Delhi District Court
State vs Raj Kishore And Others on 7 February, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. VANDANA:
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-02( NORTH ):
ROHINI DISTRICT COURTS : DELHI
In the matter of:-
(Sessions Case No. 812/2018)
FIR No. 448/2018
Police Station Bhalswa Dairy
Charge sheet filed Under Section 302/201/34 IPC
Charge framed Under Section 302/34 IPC
State V/s (1) Raj Kishore
S/o Sh. Lal Bahadur
R/o H. No. 455, Gali No.6,
D Block, Mukundpur Part - 1,
Delhi.
(2) Nand Kishore
S/o Sh. Lal Bahadur
R/o H. No. 455, Gali No.6,
D Block, Mukundpur Part - 1,
Delhi.
(3) Triveni
S/o Sh. Lal Bahadur
R/o H. No. 455, Gali No.6,
D Block, Mukundpur Part - 1,
Delhi.
......Accused Persons
Date of institution 27.11.2018
Arguments concluded on 04.02.2026
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 1 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
Judgment Pronounced on 07.02.2026
Decision Acquitted
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS
1. Events which set the prosecution machinery into
motion are that in the intervening night of 03/04.09.2018, on
receipt of DD No.10A, HC Ravinder along with SI Lokesh
reached at Gali No.6, D Block, Mukundpur, Part – 1, Delhi,
where in the gali, one boy was found lying dead and tied with
rope. On inquiry, they came to know the name of the said boy as
Abdul Razid. The postmortem of the deceased was conducted.
During investigation, statement of witnesses were recorded under
Section 161 Cr.P.C and accused persons were arrested.
After completion of investigation, charge sheet for
the offence under Section 302/201/34 IPC was filed in the court
against the accused persons.
CHARGE
2. On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions,
vide order dated 01.02.2019 charge under Section 302/34 IPC
was framed against the accused persons to which they pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial. However, accused persons were
discharged for the offence under section 201 IPC.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 2 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
PROSECUTION WITNESSES
3. Thereafter, prosecution in support of its case have
examined 13 witnesses in all.
Sl. No. Prosecution Name of witness Description
witness No.
1. PW1 ASI Mahender Duty Officer
2. PW2 Smt. Renu Public witness/
eye witness
3. PW3 Inspector Draftsman
Manohar Lal
4. PW4 Ct. Amit Kumar Photographer of
Mobile Crime
Team
5. PW5 Mohd. Javed Complainant of
the case
6. PW6 Dr. R.P. Singh Doctor, who
conducted the
postmortem
7. PW7 W/Ct. Anu Police official,
who received
PCR call
8. PW8 HC Ravinder Police witness,
who assisted the
IO in the
investigation
9. PW9 HC Deepak Police witness,
who assisted the
IO in the
investigation/
10. PW10 SI Lokesh First IO of the
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 3 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
case
11. PW11 Ct. Umesh Police witness/
arrest witness
12. PW12 Mr.Jahid Alam Father of the
deceased, who
identified the
dead body
13. PW13 Inspector Vijay Second IO of
Kumar the case
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. PW1 is ASI Mahender. He deposed that on
04/09/2018, he was working as DO from 8:00 am to 4:00 pm and
at about 3:35 pm, HC Deepak came to the PS alongwith a rukka
sent by SI Lokesh, on the basis of which, he registered the
present FIR Ex. PW1/A on a computer with the help of computer
operator. He also made endorsement on rukka which is Ex.
PW1/B and issued certificate u/s 65-B Evidence Act Ex.PW1/C
with respect to the present FIR.
He further deposed that after registration of FIR, he
handed over original rukka and copy of FIR to HC Deepak to be
handed over to IO SI Lokesh.
PW2 is Smt. Renu. She deposed that she alongwith
her family reside at H.No. 455, Gali No.6, D Block, Mukund Pur,
Delhi. She further deposed that in fact, three families were
residing at the aforesaid house i.e. on the ground floor of
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 4 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
aforesaid house, her brother-in-law (Jeth) i.e. accused Triveni
had been residing alongwith his family. She further deposed that
her brother-in-law (Dewar) i.e. accused Raj Kishore had been
residing on the first floor, whereas, she and her family including
accused Nand Kishore (her husband) had been residing on the
second floor. She further deposed that at the time of occurrence,
she was in the advance stage of pregnancy and during the
intervening night of 03/09/2018, on or about 3:30 a.m., while
they were sleeping at their house, one thief trespassed into their
house in order to commit theft but due to the noises, she woke up
and saw one thief present near the almirah of her room and was
searching the said almirah. She further deposed that she caught
hold of the said thief and in the process, the said thief had given a
leg blow over her abdomen and she lost her consciousness. She
further deposed that two of the associates of the said thief were
also present in her room and when the thief who was checking
her almirah, gave a leg blow over her abdomen, the said two
associates managed to ran away. She further deposed that when
she regained her consciousness, she found the said thief
apprehended who was beaten by public persons. She further
deposed that she cannot tell as to who had given beatings to the
said thief.
As PW2 Smt. Renu reslied from her earlier
statement, she was thoroughly cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 5 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
for the State.
In her cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the
State she denied the suggestion that when she woke up and raised
noises, after apprehending the said thief, her husband i.e.
accused Nand Kishore also woke up and her husband had
apprehended the said thief or that accused Nand Kishore had
raised noises or that upon his noises, her brother-in-law i.e.
accused Raj Kishore also came there. She also denied the
suggestion that accused Raj Kishore took the search of said thief
whose name was revealed to them as Rajid S/o Zahid Alam or
that when accused Raj Kishore, took the search of said thief,
from inside the underwear, the stolen purse of Raj Kishore
containing DL, Rs. 800/- and other documents were recovered.
