The Delhi High court acquitted a man who was convicted in the 2014 murder case. He was sentenced till his last breath in jail in 2019. The High Court granted relief giving the benefit of the doubt to the accused as the Prosecution was not able to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.
The division bench comprising Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayal acquitted appellant Deepak in the matter related to the murder of Samundar Singh.
The bench noted in the judgement that the prosecution failed to prove any motive for the alleged crime, neither regarding the transaction of the loan of Rs 1.5 lakh from the deceased to the appellant or any other reason.
The High Court also noted that there is no evidence on record to prove that the gold chain and locket indeed belonged to or were purchased by the deceased.
The wife of the deceased has not provided any details of purchase or a bill, though she simply identifies a gold chain and locket in a TIP. However she stated in her deposition that the gold chain and locket did not have any mark of identification or any photograph of the deceased or had any name engraved on it, the High Court noted in the judgement passed on January 13.
The court also said that as regards the recovery of the car of the deceased from Dimapur, Nagaland, the evidence tendered by the Prosecution cannot be relied upon.
Firstly, police officials stated that they started from Dimapur on July 20, 2014 and arrived in Delhi on July 23, 2014, the malkhana register showed that the car was deposited on July 19, 2014, which is completely contrary, the High Court noted.
It was totally impossible that a car could be driven having started on July 19, 2014 from a remote area in the North-East of Dimapur, Nagaland to arrive in Delhi the same day. The testimony of police officials itself reporting their arrival on July 23, 2014 in Delhi, the High Court said.
The bench also noted that the appellant's presence consistently at Gopal Pur, Kharkhoda, even after the date of crime, would also indicate that he was not absconding and was in fact amongst his family and relatives at his native village and went to Dimapur for four days.
Advocate Ravi Drall appearing for the appellant Deepak argued that the deceased was a notorious criminal who was wanted in various cases of murder, attempt to murder, TADA, dacoity and theft.
It was also submitted that the deceased would have had enmity against many persons and the appellant was being falsely implicated without any basis. Also, the post-mortem report was not exhibited. Despite this, it was stated that the time of death was 2-4 weeks ago, which was vague and ambiguous.
The viscera was preserved and sent for chemical examination but was never brought on record by the investigation officer.
It was also strange that the wife of the deceased never called the deceased between May 25, 2014 and June 26, 2014, a period of about one month and did not try and locate him in the native village Gopal Pur, where the appellant was also residing, the counsel argued.
It was also noted that the post-mortem report was never exhibited by the prosecution. Thus in the absence of the post-mortem report and the author thereof having been examined, nor any eyewitness deposing, that the appellant throttled the deceased, it has not been proved that the deceased died a homicidal death.
The statement of the wife of the deceased is vague and ambiguous as she did not contact her husband for one month. Her testimony regarding the inability to communicate with her husband for a long period of time is in fact extremely patchy and does not inspire confidence, the court noted.
A gangster namely Samunder Singh who was accused in TADA Act was missing from his home. A missing complaint was filed by his wife. Later on when the body of Samunder Singh was found the accused was arrested by police on the apprehension of the last seen theory.
At the instance of the accused three mobiles were allegedly recovered from his house. Further, the accused led the police to the office of a finance company, Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh from where he had allegedly taken a loan against a gold chain looted from the deceased.