10 years on, Delhi court acquits 3 men in 2015 Janakpuri murder case

New Delhi, Mar 2 (PTI) A Delhi court has acquitted three men accused of killing a man under the Janakpuri District Centre flyover in 2015, giving them the benefit of the doubt after finding material inconsistencies in the prosecution's case.

Additional Sessions Judge Pooja Talwar was hearing a case filed by complainant Kuldeep Singh against Deepak Nirman, Mohammad Naeem and Sharif Saifi, who were charged under sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting while armed with a deadly weapon) and 302 (murder), read with section 149 (vicarious liability in unlawful assembly), of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

"The prosecution has not been able to establish a chain of evidence so complete as to establish that it was only the accused persons and nobody else who could have murdered the victim," the court said in its order dated February 23.

On the intervening night of April 1 and 2, 2015, Surender Singh was allegedly beaten up by five to six people, following a scuffle earlier in the night. He was repeatedly stabbed by one child in conflict with law (CCL).

Singh was taken to the Deen Dayal Upadhyay (DDU) Hospital and later, referred to the Lok Nayak Hospital (LNJP), where he succumbed to his injuries. The post-mortem report said the cause of death was haemorrhagic shock due to a stab injury.

During the trial, the prosecution examined 25 witnesses, including two purported eyewitnesses -- Kuldeep Singh and Gurpreet Singh.

Kuldeep Singh, who claimed to have chased and apprehended one of the assailants, later found to be a CCL, had identified two accused in the court but not supported the prosecution on several material particulars and denied certain portions of his earlier statement to police. He had also expressed uncertainty regarding Naeem's role.

Gurpreet Singh, a friend of the deceased who was present at the spot at the time of the incident, primarily attributed the stabbing to a juvenile co-accused and stated that he could not properly see the other assailants. When the additional public prosecutor pointed towards Nirman, Naeem and Saifi in the court, he said, "They are not the same persons who were involved in the aforesaid incident." "In case the testimony of Gurpreet is discerned, his conduct appears to be unusual as instead of saving his friend, deceased Surender Singh, he left the spot. Thereafter, instead of calling police at the first available opportunity, he chose to reach the cousin of the deceased," the court said as it termed his testimony "highly unreliable".

The court said Kuldeep Singh's testimony, identifying two of the accused, cannot form the sole basis for conviction, adding that other evidence must corroborate his claims.

The prosecution had said the murder weapon, a knife smeared with blood, was recovered at the instance of Nirman. However, all three police witnesses gave different and contradictory testimonies, making the alleged recovery doubtful, the court said.

Furthermore, as regards the recovery of a motorcycle near the scene of crime that according to the prosecution belonged to the accused, no witness was brought on record to prove in whose name it was registered. Kuldeep Singh had also denied the information stated in the seizure memo that the vehicle was seized in his presence.

The judge said the alleged recoveries did "not inspire the confidence of this court".

While Forensic Sciences Laboratory (FSL) reports confirmed that the blood on the knife matched with that of the deceased, the court said, "Unless recovery itself is proved beyond reasonable doubt, the report alone would be inconsequential." As regards trying the accused for the offence of unlawful assembly and rioting, the court noted that none of the witnesses could identify at least five accused, failing to meet the prime requirement to constitute an unlawful assembly. PTI MDB RC