She further denied the suggestion that accused Raj Kishore and
Nand Kishore started assaulting said thief namely Rajid or that
upon hearing the noises her jeth i.e. accused Triveni had also
reached there or that thereafter, all the three accused persons had
given beating to said thief namely Rajid or took Rajid in the gali
or that upon hearing the noises, the neighbours also gathered
there and the said neighbours had also assaulted Rajid due to
which Rajid lost consciousness or that they intended not to kill
Rajid but the said assault was with intend to teach a lesson to the
said thief Rajid. She also denied having made any statement
Mark PW2/A to the police.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 6 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
PW2 was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused despite giving opportunity.
PW3 is Inspector Manohar Lal. He deposed that on
27.10.2018, on the call of IO, Inspector Vinay Kumar, he first
visited PS Bhalaswa Dairy and thereafter, he accompanied IO
Inspector Vinay Kumar to the spot i.e. at Gali no. 6, D Block,
Mukundpur, Delhi, where on the pointing out of IO, he took the
measurements and prepared rough notes and on the basis of
measurements and rough notes, he prepared scaled site plan Ex.
PW3/A on 28.10.2018 and handed over to IO and thereafter, he
destroyed the rough notes and measurements.
PW3 was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused despite giving opportunity.
PW4 is Ct. Amit Kumar. He deposed that on
04.09.2018, at about 8:00 am, a call was received from control
room and accordingly, he alongwith crime team Incharge ASI
Rajbir and ASI Surender Singh Saini (finger print expert)
reached at the spot i.e. Gali no. 6, D Block, in front of H. No.
453, Mukundpur, Delhi, where they met SI Lokesh and other
police officials. He further deposed that at the spot, crime team
incharge had inspected the said place of occurrence and at the
instance of SI Lokesh and crime team incharge, he took 10
photographs of the said place from different angles with digital
camera and after developing, he had handed over the said
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 7 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
photographs Ex. PW4/A (colly) to the IO. The CD is exhibited as
Ex. PW4/B and certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act is
exhibited as Ex. PW4/C.
PW5 is complainant Mohd. Javed. He deposed that
he alongwith his family resides at H. No. 689, Gali no. 14, Part-I,
A Block, Mukundpur, Delhiand had been running a small
Hardware shop at Veer Bazar Road, Mukundpur, Delhi. They are
four brothers and four sisters. He further deposed that Abdul
Rajid (deceased) was the son of his elder brother Mohd. Jahid.
Abdul Rajid came to Delhi from their native village around one
month prior to the occurrence of this case and he was learning
the electrician work.
He further deposed that on 04.09.2018 during the
morning hours, when he was sleeping in his house, on or about
7:00 am, he had received a phone call of his nephew Mohd.
Mushahid and over the said phone call, his said nephew had
informed him that Abdul Rajid had been killed by some persons
at gali no. 6, D Block. Accordingly, he rushed to the said place of
occurrence. He further deposed that upon reaching at the place of
occurrence, he saw many public persons gathered over there and
police officials were also present over there. He saw his nephew
lying in unconscious state at near the drain and he also noticed
the marks of tying with a rope i.e. rope marks over both his hands
and legs. He further deposed that the public persons gathered
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 8 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
over there were whispering that they had given a lesson to his
nephew Abdul Rajid for committing theft and he also saw
accused Raj Kishore and Nand Kishore present at the place,
where his nephew was lying unconscious and other persons
involved in the occurrence were also present there.
He further deposed that police officials took him to PS
where his statement Ex. PW5/A was recorded. Police got the
present case registered. He also visited the mortuary and
identified the body of his nephew and his statement Ex. PW5/B
was recorded by IO in this regard. He further deposed that after
postmortem, the body of his nephew was handed over to them
and they performed last rites.
On a leading question put by Ld. Addl. PP for the
State, PW5 admits that he came to know the name of one of the
offender as Triveni and he had named Triveni to the IO at the
time of recording his statement Ex.PW5/A.
He was duly cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused persons.
PW6 is Dr. R. P. Singh, Specialist (Forensic
Medicine), BJRM Government of NCT of Delhi. He deposed that
on 04.09.2018, he had conduced postmortem on the body of
deceased Abdul Rajid with the alleged history deceased being
killed by beatings in the morning hours of 04.09.2018 and after
conducting postmortem, he had prepared PM report no. 674/18
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 9 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:02
+0530
Ex. PW6/A.
He further deposed that during postmortem, he had
observed as many as 21 external injuries on the body of deceased
which he had detailed in PM report and had also opined the cause
of death to be hemorrhagic shock due to multiple injuries
produced by blunt objects. All the injuries were antemortem in
nature. The injuries were collectively sufficient to cause death in
ordinary course of nature. He had also opined that the nature and
pattern of injuries were consistent with continuous beatings for a
considerable time while the hands of the deceased were tied with
some ligature.
He further deposed that he had also sealed the blood
on gauze piece of the deceased as well as his clothes with the seal
of FMT BJRM HOSPITAL and handed over the same to IO. He
had also opined time since death to be within 12 hours.
PW6 was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused despite opportunity.
PW7 is W/Ct. Anu. He deposed that on 04.09.2018,
he was posted at CPCR as a Constable. On the next morning, at
about 6.21 am, at Channel No. 147, he received a telephone call
from mobile phone number 7065164383 and the place of incident
was informed as “D Block, Gali No.6, Mukundpur, near Daya
Basti School, chor pakad rakha hai. He further deposed that the
said message was flased in PCR as well as information was sent
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 10 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
to concerned control room at about 6.22 am. The attested copy
of computer generated copy of PCR Form No.1 was exhibited as
Ex.PW7/A.
PW8 is HC Ravinder. He deposed that in the
intervening night of 03/04.09.2018, he was on emergency duty
from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am with SI Lokesh and on receipt of DD
no. 10A, he alongwith SI Lokesh reached at Gali no. 6, D Block,
Mukundpur Part-1, Delhi, where in the gali, one boy was found
lying dead and tied with rope. On inquiry, they came to know the
name of the said boy as Abdul Razid. He further deposed that
Crime team was called. Many public persons had gathered over
there, who were requested to leave the place, but despite repeated
requests, more and more public persons were gathered at the
spot. He further deposed that some persons untied the ropes and
took away the rope. Crime team reached at the spot. SHO and
other staff of PS also reached there. Crime team officials
inspected the scene of crime and took photographs.
