Delhi High Court acquits 2 of murder after witnesses change account

The Delhi High Court has acquitted two persons of murdering a man after it found that the witnesses, i.e, the sister and mother of the deceased, were not trustworthy and have made improvements in their testimonies.

A bench of Justice S Muralidhar and Justice I S Mehta held that the two key witnesses did not conduct themselves in the manner natural to such close relatives of the deceased.

The court's decision comes on an appeal filed by Ajender and Monu, who were sentenced to life imprisonment for killing Sushil.

According to the case of the prosecution, on December 28, 2010, both the accused had killed Sushil by firing at him in broad daylight, while he and his wife had gone shopping at Jhanda Chowk in Narela.

There were four accused in the case. However, while one of them was shot dead on the Rohini court premises, another one has been declared as a proclaimed offender for charges of Arms Act despite being discharged of murder charges.

The main strength of the case was the eye-witnesses, who according to them had seen the entire incident. According to the statement given to the police, the duo said they were sitting in the car when Sushil and his wife were shopping.

They saw the accused coming on a motorcycle, however, could not go out of the car when they were continuously firing bullets at Sushil after pinning him to the floor.

Initially, the trial court had found the testimonies of these witnesses truthful. However, while examining the facts of the case, the court said it was unable to concur whether the mother and the sister were actually present at the spot of the murder.

"They being interested witnesses, their testimonies are required to be examined very carefully for improvements and inconsistencies. Both testimonies are abounding in inconsistencies and improvements. They are also not corroborated by the other evidence that has been gathered."

"While it is true that the homicidal death of the deceased has occurred in tragic circumstances unless the eyewitnesses testimonies inspire confidence, it would not be safe for the court to return a finding of guilt on the basis of such eyewitness testimonies," it said.

Appearing for the appellants, their counsels LS Saini helped the court in perusing the records of the case and decide on the authenticity of the witnesses.

The court found that the witnesses neither went to the hospital nor did they inform the police about the incident. It was the police, who contacted them at 8 PM even as the incident had taken place at 1.30 PM.

The bench also said that the mother had contended that she was taken to the hospital by her grandson but no one saw her there. The MLC also showed that the deceased was taken to the hospital but no one from his family was present there.