Full Judgment Text
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Reserved on: March 29, 2016
% Judgment Delivered on: April 05, 2016
+ CRL.A. 181/2016
PAWAN @ RAM SALA @ CHANDA ..... Appellant
Represented by: Mr.Naveen Gaur, Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT) ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP for
the State with Inspector
Surender Kumar, ATO Civil
Lines.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
1. Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda has been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 302 IPC for murdering Govind Sarin @ Shanky
vide impugned judgment dated November 24, 2015 and directed to undergo
imprisonment for life vide order on sentence dated November 30, 2015 on
the strength of the testimony of the two eye witnesses Tarun Arya @ Ginni,
PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2.
2. Police machinery was set into motion on receipt of DD No.38A at
Police Station Subzi Mandi on November 03, 2013 at 11.15 PM informing
that a quarrel had taken place in Gali Mitra Wali, Roshanara Road, House
No.4780, near Mata ka Mandir. DD No.38A was sent to SI Manish Kumar,
PW-7 who was already in the area through Constable Rakesh PW-15 who
reached the spot and found blood in front of House No.4783, Gali
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 1 of 8
Mitranwali, Roshanara Road. The injured had been removed to Hindu Rao
Hospital. So SI Mukesh Kumar reached Hindu Rao Hospital and collected
MLC No.8626 on which the doctor endorsed „ brought dead ‟. The MLC
noted two wounds on the chest and abdomen of the deceased. Eye witness
Tarun Arya @ Ginni was found present in the hospital whose statement
Ex.PW-7/A was recorded and sent for registration of FIR.
3. Tarun Arya @ Ginni PW-1 stated that he was residing at House
No.8102, Khariya Mohalla, Roshanara Road and was selling garments. To
celebrate Diwali he along with his brother Kaushal @ Rozar‟s friend Govind
Sarin @ Shanky s/o Ramesh Sarin, r/o House No.B-200, Gali No.2, Majlis
Park, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, who was his friend also, went to the house of
Sumit s/o Ashok Kumar, r/o House No.4783, Gali Mitra Wali, Roshanara
Road, Delhi. They reached the house of Sumit at around 9.30 PM where
they drank and ate. Around 11.20 PM they heard noise in the gali of people
who were gambling. On this Sumit, Tarun and Govind Sarin came down.
Govind Sarin scolded all those people and asked them to run away from
there. On this those people abused Sumit and Shanky. After sometime
Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda s/o Chaman Lal, r/o House No.4786, Gali
Mitra Wali, Roshanara Road, Delhi suddenly came with a knife in his hand
and attacked Govind Sarin @ Shanky stating to Govind Sarin that he had
dishonoured him in the gali by making them run away and he would take his
life. Pawan gave two stab blows to Govind Sarin on his chest and stomach
whereafter Govind Sarin @ Shanky fell down in front of the gate in the gali.
Blood was oozing out from his chest. Tarun took Govind Sarin @ Shanky
to Hindu Rao Hospital in a TSR. In the process his jeans pants also got
blood stained. At the Hindu Rao Hospital doctor declared Govind Sarin @
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 2 of 8
Shanky as „ brought dead ‟. He demanded legal action against Pawan @ Ram
Sala @ Chanda for having stabbed Govind Sarin @ Shanky in his chest and
stomach by knife.
4. Pursuant to registration of the FIR statement of Sumit, PW-2, the
other eye witness, in front of whose house the entire incident took place, was
also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
5. Inspector Surender Kumar, PW-22 who took over the investigation
thereafter, got inspected the spot through Crime Team and prepared a rough
site plan. He also seized the blood stained road concrete and blood stained
jeans worn by the complainant Tarun @ Ginni vide Ex.PW-1/C. While the
investigation was going on November 04, 2013 Tarun @ Ginni pointed out
towards a person coming from eastern side as Pawan @ Ram Sala @
Chanda who stabbed Govind Sarin. Thus Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda
was apprehended. Pursuant to his arrest, Pawan pointed out towards the
place where he threw the knife and at his instance knife was recovered from
a pile of garbage.
