help of public and took the churra into possession. That

after 10-15 minutes, Additional SHO along with his staff

reached there. The custody of the accused was handed over

to the Additional SHO. The churra, possession whereof had

already been taken from the accused, was given to the

Additional SHO and that he came to know that the name of

the person apprehended was Shirnu. He deposed that the

churra was seized vide a seizure memo Ex.PW-3/D. He

identified the churra Ex.P-1 as the one which was seized at

the spot.

19. In cross-examination he deposed that the seizure

memo Ex.PW-3/D was prepared at about 10.30 P.M.

20. Vide impugned judgment and order dated

27.2.2007, the appellant has been convicted for the offence of

murdering Ramji Sahai. He has been sentenced to undergo

imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-; in default

of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one

year. He has been convicted for the offence punishable under

Section 307 IPC for having launched a murderous assault on

Bhudi Devi. For said offence he has been sentenced to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a

fine of Rs.2,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for five months. Both the sentences

have been directed to run concurrently.

21. Needless to state the learned trial Judge has

believed the testimony of PW-3 and PW-4. Learned trial Judge

has found corroboration in the fact of the appellant chasing

the victim and his family till the hospital, even with reference

to the testimony of PW-7 and PW-8. Learned trial Judge has

noted the testimony of the police officers and in particular

PW-21 who had reached the hospital soon after receiving the

information of the injured being admitted there and saw a

crowd chasing the accused who was armed with a blood-

stained churra. The accused was apprehended at the hospital

as per the testimony of PW-3, PW-4, PW-7, PW-8 and other

police officials and in particular PW-21.

22. We note that the clothes of the accused which

were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-17/C, along with the

blood-stained clothes of the deceased and his blood sample

which was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-23/A, on being

handed over by the doctor who conducted the post-mortem,

as per the report of the serologist Ex.PW-24/A were opined to

be of human blood having blood group of „A‟ i.e. the blood

group of the deceased.

23. At the hearing of the appeal today, learned counsel

for the appellant draws our attention to the fact that in cross-

examination PW-3 Shilpi Devi, the daughter-in-law of the

deceased as also of the injured stated that the weapon of

offence was handed over to the Investigating Officer by the

police on 25.8.2004. Learned counsel draws our attention

that ASI Bhoop Singh has deposed of the day of incident being

25.8.2004 and that he gave possession of the churra to the

Additional SHO. Learned counsel urges that it is apparent

that the weapon of offence was recovered on 25.8.2004 at

10.30 P.M. and this discredits the case of the prosecution that

the appellant was apprehended on 24.8.2004 and the churra

was recovered from him.

24. No other submission has been made. Indeed, none

can be made.

25. It is a case of a person being caught pants down.

Such a person has no means to hide his shame.

26. Pertaining to the recovery of the weapon of offence

on 25.8.2004 as deposed to by ASI Bhoop Singh, it has to be

noted that the incident of stabbing took place in a slum

cluster of C.F. Road, Pahar Ganj at around 9.00 P.M. It was

24.8.2004. By the time the Additional SHO reached and

completed the formalities, the next day i.e. 25.8.2004 had

come into being. By the time the formalities were completed,

in the seizure memos etc., the date 25.8.2004 and the time

being 00.10 hours has been recorded. It is obvious that this

has caused confusion qua the date.

27. The reference to the time disclosed by various

witnesses, which ranges between 9.45 P.M. to 11.00 P.M. is

obviously referable to 24.8.2004.

28. As noted above, PW-3, PW-4, PW-7 and PW-8 all

have deposed about the accused being apprehended when he

had chased the family of the victim to the hospital and from

within the precincts of the hospital; each one of them has

consistently deposed that the stabbing incident took place

around 9.00 P.M. on the intervening night of 24-25.8.2004.

We may clarify that PW-7 and PW-8 have not claimed to have

seen the stabbing incident but have deposed that they saw

the deceased and the injured outside their jhuggi at around

9:00 PM on 24.8.2004.

29. That PW-21 has deposed that he handed over the

possession of the churra to the Additional SHO and that PW-3

has deposed that the churra was handed over to the

Investigating Officer by the police personnel has no

contradiction, for the reason both of them are speaking about

a police officer handing over a churra to the Additional SHO.

The statement of ASI Bhoop Singh PW-21 that the custody of

the accused and the churra recovered from him were made

over to the Additional SHO has to be understood and

appreciated with reference to his immediate statement

where he stated: "we over powered the accused with the help

of police and took the churra into possession".

30. It is apparent that what the witnesses had stated

is, that after the accused was over powered; he was dis-

armed; the churra in his hand was taken possession of by the

police persons and when the Additional SHO along with his

staff reached after 10-15 minutes. possession of the churra

and custody of the accused was handed over to the Additional

SHO.

31. No other point has been urged.

32. Noting the injuries on the person of the deceased,

nobody can argue that the intention of the accused was other

than to murder Ramji Sahai.

33. Noting the injuries on the person of Budhi Devi,

none can urge that but for the grace of the Lord, she would

have died. To put it simply, the assault on Budhi Devi shows

the intention of the accused to kill Budhi Devi.

34. We find no merit in the appeal.

35. Dismissed.

                                         (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
                                                JUDGE



March 05, 2009/vk                         (ARUNA SURESH)
                                               JUDGE