Ravi Kumar vs State Of Haryana

-1-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
502
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
Date of Decision: 28.10.2026
Ravi Kumar
..... Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana
.......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PUJA CHOPRA
*
Present: Mr. Randeep Singh Dhull, Advocate
for the appellant.
Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, DAG, Haryana.
*

RAJESH BHARDWAJ J.
1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant praying for
setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 16.02.2017 and order of
sentence dated 17.02.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against Women),
Kurukshetra, whereby the appellant held guilty for the offence punishable
under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for life along with the fine.
FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE
2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the present case
bearing FIR No.824, dated 19.10.2015, under Section 302 of IPC, was got
registered against the appellant on the statement of complainant, namely,
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-2-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
Krishan Kumar. It was alleged by the complainant that he was working as
XEN, Canal Department, Narwana. His real sister, namely, Kavita, whose
age is about 40 years, resides along with her family at House No.1436,
Azad Nagar, Kurukshetra. It was alleged that on 19.10.2015, at about
01:00 P.M., the accused, namely, Ravi Kumar, came to the house of his
sister, namely, Kavita and killed her by cutting her throat with big knife
and also gave knife blows on her left hand. It was alleged that after
murdering her sister, namely, Kavita, the accused tried to escape and threw
the knife outside the house, however, he was caught hold by the
neighbours, namely, Suresh Kumar, Naresh Kumar and Mukesh Kumar.
Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the accused. On the
basis of the same, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the
investigation commenced. During the investigation, site plan was prepared
and the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were
recorded. Postmortem of the dead body got conducted. Thereafter, the
accused-appellant was arrested. On completion of the investigation, the
challan against the accused-appellant was prepared and presented before
the Court of learned Area Magistrate and thereafter, the case was
committed to the Court of Sessions. Prima facie , case under Section 302 of
IPC was made out against the accused-appellant and, thus, the charge was
framed against him, accordingly. Thereafter, on the conclusion of the trial,
the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous
Crimes Against Women), Kurukshetra, after hearing both the sides,
convicted the accused vide impugned judgment dated 16.02.2017 and the
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-3-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along
with the fine vide order dated 17.02.2017. Hence, being aggrieved, the
appellant, i.e. the accused has approached this Court by way of filing the
present appeal.
SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
APPELLANT
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended
that the learned trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant by passing
the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. He has
submitted that the appellant has been falsely and frivolously implicated in
the present case. He has submitted that the investigating agencies have
falsely planted the case upon the appellant as factually, it was a blind
murder. He has submitted that the deceased, namely, Kavita, was murdered
by some unknown person for which the appellant has been implicated in a
premeditated manner by falsely planting the recoveries upon him. He has
submitted that the complainant of the case, namely, Krishan Kumar, is not
even an eye-witness and his evidence is totally a hearsay evidence. He has
submitted that the eye-witness, namely, Vidya Devi, who has been
produced by the prosecution as PW-2, is not the actual eye-witness and is
only a planted eye-witness, rather, she has been introduced by the
prosecution after the commission of the offence. He has submitted that there
are material contradictions in the deposition of the witnesses, which renders
her testimony to be inadmissible as well as there is an unexplained delay in
recording her statement. He has further contended that even the witness,
namely, Mukesh Kumar, who was examined as PW-5 as a spot witness,
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-4-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
was introduced later on. He has submitted that the presence of PW-5
(Mukesh Kumar), at the relevant time, is totally unnatural. He has further
contended that the case of the prosecution is based on the presumptions
and assumptions, however, the learned trial Court has miserably failed to
appreciate the evidences on the record and thus, has drawn the wrong
conclusion in convicting the appellant. It is, therefore, contended that the
findings and observations recorded by the learned trial Court are contrary
to the evidence available on the record and the settled legal position
rendering the impugned judgment of conviction dated 16.02.2017 and
order of sentence dated 17.02.2017 unsustainable and, thus, the same may
kindly be set aside and the accused-appellant be acquitted for the offences
as per the charges framed against him.
SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE STATE
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the
appellant. She has submitted that the case of the prosecution is based on
the clinching evidences. She has submitted that the occurrence in the
present case has taken place on 19.10.2015, at about 01:00 P.M. in the
house of the deceased, namely, Kavita. She has submitted that the
deceased-Kavita was alone at her home when the appellant came there
duly armed with a knife. She has submitted that there was a dispute
between the appellant and the deceased on account of the transaction of the
money. She has submitted that on account of the dispute, the appellant in a
premeditated manner came to the house of the deceased and finding her
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-5-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
alone, had caused serious injuries to Kavita, however, she died on the spot.