He further deposed that SI Lokesh prepared an
application for preserving the dead body in the mortuary of
BJRM Hospital. He took the dead body in a private vehicle in
BJRM Hospital and dead body was preserved. SI Lokesh came to
the BJRM Hospital, where the relative of deceased identified the
dead body. Postmortem was conducted. After postmortem, the
dead body was handed over to the relatives of the deceased. He
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 11 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
further deposed that they returned to the spot, where SI Lokesh
made endorsement on the statement of Mohd. Javed. SI Lokesh
prepared rukka which was handed over to him at 3:35 pm and he
went to police station and presented the rukka to duty officer,
who registered FIR and after registration of FIR, duty officer
handed over him copy of FIR and original rukka, which he
handed over to Inspector Vinay Kumar at the spot for further
investigation.
He was duly cross examined by ld. counsel for the
accused persons.
PW9 is HC Deepak. He deposed that on 05.09.2018,
he alongwith Inspector Vinay Kumar and other staff reached at
Gali no. 6, D Block, Mukundpur Part-1. They hid themselves
near the H. No. 455. After 10-15 minutes, one person was going
inside the H. No. 455 and IO gave indication to apprehend him.
They all apprehended the said person, who revealed his name as
Triveni. IO interrogated and arrested accused Triveni vide arrest
memo Ex.PW9/A. Personal search of the accused was also
conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/B. The accused made disclosure
statement Ex. PW9/C. He further deposed that pursuant to the
disclosure statement, accused led them to vacant plot in D Block,
where accused produced one danda which was used in causing
injury to the deceased. He further deposed that accused Triveni
produced the danda which was measured and wrapped in a piece
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 12 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
of cloth, converted into a pulanda and sealed with the seal of
VKS. The said pulanda was taken in possession vide seizure
memo Ex. PW9/D. The accused led them to the house of co-
accused Sone Lal, who was found at his house and on the
pointing out and identification of accused Triveni, co-accused
Sone Lal was apprehended. He further deposed that IO
interrogated and arrested accused Sone Lal vide arrest memo
Ex.PW9/E. Personal search of the accused was also conducted
vide memo Ex.PW9/F and he made disclosure statement
Ex.PW9/G.
PW9 further deposed that both accused Triveni and
Sone Lal led us to the house of accused Sant Lal, who was found
at his house and on the identification and pointing out by accused
Triveni and Sone Lal, accused Sant Lal was arrested vide arrest
memo Ex.PW9/H, personal search of the accused was also
conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/J. The accused made disclosure
statement Ex.PW9/K.
He further deposed that all the accused Triveni, Sone
Lal and Sant Lal led them to the house of accused Deshraj, who
was found at his house and on the identification and pointing out
by accused Triveni, Sone Lal and Sant Lal, accused Deshraj was
arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW9/L, personal search of the
accused was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/M and accused
made disclosure statement Ex.PW9/N.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 13 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
He has identified the case property i.e. one danda as
Ex. P1 and stated that this danda was recovered at the pointing
out and at the instance of accused Triveni.
He was duly cross examined by ld. counsel for the
accused.
PW10 is SI Lokesh. He deposed that on 04.09.2018,
he was on emergency duty with HC Ravinder and on receipt of
DD No.10-A Ex.PW10/A regarding one thief has been got in D
Block, Gali No.6, Mukundpur, Daya Basti School, he alongwith
HC Ravinder reached Mukundpur, Part- 1, Gali No.6, D Block
where they saw a boy who was dead, found, tied with rope. There
were injuries of the body of the said boy and on enquiry, they
came to know his name Abdul Razid S/o Mohd. Zahir. The
crime team was called at the spot and senior officers were
accordingly informed that there were many public persons
gathered at the spot. He further deposed that taking advantage of
the crowd, someone opened the rope by which the said boy was
tied and took the rope also. Inspector Vinay Kumar and other
staff also reached there.
He further deposed that Crime team reached at the spot
and the Incharge of crime team inspected the scene of crime. The
photographer took the photographs of the spot from different
angles. The photographer took the photographs of the boy lying
dead at the spot. He prepared an application for preserving the
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 14 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
dead body in the mortuary of BJRM Hospital. The dead body
was removed from the spot in a private vehicle for BJRM
Hospital through HC Ravinder. He further deposed that at the
same time, Mohd. Javed son of Sheikh Maksood also reached
there and informed that he is uncle of deceased. PW10 recorded
statement of Mohd. Javed Ex.PW5/A. He further deposed that
HC Deepak was deputed at the spot to guard the scene of crime
and he alongwith Inspector Vinay Kumar reached at BJRM
Hospital where they met with relatives of deceased who
identified the dead body. IO Inspector Vinay Kumar filled up
form 2535, prepared brief facts and application for conducting
postmortem on the dead body. The dead body was identified by
Mohd. Zahid Alam and Mohd. Javed whose statements were also
recorded. Postmortem was conducted on the dead body. After
postmortem, one envelope containing in blood in gauze piece,
one pullanda containing clothes of deceased duly sealed
alongwith sample seals of FMT, BJRM Hospital, Delhi, were
handed over to them which were seized vide seizure memo
Ex.PW10/B. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over
to the relatives of the deceased. He alongwith Inspector Vinay
reached at the spot where he made endorsement Ex.PW10/C. He
prepared rukka which was handed over to HC Deepak at 3.35
p.m., for registration of FIR. HC Deepak left for police station.
HC Deepak came back to the spot with the copy of FIR and
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 15 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
original rukka which he handed over to Inspector Vinay for
further investigation.
