- (1.) The petitioner is one of the accused in case crime No. 205 of 1998 under S. 302/120-B I.P.C., P.S. M.M. Gate, District Agra. In the said case, police after investigation has laid chargesheet against him and four others. By filing the present case, he has prayed for quashing of the chargesheet in exercise of power under S. 482 Cr. P. C.
(2.) One Ved Prakash Sharma lodged FIR alleging that on 25-11-1995 at about 7.20 P.M. while he was sitting in the office of his brother Hari Ram Sharma (hereinafter referred to the deceased"), four unknown persons being armed arrived there and indiscriminately fired at the deceased, as a result he dropped down there. When many persons from the nearby came on the spot the criminals made good their escape. It is stated that since the informant and others had seen the culprits with the help of electric light, they could be able to identify them. The persons present and the informant removed the deceased to the hospital where he was declared brought dead. The case of the petitioner is that neither he nor other accused persons have been named as the culprits in the FIR to have taken part in the alleged incident. So far he is concerned, police laid chargesheet against him under S. 120-B I.P.C. alleging that he hatched a conspiracy to eliminate the deceased and arranged Raju alias Raj Kumar Bedia, a contract killer and committed his murder.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that no cogent and convincing material could be collected during investigation that the petitioner had conspired with other accused persons to kill the deceased and with that and in view, arranged the contract killer and did away with the deceased. The investigating officer arraigned him as accused merely basing on the confessional statement of the co-accused namely, Raju Bedia who allegedly confessed before him that he committed murder of the deceased at the behest of the petitioner and others. It is submitted that in view of the bar created by S. 25 of the Evidence Act, the alleged confessional statement of accused Raju Bedia cannot be proved as evidence either against him or any other accused. The only confessional statement which can be made use of as a piece of evidence by the prosecution against co-accused is provided in S. 30 of the said Act. But judicial opinion is unanimous that basing on such statement, finding of guilt cannot be recorded against co-accused since it is not substantive evidence. It can only be used as a corroboration to land assurance to the proved circumstances. In the case in hand, urged the counsel, except the confessional statement of the co-accused as aforesaid, no other evidence could be collected during investigation that the petitioner had conspired to kill the deceased and in order to put the same into action, arranged a contract killer and caused his death.;