She has submitted that on hearing the cries of deceased-Kavita, Vidya
Devi (PW-2), who was her immediate neighbour, rushed to the spot. She
saw the accused-appellant causing knife injuries to the deceased. She has
submitted that Vidya Devi tried to intervene, however the appellant pushed
her and on account of which, she suffered the injuries. She has submitted
that Vidya Devi has been examined by the prosecution as PW-2 and she
has duly supported the case of the prosecution. She has submitted that
there are no material contradictions in her deposition and her presence was
totally natural at the time of the occurrence as she is the immediate
neighbour of the deceased. She has submitted that Vidya Devi (PW-2)
suffered the injuries as well, which are duly corroborated by the medical
record. She has submitted that Vidya Devi was treated by Dr. J. P. Bharal,
J. P. Hospital, Kurukshetra, who was examined as PW-18 and he has duly
proved the treatment given to Vidya Devi at that time which she suffered
at the hand of the appellant. She has further submitted that on causing the
injuries, the appellant tried to escape from the place of occurrence and one
Mukesh, who was passing from there, on seeing the appellant running,
caught hold of him. She has submitted that the clothes of the appellant
were blood stained. She has submitted that it was Mukesh Kumar, who
after catching hold the appellant, informed the police and handed over the
custody of the appellant to the police on its arrival. She has submitted that
Mukesh Kumar has been examined by the prosecution as PW-5 and he
duly supported the case of the prosecution. Mukesh Kumar has also
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-6-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
supported the recovery of weapon of offence, i.e. knife, which was effected
on the basis of the disclosure statement of the appellant. She has submitted
that the postmortem of the dead body of the deceased-Kavita was
conducted and the ocular version was duly medically corroborated. She
has submitted that as per the PMR (Exhibit P-36), the cause of death was
opined to be hemorrhagic shock due to the injuries caused to the deceased
on her vital parts of the body. She has further submitted that the motive for
the occurrence was the money dispute between the deceased and the
appellant, as the appellant had borrowed Rs.20,000/- from the deceased
and on her asking to return the money, the appellant had committed her
murder. She has submitted that the investigating agencies have collected
the call detail records (CDR), which was being used by the appellant and
the same has been proved by the prosecution. The appellant had sent the
messages on the phone of the deceased, which were exhibited as P-30 to P-
32 and the same proves the transaction of the money between the appellant
and the deceased. She has, thus, submitted that the prosecution has
successfully proved its case beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. She
has, thus, contended that the appellant has committed a heinous offence
and, thus, the conclusion arrived by the learned trial Court suffers from no
illegality and the appeal, being devoid of any merit, deserves to be
dismissed.
ANALYSIS & FINDINGS OF THE COURT
5. The Court has heard learned counsel for both the sides and re-
appreciated the record with their able assistance.
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-7-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the
record, it is deciphered from the evidence on the record that the occurrence
in the present case has taken place on 19.10.2015 at about 01:00 P.M. at
the house of the deceased-Kavita, when she was alone at her house. The
FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of the complainant,
namely, Krishan Kumar, who has been examined as PW-1. The statement
of the complainant was recorded on 19.10.2015 at 03:50 P.M. and
thereafter, the FIR was registered at 04:20 P.M., thus, the registration of
the FIR is prompt and there is no delay in registration of the same. The
deceased-Kavita was shifted to LNJP Hospital. The Doctor sent the
medical ruqa (Exhibit P-49), wherein it was mentioned that the patient
Kavita, wife of Karam Chand, was brought dead to LNJP Hospital on
19.10.2015 at 01:30 P.M. On the basis of the medical ruqa , the police
arrived and the investigation proceeded. The postmortem of the dead body
was conducted. On presentation of the challan, the charges were framed
and the trial commenced. The prosecution produced the evidences in the
form of witnesses, FSL report, call details, etc. The material witnesses
produced by the prosecution are PW-2 (Vidya Devi), who was the eye-
witness, PW-5 (Mukesh Kumar), who was the spot witness, etc. PW-2
(Vidya Devi) is the eye-witness of the occurrence, who was the neighbour
of the deceased and on hearing the cries of the deceased, she rushed to the
spot and saw the appellant causing injuries to the deceased. On the
intervention, she was also pushed by the appellant and she suffered the
injuries. PW-5 (Vidya Devi) was treated by Dr. J. P. Bharal, who was
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-8-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
examined as PW-18 and has proved the injuries suffered by this eye-
witness, namely, Vidya Devi. PW-5 (Mukesh Kumar), while he was
passing by, saw the appellant trying to escape in the public from the house
of the deceased and caught hold of him. Clothes of the appellant were
blood stained. On informing the police, custody of the appellant was
handed over to the police by PW-5 (Mukesh Kumar). On the disclosure
statement of the appellant, weapon of offence, i.e. knife (Exhibit P-18) was
recovered. The investigating agencies carried out the inquest report.
Various articles were recovered and sent to the FSL. As per the FSL report
(Exhibit P-22), the articles were found to be stained with blood. The blood
group on the shirt of the appellant was also established and was found to
be of blood group ‘O’. The prosecution also produced the call details of
the phone of the appellant. The messages sent by the appellant from his
phone to the deceased were also exhibited as Exhibits P-30 to P-32,
wherein he had written that he could not arrange to pay back the money.
The motive, thus, is also proved by the prosecution by producing the
cogent evidences. Dr. Rupinder Saini (PW-13) conducted the postmortem
of the deceased. The ocular version of the prosecution is medically
corroborated. The injuries suffered to the deceased were found to be
caused by the weapon of offence, i.e. knife. The cause of death was opined
to be hemorrhagic shock and injury to the vital organ, i.e. lung, which is
ante-mortem in nature.