He further deposed that IO Inspector Vinay Kumar
prepared site plan at his instance Ex.PW10/D. They went to the
house of Nand Kishore, Raj Khosre both S/o Lal Bahadur who
were named in the FIR/ complaint. Both of them were found
present at their house. Both were apprehended and interrogated
by the IO. Accused Nand Kishore was arrested vide arrest memo
Ex.PW10/E. The personal search of accused Nand Kishore was
conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW10/F. Accused Raj
Kishore was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW10/G. The
personal search of accused Raj Kishore was conducted vide
personal search memo Ex.PW10/H. Accused Nand Kishore and
RaJ Kishore made disclosure statements Ex.PW10/J &
Ex.PW10/K. The information of arrest were given to their family
members. He further deposed that both the accused were got
medically examined, they were served with food and sent to
lock-up. IO deposited exhibits in the Malkhana.
He further deposed that Renu wife of accused Nand
Kishore gave statement that one boy committed theft in her
house and the said boy was caught. He recorded the statement of
Renu and on the basis of which FIR No.447/2018 was registered
on dt. 04.09.2018 under Section 457/380/411 IPC , PS Bhalswa
Dairy. Photocopy of this FIR is Ex.PW10/L.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 16 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
He was duly cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused persons.
PW11 is Ct. Umesh. He deposed that on 04.09.2018,
he alongwith SI Lokesh went to gali no. 6, D Block, Mukundpur
Part-1, Delhi, where other staff also reached including SHO. One
boy namely Abdul Rajid was lying dead in the gali. Crime team
reached there. Crime team officials inspected the scene of crime
and photographer took the photographs from different angles.
The dead body was sent to the mortuary of BJRM hospital.
Thereafter, they left for the search of the accused
persons and reached at H. No. 455, Gali no. 6, D Block,
Mukundpur-1, Delhi, where accused Nand Kishore and Raj
Kishore were found present. Both were interrogated and arrested
vide arrest memos and personal search memos already Ex.
PW10/E, Ex. PW10/F, Ex. PW10/G and Ex. PW10/H. Both the
accused made disclosure statements already Ex. PW10/J and Ex.
PW10/K..
He was duly cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused.
PW12 is Jahid Alam. He deposed that his son Abdul
Rajid went to Delhi to stay in the house of his brother Mohd.
Javed, who is residing in Part-1, Mukundpur. His son had gone to
Delhi about 15 days prior to his death.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 17 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
He further deposed that on 04.09.2018, at about 6:30-
6:45 am, his son namely Mushahid informed him telephonically
that his younger son Abdul Rajid had been killed by Raj Kishore,
Nand Kishore, Triveni, Sone Lal, Sant Lal and Deshraj. His son
called him to reach Delhi immediately. At that time, he was in
Noida, therefore, he reached Delhi and went to the house of his
elder son Mushahid.
He further deposed that his son Mushahid narrated him
the whole incident as to how his son Abdul Rajid had been killed
by above named persons. Thereafter, he alongwith his son
Mushahid reached at the scene of crime i.e. Gali no. 6, D Block,
Mukundpur Part-1, Delhi and when they reached there, one
female was standing at her house, told them that “Jo hamare
yahan chori karne ayenge, unko aise hi saza denge.” Thereafter,
they went to police station Bhalaswa Dairy. They went to BJRM
Hospital, where he saw the dead body of his son Abdul Rajid and
his statement in this regard is Ex.PW12/A. He further deposed
that postmortem was conducted on the dead body of his son.
After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to them vide
handing over memo Ex. PW12/B.
He was duly cross examined by Ld. counsel for the
accused persons.
PW13 is Inspector Vinay Kumar. He deposed that
on 04.09.2018, he was posted at PS Bhalswa Dairy and on that
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 18 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
day, SI Lokesh received DD No. 10A regarding one thief has
been caught in D-Block, Gali No.6, Mukund Pur, Dayabasti
School. SI Lokesh reached there and apprised the facts of the
case to him and other senior police officials including SHO. He
also reached at the spot j.e. D-Block. Gali No.6. Mukund Pur
Part-1. Delhi. Many public persons were gathered there. Sl
Lokesh was present at the spot with other police staff. He further
deposed that one boy was found lying on the ground tied with
rope. Crime Mobile Team was called at the spot. Crime team
reached there and inspected the scene of crime. Photographer
took the photographs of the scene of crime. Dead body was
shifted to BJRM Hospital through a private vehicle. He further
deposed that he alongwith Sl Lokesh reached at BJRM hospital
where the relatives of deceased also reached. Mohd. Zahid Alam
and Mohd. Javed identified the dead body of Abdul Razid. He
further deposed that he recorded their statement in this regard
Ex.PW12/A and Ex.PW5/B. He filled up form 25.35 Ex.PW13/A
and prepared inquest documents and moved application to
Incharge of Mortuary Ex.PW13/B for conducting postmortem on
the dead body. The postmortem was conducted vide report
Ex.PW6/A. He further deposed that after postmortem the dead
body was handed over to the relatives of deceased vide dead
body handing over memo Ex.PW12/B. The autopsy surgeon/
hospital handed over one envelope, one pullanda and sample seal
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 19 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
of the hospital to him which he seized vide seizure memo
Ex.PW10/B.
He further deposed that he alongwith Sl Lokesh
reached at the spot where SI Lokesh made endorsement
Ex.PW10/C on the statement of Javed. SI Lokesh prepared rukka
which was handed over to HC Deepak at 3.35 p.m., for
registration of FIR. HC Deepak left for police station. He further
deposed that HC Deepak came back to the spot with the copy of
FIR and original rukka which he handed over the same to him
(PW13) for further investigation.
He further deposed that he prepared site plan at the
instance SI Lokesh Kumar Ex.PW10/D. They went to the house
of Nand Kishore, Raj Kishore, both S/o Lal Bahadur who were
named in the FIR/ complaint. Both of them were found present at
their house. Both were apprehended and interrogated by him. He
further deposed that accused Nand Kishore was arrested vide
arrest memo Ex.PW10/E. The personal search of accused Nand
Kishore was also conducted vide personal search memo
Ex.PW10/F. Accused Raj Kishore was arrested vide arrest memo
Ex.PW10/G. The personal search of accused Raj Kishore was
conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW10/H. Accused
Nand Kishore and Raj Kishore made disclosure statements
Ex.PW10/J & Ex.PW10/K. He further deposed that the
information of arrest were given to their family members. Both
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 20 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
the accused were got medically examined. He further deposed
that he has deposited exhibits in the Malkhana and recorded
statement of witnesses. He further deposed that Renu wife of
Nand Kishore/accused gave statement that one boy committed
theft in her house and the said boy had been caught. SI Lokesh
recorded the statement of Renu and on the basis of which FIR
No.447/2018 Ex.PW10/L was registered on dt. 04.09.2018 under
Section 457/380/411 IPC, PS Bhalswa Dairy.