6. Dr.Mohit Gupta, who conducted the post-mortem on the body of
Govind Sarin @ Shanky found the following external injuries:
“1) Stab wound 1.6 cm x 1 cm obliquely placed over the
front of left side of chest, 6.6 cm below left nipple, 24
cms below middle of clavicle (left), 3.4 cms away
from midclavicular line, inner edge placed 10 cms
from mid line and 125 cms above left heel. The upper
pole of the wound was blunt and lower pole of wound
was sharp. The track of the wound goes upwards and
backwards and medially, piercing the skin,
th th
subcutaneous tissues muscles through the 5 and 6
inter costal space, piercing the pericardium, the apex
of the heart and entering the cavity of the heart. The
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 3 of 8
length of the track measures approximately 7 cms.
2) The stab wound 1.7 cms x 1 cm obliquely placed over
front of left side of abdomen, 15 cms below and inner
to injury No.1, 41 cms below middle of left clavicle,
23 cms below left nipple and 108 cms above left heel.
The upper pole of the wound was blunt and lower
pole was sharp. Tailing of wound present at lower
pole. The track of the wound goes upwards,
backwards and medially, piercing the skin,
subcutaneous tissues muscles, peritoneum, greater
curvature of stomach and enters into stomach cavity.
In the stomach wall, it produced a wound of size 1.6
cms x 0.5 cm. The length of the track measures
approximately 8 cms.
3) Reddish contusion 3 cm x 3 cms present over left
parietal region, 3 cms from mid line.
7. Dr.Mohit Gupta opined the cause of death as shock and haemorrhage
due to injury caused to internal organs by forceful thrust of sharp object or
weapon. All injuries were ante mortem in nature. Injury No.1 and 2 were
caused by sharp object or weapon and were individually and collectively
sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injury No.3 could
be caused by blunt object/surface impact. Time since death was opined to
be about 12-14 hours.
8. Before the Court Tarun Arya, PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2 deposed in
sync with their statements made before the police. Considering the evidence
on record the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant as above.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that though Tarun claims
to know the deceased Shanky and had taken him to the hospital however, in
the MLC name of the patient, his parentage and address is written as
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 4 of 8
„Unknown‟. As per the father of the deceased Ramesh Sarin, PW-3, Pawan
and his son Shanky were present in the hospital. PW-3 has not deposed
about the presence of Tarun @ Ginni in the hospital. The conduct of PW-2
shows that he was not an eye witness as he neither made the PCR call nor
removed the injured to the hospital and as per his deposition he went home
to sleep and got to know about the death of Shanky on the next day at 3.00
PM. The presence of Tarun at the time of arrest is also further doubtful as
he neither signed the personal search memo nor the disclosure statement nor
the pointing out memo cum seizure memo of knife nor the sketch of the
knife by Pawan. There are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses
with regard to the recovery of knife and thus the same cannot be used as
incriminating against the appellant.
10. As noted above Tarun Arya, PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2 stood by their
version before the learned Trial Court. Tarun stated that while stabbing
Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda stated “ aaj tumne meri gali me meri bezzati
kar di, aaj main tumhe jaan se maar dunga ”. In the cross-examination
nothing material could be elicited from the two witnesses. The only
omission pointed out by the learned counsel qua Tarun Arya is that in cross-
examination Tarun could not tell as to who brought the TSR. In a panic
after stabbing, it is not necessary for the witness to remember who brought
the TSR. The version of Tarun Arya is corroborated by the version of
Sumit, PW-2 to whose house Tarun and Govind had gone.