7. On the re-appreciation of the evidences, the Court finds that
there are no material contradictions in the deposition of the witnesses,
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-9-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
which can render the case of the prosecution to be doubtful. Thus, there is
sufficient material on record to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond the
reasonable doubt.
8. The learned trial Court, after careful and cautious scrutiny of
the evidence, comes to the conclusion that the prosecution by way of
leading cogent and convincing evidence on record has proved the guilt of
the appellant, and, thus, has rightly convicted the appellant.
9. Weighing the facts and circumstances of the present case on
the anvil of law settled, this Court finds no perversity in the findings
arrived by the learned trial Court. Therefore, the view taken by learned
trial Court cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the evidence
available on record. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is
based on proper appreciation of evidence and does not call for any
interference by this Court.
10. Reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Bhagwan Jagannath Markad and others vs. State of
Maharashtra, AIR 2016 SC (Criminal) 1461 , wherein it has been
observed as under:-
“19. While appreciating the evidence of a witness, the court
has to assess whether read as a whole, it is truthful. In doing
so, the court has to keep in mind the deficiencies, drawbacks
and infirmities to find out whether such discrepancies shake
the truthfulness. Some discrepancies not touching the core of
the case are not enough to reject the evidence as a whole. No
true witness can escape from giving some discrepant details.
Only when discrepancies are so incompatible as to affect the
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-10-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
credibility of the version of a witness, the court may reject the
evidence. Section 155 of the Evidence Act enables the doubt
to impeach the credibility of the witness by proof of former
inconsistent statement. Section 145 of the Evidence Act lays
down the procedure for contradicting a witness by drawing his
attention to the part of the previous statement which is to be
used for contradiction. The former statement should have the
effect of discrediting the present statement but merely because
the latter statement is at variance to the former to some extent,
it is not enough to be treated as a contradiction. It is not every
discrepancy which affects creditworthiness and
trustworthiness of a witness. There may at times be
exaggeration or embellishment not affecting credibility. The
court has to sift the chaff from the grain and find out the truth.
A statement may be partly rejected or partly accepted[18].
Want of independent witnesses or unusual behavior of
witnesses of a crime is not enough to reject evidence. A
witness being a close relative is not enough to reject his
testimony if it is otherwise credible. A relation may not
conceal the actual culprit. The evidence may be closely
scrutinized to assess whether an innocent person is falsely
implicated. Mechanical rejection of evidence even of a
‘partisan’ or ‘interested’ witness may lead to failure of justice.
It is well known that principle “falsus in uno, falsus in
omnibus” has no general acceptability[19]. On the same
evidence, some accused persons may be acquitted while others
may be convicted, depending upon the nature of the offence.
The court can differentiate the accused who is acquitted from
those who are convicted. A witness may be untruthful in some
aspects but the other part of the evidence may be worthy of
acceptance. Discrepancies may arise due to error of
observations, loss of memory due to lapse of time, mental
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-11-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
disposition such as shock at the time of occurrence and as
such the normal discrepancy does not affect the credibility of
a witness.
11. Further dealing with the same issue involved in the present
case, Hon’ble Supreme Court in Baban Shankar Daphal and others vs.
The State of Maharashtra, passed in Criminal Appeal No.1675 of 2015
on 22.01.2025, held as under:-
“32. It has been consistently laid down by this court that once
there is a version of eyewitness and the same inspires
confidence of the court it will be sufficient to prove the guilt
of the accused. A profitable reference can be made to the
decision of this Court in the case of Pruthviraj Jayantibhai
Vanol vs. Diensh Dayabhi Vala and Ors , wherein it was laid
down that:
“17. Ocular evidence is considered the best evidence
unless there are reasons to doubt it. The evidence of
PW-2 and PW-10 is unimpeachable. It is only in a case
where there is a gross contradiction between medical
evidence and oral evidence, and the medical evidence
makes the ocular testimony improbable and rules out all
possibility of ocular evidence being true, the ocular
evidence may be disbelieved.” (Emphasis supplied)
33. Hence, a conviction can be based upon the version put forth
by the eyewitness and the medical evidence must be considered
only for the purpose of corroboration of the ocular evidence.”
12. Hence, the impugned judgment of conviction dated
16.02.2017 and order of sentence dated 17.02.2017 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against
Women), Kurukshetra, stands upheld. Therefore, the view taken by learned
trial Court cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the evidence
available on record. The impugned judgment of conviction is based on
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

-12-
CRA-D No.380-DB of 2017
proper appreciation of evidence and does not call for any interference by
this Court. Consequently, the appeal against c onviction filed by the
appellant , being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. Appellant is
directed to surrender before the Jail Authorities forthwith and undergo the
rest of the sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court.
13. Respondent-State is directed to take appropriate action against
the appellant and take him into custody forthwith, as per the law and
produced in the Court and proceed in accordance with law.
(RAJESH BHARDWAJ)
JUDGE
(PUJA CHOPRA)
JUDGE
28.10.2026
rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
RITTU
2026.11.03 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document