He further deposed that on 05.09.2018, he received
secret information about accused Triveni. He alongwith HC
Deepak and other staff and with secret informer left the police
station and reached at Gali no. 6, D Block, Mukundpur Part-1.
They hid themselves near the House No. 455. After 10-15
minutes, one person was going inside the House No. 455 and he
gave indication to his staff who apprehended him. They all
apprehended the said person, who revealed his name as Triveni.
He further deposed that he interrogated and arrested accused
Triveni vide arrest memo Ex.PW9/A. Personal search of the
accused was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/B. The accused
made disclosure statement Ex.PW9/C. He further deposed that
pursuant to the disclosure statement, accused led them to vacant
plot in D Block, where he produced one danda which was used in
causing injury to the deceased. Accused Triveni produced the
danda which was measured and wrapped in a piece of cloth,
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 21 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
converted into a pulanda and sealed with the seal of VKS. The
said pulanda was taken in possession vide seizure memo already
Ex. PW9/D. He further deposed that the accused led them to the
house of co-accused Sone Lal, who was found at his house and
on the pointing out and identification of accused Triveni, co-
accused Sone Lal was apprehended, interrogated and arrested
accused Sone Lal vide arrest memo Ex. PW9/E. Personal search
of the accused was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/F. The
accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW9/G. He further
deposed that both accused Triveni and Sone Lal led them to the
house of accused Sant Lal, who was found at this house and on
the identification and pointing out by accused Triveni and Sone
Lal, accused Sant Lal was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW9/H.
Personal search of the accused was also conducted vide memo
Ex. PW9/J. The accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW9/K.
He further deposed that all the accused Triveni, Sone
Lal and Sant Lal led them to the house of accused Deshraj, who
was found at his house and on the identification and pointing out
by accused Triveni. Sone Lal and Sant Lal, accused Deshraj was
arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW9/L. Personal search of the
accused was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW9/M. The accused
made disclosure statement Ex. PW9/N.
He further deposed that he obtained the postmortem
report and after discussion with SHO and senior officials Section
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 22 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
302 IPC was added.
He further deposed that on 07.09.2018, he collected
the crime mobile team report and CD of photographs and
recorded statement of witnesses. On 10.09.2018, he collected
PCR form and placed the same on record. On 12.09.2018, he
prepared an application for obtaining subsequent opinion with
regard to danda. Ct. Umesh took the letter alongwith pullanda
from MHC(M) for depositing the same in BJRM hospital for
subsequent opinion vide RC No. 245/21/18, he sent request for
obtaining the CDR of mobile number of accused persons.
He further deposed that on 27.10.2018, he alongwith
Draftsman Inspector Manohar Lal went to the spot for preparing
scale site plan. Inspector Manohar Lal took the measurement and
prepared rough notes for scaled site plan. On 28.10.2018,
Inspector Manohar Lal prepared the scaled site plan and he
collected the same which was placed on the record.
He further deposed that he had already filed the
subsequent opinion regarding the weapon of offence. He had
filed a report regarding CDR of the mobile phone 9873507479
and 9560668792 for the period 20.08.2018 till date. He further
deposed that he had contacted the service provider and as per
their report, no call details of the above said mobile phones are
available as the same are more than 02 years old and the data is
not saved beyond the period of 02 years and his report is
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 23 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
Ex.PW13/B. He had identified the case property i.e. stick/danda
as Ex.P1.
PW13 was duly cross examined by ld. Counsel for
the accused persons.
Documents produced on behalf of prosecution
Ex.PW1/A Copy of the present FIR
Ex.PW1/B Endorsement on rukka
Ex.PW1/C Certificate U/s 65B Indian
Evidence Act regarding correctness
of the FIR
Ex.PW1/D & Copy of FIR No. 447/2018, PS
Ex.PW10/L Shahbad Dairy
Ex.PW3/A Scaled site plan
Ex.PW4/A (colly) 10 photographs
Ex.PW4/B CD
Ex.PW4/C Certificate U/s 65B Indian
Evidence Act regarding correctness
of the photographs and CD
Ex.PW5/A Statement under Section 161
Cr.P.C. of PW Mohd. Javed
Ex.PW5/B Dead body identification statement
of PW Mohd. Javed
Ex.PW6/A Postmortem report of deceased
Ex.PW7/A Copy of computer generated copy
of PCR Form No.1
Ex.PW9/A Arrest memo of accused Triveni
Ex.PW9/B Personal search memo of accused
Triveni
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 24 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
Ex.PW9/C Disclosure statement of accused
Triveni
Ex.PW9/D Seizure memo of danda recovered
at instance of accused Triveni
Ex.PW9/E Arrest memo of accused Sone Lal
Ex.PW9/F Personal search memo of accused
Sone Lal
Ex.PW9/G Disclosure statement of accused
Sone Lal
Ex.PW9/H Arrest memo of accused Sant Lal
Ex.PW9/J Personal search memo of accused
Sant Lal
Ex.PW9/K Disclosure statement of accused
Sant Lal
Ex.PW9/L Arrest memo of accuse Deshraj
Ex.PW9/M Personal search memo of accused
Deshraj
Ex.PW9/N Disclosure statement of accused
Deshraj
Ex.PW10/A DD No.10A
Ex.PW10/B Seizure memo of clothes deceased
Ex.PW10/C Endorsement on rukka
Ex.PW10/D Site plan
Ex.PW10/E Arrest memo of accused Nand
Kishore
Ex.PW10/F Personal search memo of accused
Nand Kishore
Ex.PW10/G Arrest memo of accused Raj
Kishore
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 25 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:56
+0530
Ex.PW10/H Personal search memo of accused
Raj Kishore
Ex.PW10/J Disclosure statement of accused
Nand Kishore
Ex.PW10/K Disclosure statement of accused
Raj Kishore
Ex.PW12/A Dead body identification statement
of Jahid Alam
Ex.PW12/B Dead body handing over memo
Ex.PW13/A Form No. 25.35
Ex.PW13/B Report of Inspector Vinay Kumar
regarding CDR of Mobile No.
