Commissioner to Take Appropriate Action Against Police Official’s Lackadaisical Approach: Delhi High Court

Must Read

Madras HC Reaffirms Trial Court’s Decree in Case of Thimmaraya & Ors. V. Gowrammal

A Civil Revision Petition was filed by three petitioners against the dismissal of their application on the file of...

Delhi High Court Disposes Ashok Arora’s Appeal Against Suspension From Supreme Court Bar Association

In the present Petition, Senior Advocate Ashok Arora challenged an Order passed by a Single Judge bench. The Order...

Allahabad High Court Dismisses Application To Quash Prima Facie Allegations of Criminal Intimidation and Outraging Modesty

Allahabad High Court, on 17th November 2020, dismissed an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and refused to...

Delhi High Court Prohibits Gathering in Public Places To Celebrate Chhat Puja

The Order had come in a Writ Petition moved by Shri Durga Jan Seva Trust. The Petition sought to...

Bombay High Court Directs State To Pass Tribe Claim Within Two Weeks, Refuses To Intervene on Merits of Claim Itself

The Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S.S. Shinde and Madhav Jayajirao Jamdar passed an order...

Kerala High Court Dismisses Petition by Allocating Respondent To Vacancy in IFS Cadre

On 16th November 2020, the Division Bench at Kerala High Court, consisting of Honourable Justice A.M. Shaffique and Honourable...

Follow us

The Order had come in a Criminal application moved by Mustakeem and Arshad. They have been convicted for an offence under section 302 of IPC by Trial Court on 27.02.2018.

Facts of the Case

The Appellant, Mustakeem has been sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10,000. He has been convicted for the offence of Murder under section 302 of IPC and section 25 of Arms act. Further, Appellant no. 2 Arshad has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence Under section 392 and 34 of IPC. In the present application, the Appellants assert that they have been falsely implicated in the case. Furthermore, there was not even a speck of evidence against them. The Appellant also alleged that one eye witness named Kuldeep Singh (Constable) was a “Planted Witness”.

Arguments Before Court

Mr. Bipin Kumar appeared for Mustakeem. He vehemently argued that the Trial Court’s reliance on the testimony of Kuldeep Singh is wholly untenable. Mr.Kumar further argued that the recoveries effected from the Appellant are planted. And no public person was joined at the time of recovery from the Appellant.

Mr.R.S.P. Bhatti appeared for Arshad. He urged that the Appellant has been falsely implicated. And there is not even an iota of evidence against the Appellant except his disclosure statement which is not accepted in evidence.

Ld. APP Mr. Ashish Dutta appeared for the State. He urges that the recovery of the stolen property has been affected by the Appellants after the commission of the crime. And the Ld. Trial Court has rightly applied Section 114 (a) of the Evidence Act in concluding guilt. Mr.Dutta further states that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses finds due corroboration with the medical evidence.

Court’s Observation

After hearing the Ld. Counsels and APP, The Court observed that:

1. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate Kuldeep’s testimony in its right earnest and has wrongly placed reliance on his testimony.

2. The Trial Court erred in not looking at whether the deceased was carrying the amount as alleged by the prosecution on the date of the incident.

3. The Trial Court failed to appreciate that except for the disclosure statement, there is no evidence against the appellants

Court’s Order

The Division Bench of Justices Rajnish Bhatnagar and Vipin Sanghi quashed and set aside the Trial Court’s Order. Further taking exception to the “lackadaisical approach” of the Police authorities in the instant case, the Court has urged the Commissioner of Police to take appropriate action against the erring police officials.

For the original order of the case, Click here: Mustakeem & Ors v. GNCTD


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras HC Reaffirms Trial Court’s Decree in Case of Thimmaraya & Ors. V. Gowrammal

A Civil Revision Petition was filed by three petitioners against the dismissal of their application on the file of the Sub-Judge, Hosur. The case...

Delhi High Court Disposes Ashok Arora’s Appeal Against Suspension From Supreme Court Bar Association

In the present Petition, Senior Advocate Ashok Arora challenged an Order passed by a Single Judge bench. The Order held that Mr Arora had...

Allahabad High Court Dismisses Application To Quash Prima Facie Allegations of Criminal Intimidation and Outraging Modesty

Allahabad High Court, on 17th November 2020, dismissed an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and refused to quash the charge sheet (dated...

Delhi High Court Prohibits Gathering in Public Places To Celebrate Chhat Puja

The Order had come in a Writ Petition moved by Shri Durga Jan Seva Trust. The Petition sought to quash and set aside an...

Bombay High Court Directs State To Pass Tribe Claim Within Two Weeks, Refuses To Intervene on Merits of Claim Itself

The Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S.S. Shinde and Madhav Jayajirao Jamdar passed an order on 17th November 2020 in...

Kerala High Court Dismisses Petition by Allocating Respondent To Vacancy in IFS Cadre

On 16th November 2020, the Division Bench at Kerala High Court, consisting of Honourable Justice A.M. Shaffique and Honourable Justice Gopinath. P heard the...

AP High Court: If an Auction Is Conducted by a Cooperative Bank, the Property Ceases to be Property of the State

A single-judge bench consisting of honourable justice Ninala Jayasurya gave orders on the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The petition challenges the action...

Madras HC Rules in Favour of the Authorities in FMGE Examination, Finds Writ Petitions Against the Exam Void of Merit

Three aspirants of Foreign Medical Examinations moved to the High Court by filing a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. They...

Hong Kong High Court Rules for Independent Mechanisms To Be Set up To Deal With Complaints Against Police Officers

The present suit was brought by a journalist association because of the police brutality that the protestors faced in the protests against the China...

Madras High Court Maintains That Government Policy Is To Prioritize Own State’s Candidates and Sets Aside Nativity Certificate Rejection Order

Varsha Totagi, a NEET aspirant filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. She had been denied Nativity Certificate without which...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -