In this criminal appeal, the High Court reduced the appellants' sentences for culpable homicide to the period already undergone but upheld convictions and fines.
Sentences for Sections 304/34 IPC reduced to period undergone; appellants released. Fines imposed with default imprisonment; other sections dismissed as sentences undergone.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NEERAJ @ RINKLE & ANR. ..... Appellants Represented by: Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate. versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with SI Ved Pal Sharma, PS Mangolpuri.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 1 of 10
Aslam Khan (PW-2). Weapon of offence i.e. the danda has not been recovered in the present case. Even as per the case of the prosecution only single danda blow was inflicted. The MLC of the deceased who died due to septicemia has not been proved. He further urges that appellant No.2 Surender has not been named in the FIR, no TIP was conducted, hence the identification is required to be disbelieved. Even accepting the allegations by the prosecution witnesses Idrisha categorically stated that the role assigned to Surender was of catching hold. Surender being six feet tall whereas the deceased was five feet it was impossible for Neeraj @ Rinkle to have inflicted danda blow on the parietal region of the deceased. Even otherwise the case of the prosecution at best is of giving the danda blow pursuant to a minor scuffle which could not be said to be with an intention to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The conviction of the appellants be thus converted to Section 325 IPC and they be released on the period undergone.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 2 of 10
along with Ct. Rajkumar (PW-5) went to SGM Hospital and collected the MLC of injured Mujjafar. Injured Mujjafar was later moved to LNJP Hospital. Enquiries were made to trace Idrisha, mother of Mujjafar who had brought him to SGM Hospital but she could not be found.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 3 of 10
the statement of Anis vide Ex.PW-3/A and Mohd. Akil vide Ex.PW-4/A regarding identification of the dead body. He also prepared the brief facts vide Ex.PW-19/C. During the course of investigation, site plan (Ex.PW18/C) was prepared with marginal notes on the pointing out of Idrisha.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 4 of 10
the head of her son. Her son remained admitted in unconscious state and died after about a month. She further stated that when she was coming to her house on 12th February, 2010, both the appellants were standing and stated that it seems that her son has not died and that they have inflicted danda blows with the intention to commit murder and in case his life is saved, they would kill him later. During her cross-examination, she stated that none except her came out on hearing the abuses. She denied the suggestion that none of the appellants were giving any abuses. During her further examination, she stated that when she tried to save her son, Neeraj also gave a danda blow on her head and back and also pushed her due to which she fell down. In the meantime, Mujjafar had also fallen down on the ground. She rose and raised alarm to save her son. In the meantime, brotherin-law of Mujjafar namely Aslam came to their house to meet his sister. On seeing the situation, he also tried to save them but the appellants showed him the danda and he went back due to fear.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 5 of 10
moved backward because of fear. Mujjaffar underwent the treatment for about one month and thereafter, expired.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 6 of 10
1. No external injuries were present over the body.
2. On internal examination, both the lungs were congested and oedematous and patch consolidation present at places on cut section, frothy fluid mixed with pus oozing out. Both lungs weighed 390 gms and 380gms right and left respectively.
3. Heart shows no abnormality.
4. All internal organs were congested.
5. Spinal Column also showed no abnormality.
6. On head examination, scalp was NAD (Nothing abnormal detected).
7. On skull examination, surgical removal of 13 cm X 9 cm bone on left parito-temporal region present.
8. Brain Examination showed contused neuroses infected area over left partial part of cerebral hemisphere. Patchy areas of pus present over parenchyma of brain at places and whole brain is congested. Weight of brain was 1250 gms.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 7 of 10
He identified the handwriting and the signatures of Dr. Vipin.
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 8 of 10
injury to the deceased was not caused with intention to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Contention of learned counsel for the appellants that Surender being six feet tall and the deceased being five feet is based on no evidence as no witness has been confronted with this fact. No doubt the test identification parade of Surender was not conducted however, Idrisha in her statement categorically stated that she could identify the second boy if brought before her and soon after the arrest Idrisha saw Surender and identified him to be the person accompanying Neeraj @ Rinkle. Test identification parade being only an aid in investigation nothing has been brought on record in cross-examination to suggest that Idrisha wrongly identified Surender as the person accompanying Neeraj @ Rinkle. 19. In view of the discussion aforesaid, this Court finds no error in the impugned judgment dated 17th January, 2017 convicting the appellants for offence punishable under Sections 304/34 IPC. 20. Appellants have been awarded sentence of imprisonment for a period of 14 years and to pay a fine of ₹30,000/- each in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for offence punishable under Sections 304/34 IPC. Sentence imposed on the appellants is excessive, considering that the weapon of offence used is only a danda and as per the MLC one single blow on the left parietal region was inflicted. 21. As per the nominal roll the appellant Neeraj @ Rinkle has undergone sentence of imprisonment for a period of eight years and five months approximately. His sentence under Section 304/34 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the fine amount imposed of ₹30,000/would be paid by Neeraj @ Rinkle in default whereof he would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Role assigned to appellant
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 9 of 10
Surender @ Goldy is of catching hold and as per the nominal roll he has undergone sentence of imprisonment for a period of five years and seven months. The sentence under Section 304/34 is modified to the period undergone. The fine of ₹30,000/- would be paid by appellant Surender @ Goldy in default whereof he would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The sentence in respect of offence punishable under Sections 341/34 IPC and 506/34 IPC have already been undergone by the two appellants and the fine for offence punishable under Section 506/34 is waived of.
Crl. M.B. No.536/2018 (suspension of sentence)
Since judgment has been rendered in appeal, appellants have been released on the period already undergone, application seeking suspension of sentence is dismissed as infructuous.
(MUKTA GUPTA) JUDGE
JULY 11, 2018 ‘vn’
CRL.A. 199/2017
Page 10 of 10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction under Section 304 IPC should be maintained given the nature of injuries and lack of recovered weapon.
Whether the imposed sentence of fourteen years is excessive and requires modification.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Neeraj @ Rinkle
Surender Singh @ Goldy @ Goly
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
Mukta Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