11. No doubt Sumit PW-2 does not support the case of the prosecution
subsequent to the receiving of the injuries by Govind at the hands of Pawan
and states that after Govind fell at the spot he became nervous and due to
fear of his family members, he went to his home while Tarun tried to lift
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 5 of 8
Govind. However, as regards the incident he has fully supported the case of
the prosecution. Even in the cross-examination nothing could be elicited
contradicting the fact that Tarun and Govind had come to the house of Sumit
on the evening of Diwali at around 9.30 PM where they wined and dined till
11.30 PM, when the unfortunate incident took place. He also reiterated in
his cross-examination about 7 to 10 people making noise and playing cards
in the gali in front of his house. When all three of them, that is, Shanky,
Tarun and he went hot exchange took place between the two group. Further
that all three knew Pawan as he was residing in the same gali being
neighbour. He also reiterated Pawan exhorting and stabbing the deceased.
It is well settled that different persons react differently in a given situation
and if after the incident out of fear Sumit went to his house and did not
disclose about the incident to his family members it cannot be said to be
unnatural or that he was deposing falsely
12. Version of Tarun Arya is also corroborated by the MLC Ex.PW-20/A
which notes the deceased having been brought by his friend Ginni, also
noting his phone number as 9999950680. The MLC noting the name of the
patient, his parentage and address as unknown, is a clear case of callousness
on the part of the concerned doctor and the same cannot lead to the inference
that Tarun @ Ginni did not take Govind @ Shanky to the hospital.
13. The oral evidence of Tarun Arya, PW-1 is further corroborated by his
jeans pants having got stained with the blood of the deceased which fact is
proved by Ex.PW-22/PX according to which jeans pant of Tarun Arya was
stained with blood of human origin of „A‟ group which was that of the
deceased.
14. Vide his subsequent opinion Ex.PW-23/B Dr.Mohit Gupta also
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 6 of 8
opined that the cuts corresponding to injury No.1 on the body of deceased
were present on the shirt and baniyan and the injury Nos.1 and 2 on the body
of the deceased and cuts in the clothing could be caused by same weapon of
offence, that is, the knife recovered. He also stated that the deceased had
consumed alcohol prior to death which corroborates the statement of Tarun
Arya and Sumit that they were drinking and eating at the house of Sumit
when they heard the noise of people in the gali playing cards.
15. Ramesh Sarin, father of the deceased Govind @ Shanky deposed
about having received a call about 11.45 PM on November 03, 2013 from
Kaushal @ Rozar informing about his son having received injuries by
accused who was present in the Court whereafter he again stated that Pawan
and his son were in the hospital. He immediately rushed to the hospital
where he found his son dead. Ramesh Sarin is only a witness to identify the
dead body of the deceased and whatever information he received was on the
basis of a telephonic conversation. A perusal of his testimony clearly shows
that after having stated that he got to know that accused had stabbed his son,
he stated that Pawan was in the hospital. The later portion seems to be a
confusion which ought to have been got corrected by the learned APP in the
re-examination however, the same is not material as Ramesh Sarin is not an
eye witness of the incident and is only an eye witness to identify the body of
the deceased.
16. Merely because Tarun Arya did not sign the personal search memo,
the disclosure statement, the pointing out memo cum seizure memo of knife
and the sketch of the knife, that is, Ex.PW-7/C to Ex.PW-7/E it cannot be
said that he was not a witness to the arrest or recovery. Police witnesses had
duly identified the three memos and the arrest memo Ex.PW-1/D is also
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 7 of 8
signed by Tarun Arya @ Ginni. From the cross-examination nothing has
been elicited to show that Tarun did not witness the arrest or the recovery.
17. In view of the evidence on record we find no infirmity in the
impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence.
18. The appeal is dismissed.
19. Copy of this order be sent to Superintendent Central Jail Tihar for
updation of the Jail record.
