- (1.) Appellant, namely, Vinod @ Raje, has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 05.03.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, vide which the appellant was convicted under Section 304 (Part-I), 307 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 304 (Part-I) IPC, sentenced to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 307 IPC and to further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The brief facts of the case in hand, as noticed by the learned trial Court are that, on 20.08.2009 at about 04.30 p.m., the complainant, namely, Govind (PW-3), aged about 26 years, Salesman in Vodafone Company, Jhajjar, was collecting payments of Vodafone coupons from shopkeepers at Rewari Road, Silani Gate, Jhajjar. After collecting the amount from M/s. Yadav Communication when he reached near Babloo Wali Piaoo on his motorcycle, all of sudden two young boys came on a motorcycle and got stopped his motorcycle. Karambir kept sitting on the motorcycle, whereas, accused-Vinod asked the complainant on gun-point, to hand over the bag containing Rs. 40,000/- in cash and a few coupons of Vodafone. Complainant tried to resist them. Accused Vinod then fired a gun shot in the air and second on the floor, pellets of which struck on the left knee of the complainant. Third gun-shot struck against right wrist of the complainant whereas forth gun-shot struck against the belt of the bag as a result of which it broke down. Accused Vinod snatched the bag and both the assailants then ran away on their bike, but the bike slipped after covering a distance of about two acres. Accused Vinod then gave a gun-blow to his own companion Karambir and ran away from the spot carrying the snatched bag. Public gathered at the spot and shifted the complainant Govind as well as assailant Karambir to General Hospital, Jhajjar, from where they were referred to PGIMS, Rohtak. Karambir succumbed to his injuries.
(2.) After completion of investigation, the challan against the accused-appellant was presented before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar. Since, the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore, the case was committed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar, to the Court of learned Sessions Judge for trial vide order dated 04.03.2010. The charge was framed against the accused-appellant vide order dated 28.04.2010, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:-- "PW1, Dharmender is the cousin of deceased Karambir and had identified the dead body at the time of postmortem examination. He deposed accordingly, but failed to support his previous statement (Ex. P-1) made to the police, wherein he had disclosed the fact that he had seen all the three accused with Karambir on the date of occurrence and that Karambir was having friendly relations with accused Satpal of his village and with accused Vinod of Gurgaon who used to visit Karambir and Satpal in the past. PW-2, Jai Karan, is another cousin of Karambir. This witness also turned hostile and made an identical deposition that of PW-1. PW-3, Govind, is the complainant and injured eyewitness. He proved his statement to the police (Ex. PW-3/A) on the basis of which FIR in the present case was registered. He also identified accused-Vinod as the assailant who caused two gun-shot injuries to him and subsequently murdered his own companion Karambir. PW-3, however, has taken a twisted stand in cross-examination by asserting that accused present in Court was not amongst the assailants. PW-4, Parveen Kumar is the distributor of Vodafone and the employer of the complainant, Govind and has duly proved the said relationship. PW-5, Sukhbir Singh, had brought the medical record regarding complainant Govind from PGIMS, Rohtak, and tendered the same in evidence. As such, he was simply a witness of record and was, therefore, examined without oath. PW-6, HC Jai Chand, Draftsman, working in the office of Superintendent of Police, Jhajjar. He prepared scaled site plan (Ex. PW-6/A) of the spot. PW-7, ASI Surender is the official photographer who had taken four photographs of the place of occurrence which he tendered in evidence as Ex. PW-7/A to Ex. PW-7/D alongwith their negative Ex. PW-7/E to Ex. PW-7/H. PW-8, Dr. Neera Ahuja, Medical Officer, PGIMS, Rohtak. He had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Karambir and tendered his affidavit (Ex. PW-8/A) regarding his observations given in the MLR. PW-9, ASI Aas Mohammad had joined the investigation on 21.08.2009, with the Investigating Officer and entire spot investigation was carried out in his presence, which he duly proved in the Court. PW-10, SI Krishan Kumar, had recorded FIR (Ex. PW-10/B) of the case on receiving the police rukka (Ex. PW-10/A). He put his endorsement (Ex. PW-10/C) over the rukka and sent the same back to the Investigating Officer. PW-11, SI Braham Parkash, had arrested accused Satpal on 25.08.2009, when accused-Satpal was found carrying country-made pistol and two cartridges without licence. A separate case under Section 25 of the Arms Act was registered against the accused-Satpal vide FIR No. 452 dated 25.08.2009 and he recorded the disclosure statement (Ex. PW-11/A) of the accused in the said case wherein accused also disclosed his involvement in the present case. PW-12, Satbir Singh is Clerk in the office of District Magistrate, Jhajjar. He proved sanction order (Ex. PW-12/A) passed by the then, District Magistrate, who signatures, he identified before the Court. PW-13, ASI Dalbir Singh, joined the investigation on 20.08.2009 and after postmortem parcels were handed over to him by the doctor, which he handed over to the Investigating Officer through recovery memo Ex. PW-13/A. PW-14, HC Ram Kishan, was with the Investigating Officer when accused Vinod suffered disclosure statement on 18.10.2009 and in furtherance thereof demarcated the place of occurrence upon which Investigating Officer prepared demarcation over the same as an attesting witness. He also carried sealed parcels to FSL on 31.08.2009. PW-15, Dr. Hemant Jain, treating doctor of complainant Govind proved MLR (Ex. PW-15/A) and medical rukka (Ex. PW-15/B). PW-16, HC Ramesh Chander, carried sealed parcel to FSL, Madhuban on 16.11.2009 and tendered in evidence his affidavit (Ex. P-16) regarding safe and sound custody of the parcels. He was inadvertently again examined as PW-19 of the same fact. PW-17, ASI Kuldeep Singh was the MHC on duty on 20.08.2009 and case property remained in his safe and sound custody at police malkhana. PW-18, EHC Narender, carried special report/FIR to Illaqa Magistrate and other senior police officers. PW-19, HC Ramesh Chander was inadvertently again summoned and recorded whereas his deposition was already recorded as PW-16. PW-20, SI Krishan (Retd.) was the Investigating Officer of the case from 03.10.2009 to 26.10.2009 and he proved the investigation carried out by him. PW-21, SI Dharmender was the first Investigating Officer and carried out the investigation from 20.08.2009 to 26.08.2009 and proved the same. PW-22, SI Rajinder Singh (Retd.) remained as Investigating Officer at CIA Staff, Sukhrali, Gurgaon. He arrested the accused-Vinod on 19.09.2009 and recorded the disclosure statement (Mark-C) wherein accused Vinod admitted his involvement in the present case as well as few other crimes.";