9873507479 and 9560668792
List of Material Objects
Ex.P1 Danda
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 Cr.P.C
5. After closure of PE, the respective statements of the
accused Raj Kishore, Nand Kishore and Triveni was recorded u/s
313 Cr.P.C. on 04.07.2025, wherein they denied all the evidence
put to them and stated that they have been falsely implicated in
the present case. They have stated that first they have lodged
FIR No. 447/18 U/s 457/380/411 IPC regarding theft in their
house. Deceased was beaten by the public persons. They have
been called by the police in the police station and were forced to
sign some blank documents, which were later converted into
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 26 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:55
+0530
incriminating documents.
Accused persons chose not to lead defence evidence.
6. Thereafter, matter was fixed for final arguments.
ARGUMENTS
7. I have heard Dr. Sarita Rani, Ld. Addl. PP for the
State and Ms. Hemlata, Ld. counsel for all the accused persons.
8. It was argued by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that the
allegations levelled against the accused persons are of serious
nature and through the testimonies of material witnesses, the
prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and
accused persons deserves conviction.
It was further argued that all the police officials have
clearly proved the chain and the manner of investigation and
merely because the witnesses are police officials their testimony
cannot be disbelieved.
9. On the contrary, Ms. Hemlata, Ld. counsel for all
accused persons has argued that accused persons have been
falsely implicated. It was argued that PW2 Smt. Renu/the eye
witness has given inconsistent version and has not supported the
case of the prosecution. It was argued that there was no other eye
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 27 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
witness of the incident examined by the prosecution. PW5 Mohd.
Javed admitted in his cross examination by ld. Counsel for the
accused that the incident was not happened in his presence. He
also admitted that he came to know that deceased, who is his
nephew had trespassed into the house for committing theft and
was apprehended by public persons and FIR had also been
registered for lurking house trespass and committing theft. It was
further argued that deceased was beaten by public persons
gathered there and not by the accused persons. There is no
forensic evidence on record which cull out any incriminating
evidence against the accused persons. Recovery of weapon was
also planted upon the accused persons. It was further argued that
benefit of doubt has to be granted to the accused persons and
accordingly, accused persons deserve acquittal.
10. I have heard the arguments at length and perused the
entire record.
FINDINGS
11. The accused Raj Kishore, Nand Kishore and Triveni
had been charged for the commission of offence punishable
under Section 302/34 IPC.
12. At the very outset, it is relevant to quote the law.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 28 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
The relevant Section is reproduced as under:
SECTION 302 IPC
“Whoever commits murder shall be
punished with death, or
[imprisonment for life], and shall
also be liable to fine”.
SECTION 34 IPC
“When a criminal act is done by
several persons in furtherance of the
common intention of all, each of
such persons is liable for that act in
the same manner as if it were done
by him alone”.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
13. It is a settled law of criminal jurisprudence that a
person is believed to be innocent till the guilt is proved against
him. This principle is called The Presumption of Innocence. In
another words, the accused is entitled to take advantage of
reasonable doubt in respect of his crime. The principle finds its
genesis in the Declaration of Human Rights under Article 11
Section 1 incorporated by the United Nations in 1948. It is also
mentioned in the European Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights in Article 6 Section 2 and United Nations
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights under
Article 14, Section 2.
Presumption of Innocence is a re-statement of the
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 29 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
rule that in criminal matters the prosecution has the burden of
proving guilt of the accused in order to be convicted of the crime
of which he is charged.
In Chandrashekhar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
decided on 06.07.2018 relying on judgment of Data Ram Singh
Vs. State of UP passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on
06.02.2018, it was held that:
“the freedom of an individual is utmost
important and cannot be curtailed specially
when guilt if any, is yet to be proved. It
is settled law that till such time guilt of a
person is proved, he is deemed to be
innocent…….. A fundamental postulate of
criminal juris prudence is a presumption of
innocence meaning thereby that a person is
believed to be innocent until found guilty….
Thus, it is a settled law that it is for the prosecution
to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable
doubt.
14. The essential ingredients of the offence under
section 302 IPC are as follows:-
1. Death of a human being was caused;
2. Such death was caused by or in consequence of the
act of the accused;
3. Such act was done;
a. with the intention of causing death, or
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 30 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
b. that the accused knew it to be likely to cause
death, or
c. that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary
course of nature to cause death.
15. The case of the prosecution is based on
circumstantial and scientific evidence. A three−Judge Bench in
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC
116, held as under:
“152………….It is well to remember
that in cases where the evidence is of a
circumstantial nature, the circumstances
from which the conclusion of guilt is to
be drawn should in the first instance be
fully established, and all the facts so
established should be consistent only
with the hypothesis of the guilt of the
accused. Again, the circumstances
should be of a conclusive nature and
tendency and they should be such as to
exclude every hypothesis but the one
proposed to be proved. In other words,
there must be a chain of evidence so far
complete as not to leave any reasonable
ground for a conclusion consistent with
the innocence of the accused and it must
be such as to show that within all human
probability the act must have been done
by the accused.
153. A close analysis of this
decision would show that the following
conditions must be fulfilled before a
case against an accused can be said to be
fully established:
(1) the circumstances from which the
conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should
be fully established. It may be noted
here that this Court indicated that theSC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 31 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
circumstances concerned ‘must or
should’ and not ‘may be’ established.