20. TCR be returned.
(MUKTA GUPTA)
JUDGE
(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
JUDGE
APRIL 05, 2016
‘vn’
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 8 of 8
Judgment Reserved on: March 29, 2016
% Judgment Delivered on: April 05, 2016
+ CRL.A. 181/2016
PAWAN @ RAM SALA @ CHANDA ..... Appellant
Represented by: Mr.Naveen Gaur, Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT) ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP for
the State with Inspector
Surender Kumar, ATO Civil
Lines.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
1. Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda has been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 302 IPC for murdering Govind Sarin @ Shanky
vide impugned judgment dated November 24, 2015 and directed to undergo
imprisonment for life vide order on sentence dated November 30, 2015 on
the strength of the testimony of the two eye witnesses Tarun Arya @ Ginni,
PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2.
2. Police machinery was set into motion on receipt of DD No.38A at
Police Station Subzi Mandi on November 03, 2013 at 11.15 PM informing
that a quarrel had taken place in Gali Mitra Wali, Roshanara Road, House
No.4780, near Mata ka Mandir. DD No.38A was sent to SI Manish Kumar,
PW-7 who was already in the area through Constable Rakesh PW-15 who
reached the spot and found blood in front of House No.4783, Gali
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 1 of 8
Mitranwali, Roshanara Road. The injured had been removed to Hindu Rao
Hospital. So SI Mukesh Kumar reached Hindu Rao Hospital and collected
MLC No.8626 on which the doctor endorsed „ brought dead ‟. The MLC
noted two wounds on the chest and abdomen of the deceased. Eye witness
Tarun Arya @ Ginni was found present in the hospital whose statement
Ex.PW-7/A was recorded and sent for registration of FIR.
3. Tarun Arya @ Ginni PW-1 stated that he was residing at House
No.8102, Khariya Mohalla, Roshanara Road and was selling garments. To
celebrate Diwali he along with his brother Kaushal @ Rozar‟s friend Govind
Sarin @ Shanky s/o Ramesh Sarin, r/o House No.B-200, Gali No.2, Majlis
Park, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, who was his friend also, went to the house of
Sumit s/o Ashok Kumar, r/o House No.4783, Gali Mitra Wali, Roshanara
Road, Delhi. They reached the house of Sumit at around 9.30 PM where
they drank and ate. Around 11.20 PM they heard noise in the gali of people
who were gambling. On this Sumit, Tarun and Govind Sarin came down.
Govind Sarin scolded all those people and asked them to run away from
there. On this those people abused Sumit and Shanky. After sometime
Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda s/o Chaman Lal, r/o House No.4786, Gali
Mitra Wali, Roshanara Road, Delhi suddenly came with a knife in his hand
and attacked Govind Sarin @ Shanky stating to Govind Sarin that he had
dishonoured him in the gali by making them run away and he would take his
life. Pawan gave two stab blows to Govind Sarin on his chest and stomach
whereafter Govind Sarin @ Shanky fell down in front of the gate in the gali.
Blood was oozing out from his chest. Tarun took Govind Sarin @ Shanky
to Hindu Rao Hospital in a TSR. In the process his jeans pants also got
blood stained. At the Hindu Rao Hospital doctor declared Govind Sarin @
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 2 of 8
Shanky as „ brought dead ‟. He demanded legal action against Pawan @ Ram
Sala @ Chanda for having stabbed Govind Sarin @ Shanky in his chest and
stomach by knife.
4. Pursuant to registration of the FIR statement of Sumit, PW-2, the
other eye witness, in front of whose house the entire incident took place, was
also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
5. Inspector Surender Kumar, PW-22 who took over the investigation
thereafter, got inspected the spot through Crime Team and prepared a rough
site plan. He also seized the blood stained road concrete and blood stained
jeans worn by the complainant Tarun @ Ginni vide Ex.PW-1/C. While the
investigation was going on November 04, 2013 Tarun @ Ginni pointed out
towards a person coming from eastern side as Pawan @ Ram Sala @
Chanda who stabbed Govind Sarin. Thus Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda
was apprehended. Pursuant to his arrest, Pawan pointed out towards the
place where he threw the knife and at his instance knife was recovered from
a pile of garbage.
