19 years after FIR, Delhi court convicts man for murder

A Delhi court has convicted a man for murder more than 19 years after he killed another man using an iron rod in the Gokalpuri area of the city.

The FIR against the accused was registered on January 16, 2003, and the charge sheet was filed before a metropolitan magistrate court on April 10, 2003.

The case was put up for trial before the sessions court on May 7, 2003.

According to the prosecution, accused Vipul assaulted Sushil with an iron rod on January 12, 2003. Four days later, Sushil died due to head injuries.

An FIR was then registered against Vipul and others at Gokalpuri police station.

Counsel for the accused said that the injuries were not grave in nature. Also, Vipul did not have a “strong motive” and the versions of prosecution witnesses were doubtful.

There were also other inconsistencies, including a delay in the filing of FIR, the counsel added.

However, Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala did not find any contradiction in the statement made by the prosecution witness regarding the details of the incident.

Police might have waited for opinion on injury before registering the FIR or there was “reluctance to register FIR and hush up the matter,” the judge said, adding that in any case, the complainant could not be held responsible for inaction of police.

The judge also agreed that the injuries were sustained because of assault, and said, “Hence, I have no hesitation to conclude that it was a case of culpable homicide of Sushil with such knowledge that the injury being inflicted could have caused his death in normal circumstances."

Rejecting the argument that it was a spur-of-the-moment incident, the judge said it was an incident for which the accused had come well prepared.

“He (the accused) used a deadly weapon (iron rod) and great force to hit one of the most sensitive parts of the human body. Therefore it cannot be said that it is a case of a single blow out of some quarrel...,” the judgment dated July 26, 2022 said.

Even if the accused did not have the intention of murdering Sushil, he committed culpable homicide with the intention of causing severe head injury, the judge said.

The accused knew that this injury could result in the death of Sushil, the judge added.

The judge then convicted the accused for committing the offence of murder.

Four others were convicted under section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) read with section 34 (common intention) of the IPC.