There is not only a grammatical but a
legal distinction between ‘may be
proved’ and “must be or should be
proved” as was held by this Court in
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of
Maharashtra [(1973) 2 SCC 793 : 1973
SCC (Cri) 1033 : 1973 Cri LJ 1783]
where the following observations were
made : [SCC para 19, p. 807 : SCC (Cri)
p. 1047] Certainly, it is a primary
principle that the accused must be and
not merely may be guilty before a court
can convict and the mental distance
between ‘may be’ and ‘must be’ is long
and divides vague conjectures from sure
conclusions.”
(2) the facts so established should be
consistent only with the hypothesis of
the guilt of the accused, that is to say,
they should not be explainable on any
other hypothesis except that the accused
is guilty,
(3) the circumstances should be of a
conclusive nature and tendency,
(4) they should exclude every possible
hypothesis except the one to be proved,
and
(5) there must be a chain of evidence so
complete as not to leave any reasonable
ground for the conclusion consistent
with the innocence of the accused and
must show that in all human probability
the act must have been done by the
accused.
154.These five golden principles, if we
may say so, constitute the panchsheel of
the proof of a case based on
circumstantial evidence.”
In Mohd. Arif v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2011) 13
SCC 621, it has been observed:
“There can be no dispute that in a
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 32 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:57
+0530
case entirely dependent on the
circumstantial evidence, the
responsibility of the prosecution is
more as compared to the case where
the ocular testimony or the direct
evidence, as the case may be, is
available. The Court, before relying
on the circumstantial evidence and
convicting the accused thereby has to
satisfy itself completely that there is
no other inference consistent with the
innocence of the accused possible
nor is there any plausible
explanation. The Court must,
therefore, make up its mind about the
inferences to be drawn from each
proved circumstance and should also
consider the cumulative effect
thereof. In doing this, the Court has
to satisfy its conscience that it is not
proceeding on the imaginary
inferences or its prejudices and that
there could be no other inference
possible excepting the guilt on the
part of the accused.
At times, there may be only a few
circumstances available to reach a
conclusion of the guilt on the part of
the accused and at times, even if
there are large numbers of
circumstances proved, they may not
be enough to reach the conclusion of
guilt on the part of the accused. It is
the quality of each individual
circumstance that is material and that
would essentially depend upon the
quality of evidence. Fanciful
imagination in such cases has no
place. Clear and irrefutable logic
would be an essential factor in
arriving at the verdict of guilt on the
basis of the proven circumstances.”
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 33 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:55
+0530
EVIDENCE OF MATERIAL WITNESSES
16. Now, coming to the facts in hand, the case of the
prosecution is that the deceased Abdul Rajid was found dead in
street no. 6, D Block, Mukund Pur. The complainant who is the
paternal uncle of the deceased who complained that when he
reached at the spot, he heard that the deceased was badly beaten
by the accused Triveni, Raj Kishore, Nand Kishore and some
other persons as the deceased went to house of Raj Kishore for
theft. When the complainant was examined as PW-5, he did not
testify anything in this regard. Though he identified the accused
persons, but, he did not utter even a single word, about having
seen accused persons giving beatings to the deceased. During
cross-examination, he categorically admitted that, “he had not
seen the occurrence with his own eyes”. He further admitted that,
“it is correct that none of the accused persons had assaulted my
nephew in my presence”. In fact, he duly admitted that he came
to know that his nephew trespassed into the house in order to
commit theft and was apprehended by the public persons.
Further, the prosecution has further cited Smt. Renu
wife of accused Nand Kishore, as witness, she testified that at the
time of occurrence, she was at the advance stage of pregnancy.
During the intervening night, of 03/09/2018, on or about 3:30
a.m., while they were sleeping in their house, one thief trespassed
into their house in order to commit theft but due to the noise, she
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 34 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
woke up and saw one thief present near the almirah of her room
and was searching the said almirah. She further deposed that she
caught hold of the said thief and in the process, the said thief had
given a leg blow over her abdomen and she lost her
consciousness. She further deposed that two of the associates of
the said thief were also present in her room and when the thief,
who was checking her almirah, gave a leg blow over her
abdomen, the said two associates managed to ran away. She
further deposed that when she regained her consciousness, she
found the said thief apprehended who was beaten and beaten by
public persons. She further deposed that she cannot tell as to who
had given beatings to the said thief.
She was cross-examined at length, whereby, she
denied all the suggestions that the accused persons apprehended
the said thief (deceased) or gave beatings to him. She was
confronted with her statement recorded under section 161
Cr.P.C., which was denied by her.
PW1 though proved the registration of the FIR of
theft i.e. Ex.PW1/D, it is settled principle of law that mere
proving the registration of FIR does not tantamount to proving
the contents of the FIR. Moreover, PW2 Smt. Renu, who is the
complainant in that FIR has already turned hostile and she
deposed that she did not see anything as to who had given
beatings to the deceased.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 35 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
There is no forensic evidence lifted from the crime
scene which could suggest any signs of scuffle or struggle or that
which has been sent for further investigation to the lab which
could be incriminating against the accused persons.
There was no eye witness or any other independent
public witness which have supported the case of the prosecution.
There is no CCTV footage of the incident which has been proved
by the prosecution.
RECOVERY OF WEAPON
17. As such, there is no independent witness to the
alleged recovery of danda Ex.P1 from accused Triveni, which
was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW9/D.
At this stage reliance is placed on the following
landmark judgments by the Hon’ble Superior Courts on this
point.
In the landmark judgment of State (NCT of Delhi)
Vs. Sunil 2001 SCC, (Cri) 248, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held
that:
“when discovery is made pursuant to any
facts deposed by the accused, the discovery
memo prepared by the IO is necessarily
attested by the independent witnesses but if
no witness is present, it is difficult to lay
down as a proposition that the recovery must
be tainted or that or unreliable. But in such a
situation, the court has to consider the report
of the IO on its own merits”.
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 36 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:02
+0530
In Mani Vs. State of Tamilnadu decided on
08.01.2008, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it has been held that:
“Discovery is a weak kind of evidence and
cannot be wholly relied upon and conviction
in such a serious matter cannot be based upon
discovery”.