6. Dr.Mohit Gupta, who conducted the post-mortem on the body of
Govind Sarin @ Shanky found the following external injuries:
“1) Stab wound 1.6 cm x 1 cm obliquely placed over the
front of left side of chest, 6.6 cm below left nipple, 24
cms below middle of clavicle (left), 3.4 cms away
from midclavicular line, inner edge placed 10 cms
from mid line and 125 cms above left heel. The upper
pole of the wound was blunt and lower pole of wound
was sharp. The track of the wound goes upwards and
backwards and medially, piercing the skin,
th th
subcutaneous tissues muscles through the 5 and 6
inter costal space, piercing the pericardium, the apex
of the heart and entering the cavity of the heart. The
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 3 of 8
length of the track measures approximately 7 cms.
2) The stab wound 1.7 cms x 1 cm obliquely placed over
front of left side of abdomen, 15 cms below and inner
to injury No.1, 41 cms below middle of left clavicle,
23 cms below left nipple and 108 cms above left heel.
The upper pole of the wound was blunt and lower
pole was sharp. Tailing of wound present at lower
pole. The track of the wound goes upwards,
backwards and medially, piercing the skin,
subcutaneous tissues muscles, peritoneum, greater
curvature of stomach and enters into stomach cavity.
In the stomach wall, it produced a wound of size 1.6
cms x 0.5 cm. The length of the track measures
approximately 8 cms.
3) Reddish contusion 3 cm x 3 cms present over left
parietal region, 3 cms from mid line.
7. Dr.Mohit Gupta opined the cause of death as shock and haemorrhage
due to injury caused to internal organs by forceful thrust of sharp object or
weapon. All injuries were ante mortem in nature. Injury No.1 and 2 were
caused by sharp object or weapon and were individually and collectively
sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injury No.3 could
be caused by blunt object/surface impact. Time since death was opined to
be about 12-14 hours.
8. Before the Court Tarun Arya, PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2 deposed in
sync with their statements made before the police. Considering the evidence
on record the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant as above.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that though Tarun claims
to know the deceased Shanky and had taken him to the hospital however, in
the MLC name of the patient, his parentage and address is written as
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 4 of 8
„Unknown‟. As per the father of the deceased Ramesh Sarin, PW-3, Pawan
and his son Shanky were present in the hospital. PW-3 has not deposed
about the presence of Tarun @ Ginni in the hospital. The conduct of PW-2
shows that he was not an eye witness as he neither made the PCR call nor
removed the injured to the hospital and as per his deposition he went home
to sleep and got to know about the death of Shanky on the next day at 3.00
PM. The presence of Tarun at the time of arrest is also further doubtful as
he neither signed the personal search memo nor the disclosure statement nor
the pointing out memo cum seizure memo of knife nor the sketch of the
knife by Pawan. There are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses
with regard to the recovery of knife and thus the same cannot be used as
incriminating against the appellant.
10. As noted above Tarun Arya, PW-1 and Sumit, PW-2 stood by their
version before the learned Trial Court. Tarun stated that while stabbing
Pawan @ Ram Sala @ Chanda stated “ aaj tumne meri gali me meri bezzati
kar di, aaj main tumhe jaan se maar dunga ”. In the cross-examination
nothing material could be elicited from the two witnesses. The only
omission pointed out by the learned counsel qua Tarun Arya is that in cross-
examination Tarun could not tell as to who brought the TSR. In a panic
after stabbing, it is not necessary for the witness to remember who brought
the TSR. The version of Tarun Arya is corroborated by the version of
Sumit, PW-2 to whose house Tarun and Govind had gone.