In the case of Naveen kumar Verma Vs. State (Govt.
of NCT of Delhi) decided by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on
03.07.2013 relying on the landmark judgment of Mohd. Jabbar
Vs. State decision 21.05.2010 Crl. A. 1022/18, it has been
reiterated that:
“The courts have to be cautioned and to
vigilant against the non practice of the police
to plant ordinary objects on the accused
persons to prove access by the accused to the
place where the crime was allegedly
committed”.
In Prabhu Vs. State AIR 1963, Supreme Court 1113,
recovery of a blood stained shirt and a dhoti as also on an axe on
which human blood was detected was held to be a weak evidence
as was also held in the case of Narsinghbhai Prajapati Etc. Vs.
Chatrasingh & Ors. AIR 1977 Supreme Court 1753, where
recovery of a blood stained shirt and a dhoti and also a dharia
(weapon of offence) were held to be a weak evidence.
In the case of Surjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR
1994 Supreme Court 110, the watch of the deceased and a dagger
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 37 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:01
+0530
stained with the blood of the same group as that of the deceased
was held to be weak evidence.
In the present case, as already stated earlier, there is
no independent witness to the alleged recovery of danda and
same is as such easily available in the market. Further, though
Ex.P1 describes the measurement of danda but does not denote
anything about any blood stains over the same. Infact the charge-
sheet is also silent regarding sending the same to FSL for any
further analysis. In the light of aforesaid case laws, the recovery
of aforesaid danda is a weak piece of evidence which cannot be
sole basis of conviction of accused persons.
18. There appears to be no sincere efforts were made by
police officials concerned to join independent public witnesses in
the concerned police proceedings at any of the available stages
especially at the time of recovery of alleged weapon of offence or
at the time of arrest of accused persons. In this regard reliance is
being placed on the following judgments:-
In case law reported as “Anoop Joshi Vs. State“
1992(2) C.C. Cases 314(HC), High Court of Delhi had observed
as under:-
“18. It is repeatedly laid down by this
Court in such cases it should be shown
by the police that sincere efforts have
been made to join independent witnesses.
In the present case, it is evidence that noSC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 38 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:58
+0530
such sincere efforts have been made,
particularly when we find that shops
were open and one or two shop-keepers
could have been persuaded to join the
raiding party to witness the recovery
being made from the appellant. In case
any of the shopkeepers had declined to
join the raiding party, the police could
have later on taken legal action against
such shopkeepers because they could not
have escaped the rigours of law while
declining to perform their legal duty to
assist the police in investigation as a
citizen, which is an offence under the
IPC“.
In a case law reported as “Roop Chand Vs. The State
of Haryana” 1999 (1) C.L.R. 69, the Punjab & Haryana High
Court held as under:-
“3. I have heard the learned counsel for
the parties and gone through the evidence
with their help. The recovery of illicit
liquor was effected from the possession of
the petitioner during noon time and it is in
the evidence of the prosecution witnesses
that some witnesses form the public were
available and they were asked to join the
investigation. The explanation furnished
by the prosecution is that the independent
witnesses were asked to join the
investigation but they refused to do so on
the ground that their joining will result
into enmity between them and the
petitioner”. “4. It is well settled principle
of the law that the Investigating Agency
should join independent witnesses at the
time of recovery of contraband articles, if
they are available and their failure to do
so in such a situation casts a shadow of
doubt on the prosecution case. In theSC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 39 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:00
+0530
present case also admittedly the
independent witnesses were available at
the time of recovery but they refused to
associate themselves in the investigation.
This explanation does not inspire
confidence because the police officials
who are the only witnesses examined in
the case have not given the names and
addresses of the persons contacted to join
it is a very common excuse that the
witnesses from the public refused to join
the investigation. A police officer
conducting investigation of a crime is
entitled to ask anybody to join the
investigation and on refusal by a person
from the public the Investigating Officer
can take action against such a person
under the law. Had it been a fact that the
witnesses from the public had refused to
join the investigation, the Investigating
Officer must have proceeded against them
under the relevant provisions of law. The
failure to do so by the police officer is
suggestive of the fact that the explanation
for non-joining the witnesses from the
public is an after thought and is not
worthy of credence. All these facts taken
together make the prosecution case highly
doubtful”.
19. The remaining prosecution witnesses were formal
police witnesses who merely deposed regarding the manner of
investigation.
CONCLUSION
20. It is a settled law that in case of circumstantial
evidence, the paramount requirement is that every possible link
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 40 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:35:59
+0530
in the chain should be complete along with other incriminating
circumstances including motive and the recovery of weapon of
offence and should unequivocally point towards the guilt of the
accused and cannot be solely based on the last seen testimony.
The prime prosecution witness PW2 Smt. Renu had completely
resiled from her statement and nothing could be culled out from
her testimony against accused persons.
Further, the material witnesses could not bring home
the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The recovery
of articles as discussed above, was a weak piece of evidence and
no conclusive evidence exclusively pointing out towards the guilt
of accused persons could be proved by the prosecution beyond
reasonable doubt.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid detailed findings,
there is no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has failed to
prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly the
accused persons Raj Kishore, Nand Kishore and Triveni deserves
a benefit of doubt and hence stand acquitted of the charges
levelled against them.
32. File be consigned to record room after due
compliance.
Needless to say, that in view of Section 357A
Cr.P.C. the LRs of deceased would be entitled to compensation
SC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 41 of 42
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
Date:
VANDANA 2026.02.07
17:36:02
+0530
even though the accused persons have been acquitted, if not
awarded so far by the Delhi State Legal Authority, as may be
permissible, as per subsisting rules and in accordance with law.
Digitally signed
by VANDANA
VANDANA Date:
2026.02.07
17:36:23 +0530
Dictated and announced in the open (Vandana)
Court on 07.02.2026 Addl. Session Judge-02
(running in 42 pages) (North), Rohini Courts/DelhiSC No. 812/18, FIR No. 448/2018 PS Bhalswa Dairy
State Vs. Raj Kishore Etc. Page No. 42 of 42