11. No doubt Sumit PW-2 does not support the case of the prosecution
subsequent to the receiving of the injuries by Govind at the hands of Pawan
and states that after Govind fell at the spot he became nervous and due to
fear of his family members, he went to his home while Tarun tried to lift
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 5 of 8
Govind. However, as regards the incident he has fully supported the case of
the prosecution. Even in the cross-examination nothing could be elicited
contradicting the fact that Tarun and Govind had come to the house of Sumit
on the evening of Diwali at around 9.30 PM where they wined and dined till
11.30 PM, when the unfortunate incident took place. He also reiterated in
his cross-examination about 7 to 10 people making noise and playing cards
in the gali in front of his house. When all three of them, that is, Shanky,
Tarun and he went hot exchange took place between the two group. Further
that all three knew Pawan as he was residing in the same gali being
neighbour. He also reiterated Pawan exhorting and stabbing the deceased.
It is well settled that different persons react differently in a given situation
and if after the incident out of fear Sumit went to his house and did not
disclose about the incident to his family members it cannot be said to be
unnatural or that he was deposing falsely
12. Version of Tarun Arya is also corroborated by the MLC Ex.PW-20/A
which notes the deceased having been brought by his friend Ginni, also
noting his phone number as 9999950680. The MLC noting the name of the
patient, his parentage and address as unknown, is a clear case of callousness
on the part of the concerned doctor and the same cannot lead to the inference
that Tarun @ Ginni did not take Govind @ Shanky to the hospital.
13. The oral evidence of Tarun Arya, PW-1 is further corroborated by his
jeans pants having got stained with the blood of the deceased which fact is
proved by Ex.PW-22/PX according to which jeans pant of Tarun Arya was
stained with blood of human origin of „A‟ group which was that of the
deceased.
14. Vide his subsequent opinion Ex.PW-23/B Dr.Mohit Gupta also
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 6 of 8
opined that the cuts corresponding to injury No.1 on the body of deceased
were present on the shirt and baniyan and the injury Nos.1 and 2 on the body
of the deceased and cuts in the clothing could be caused by same weapon of
offence, that is, the knife recovered. He also stated that the deceased had
consumed alcohol prior to death which corroborates the statement of Tarun
Arya and Sumit that they were drinking and eating at the house of Sumit
when they heard the noise of people in the gali playing cards.
15. Ramesh Sarin, father of the deceased Govind @ Shanky deposed
about having received a call about 11.45 PM on November 03, 2013 from
Kaushal @ Rozar informing about his son having received injuries by
accused who was present in the Court whereafter he again stated that Pawan
and his son were in the hospital. He immediately rushed to the hospital
where he found his son dead. Ramesh Sarin is only a witness to identify the
dead body of the deceased and whatever information he received was on the
basis of a telephonic conversation. A perusal of his testimony clearly shows
that after having stated that he got to know that accused had stabbed his son,
he stated that Pawan was in the hospital. The later portion seems to be a
confusion which ought to have been got corrected by the learned APP in the
re-examination however, the same is not material as Ramesh Sarin is not an
eye witness of the incident and is only an eye witness to identify the body of
the deceased.
16. Merely because Tarun Arya did not sign the personal search memo,
the disclosure statement, the pointing out memo cum seizure memo of knife
and the sketch of the knife, that is, Ex.PW-7/C to Ex.PW-7/E it cannot be
said that he was not a witness to the arrest or recovery. Police witnesses had
duly identified the three memos and the arrest memo Ex.PW-1/D is also
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 7 of 8
signed by Tarun Arya @ Ginni. From the cross-examination nothing has
been elicited to show that Tarun did not witness the arrest or the recovery.
17. In view of the evidence on record we find no infirmity in the
impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence.
18. The appeal is dismissed.
19. Copy of this order be sent to Superintendent Central Jail Tihar for
updation of the Jail record.
20. TCR be returned.
(MUKTA GUPTA)
JUDGE
(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)
JUDGE
APRIL 05, 2016
‘vn’
CRL.A. 181/2016 Page 8 of 8