Delhi District Court
State vs Satish Kumar Yadav on 28 February, 2025
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIJAY SHANKAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 04, (WEST DISTRICT)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CNR No.DLWT01-000322-2014
Sessions Case No. 56211/2016
FIR No. 262/2014
PS: Uttam Nagar
U/s 302/364/420 IPC
State Vs. Satish Kumar Yadav
a) Date of commission of offence : 10/03/2014
b) Name of the complainant : Sh. Jai Bhagwan
S/o Sh. Phool Singh
c) Name of accused and address : Satish Kumar Yadav
S/o Late Sh. Lalaram @
Sahdev Singh
R/o VPO Malkosh,
PS Bond Kalan,
District Bhiwani,
Haryana
d) Offence complained of : u/s. 302/364/420 IPC
e) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
f) Final order : CONVICTED
Date of institution of the case : 02/09/2014
Date of committal : 12/09/2014
Date on which judgment was
reserved : 10/01/2025
Date of judgment : 28/02/2025
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:07:52
+0530
FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.1 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
1. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that
before 10/03/2014, accused Satish Kumar Yadav had cheated and
dishonestly induced the complainant Jai Bhagwan to part with
Rs. Three Lakh by deceiving him that he would arrange an
employment for his son namely Vikas (deceased) in the
Agriculture Department, ICAR for the post of Clerk but no such
appointment/employment was given to Vikas in the Agriculture
Department, ICAR and the accused had handed over a forged
appointment letter to him. It is also the case of the prosecution
that on 10/03/2014, accused had called Vikas and Vikas was left
by the complainant at the residence of the accused bearing House
No. 91-A, A-2 Block, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi
and thereafter, accused had abducted Vikas in his Alto car
bearing No. HR-26AG-4749 with intent that he be put into
danger of being murdered and was so murdered. It is also the
case of the prosecution that on 10/03/2014 after 12:30 PM
between 5:05 PM to 6:10 PM near Sector-14, Dwarka, New
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:08
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.2 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavDelhi, accused had committed the murder of Vikas by throttling
his neck with intention of causing such bodily injury as was
likely to cause death and with the knowledge that the accused by
the said act by throttling the neck of Vikas would cause his death.
REGISTRATION OF FIR, INVESTIGATION AND CHARGE-
SHEET
2. In the present case, on the complaint of the
complainant Sh. Jai Bhagwan, FIR bearing No. 262/2014, Police
Station Uttam Nagar, U/s. 365 IPC was got registered by the
Police of Police Station Uttam Nagar. After registration of the
FIR, the matter was investigated by the police and on completion
of the investigation, the present charge-sheet was submitted in
the Court of Ld. MM on 02/09/2014 for trial of the accused
Satish Kumar Yadav.
COGNIZANCE
3. Cognizance of the offence was taken by the Ld. MM
vide order dated 02/09/2014.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:15
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.3 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavSUPPLY OF COPIES AND COMMITTAL
4. Copy of the charge-sheet was supplied to the
accused Satish Kumar Yadav in compliance of section 207
Cr.P.C. Thereafter, vide order dated 12/09/2014 passed by the Ld.
MM, the present case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
CHARGE
5. Finding a prima-facie case against the accused
Satish Kumar Yadav, charge for the offence u/s. 302/364/420 IPC
was framed against the accused, to which, he pleaded not guilty
and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION WITNESSES
6. Prosecution was then called upon to substantiate its
case by examining its witnesses. The prosecution in support of its
case had examined 31 witnesses. The prosecution had examined
the following witnesses:-
(1) PW-1 Sh. Mahender Singh
(2) PW-2 Sh. Sudhir Kumar
(3) PW-3 Sh. Karamjeet Singh @ Sonu
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:26
+0530
FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.4 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
(4) PW-4 HC/ASI Rajbir Gulia
(5) PW-5 W/Ct. Chhaya
(6) PW-6 ASI/SI Ajeet Singh
(7) PW-7 Smt. Shanti Devi
(8) PW-8 HC Vijay Kumar
(9) PW-9 HC Virender Singh
(10) PW-10 HC Mukesh Ram
(11) PW-11 HC/ASI Laxman
(12) PW-12 Ct. Rajesh
(13) PW-13 Sh. Naresh, Senior Scientific Officer,
Biology, FSL, Delhi
(14) PW-14 HC Ajay
(15) PW-15 Sh. Rajesh Kumar
(16) PW-16 Sh. Saurabh Agarwal, Nodal Officer,
Vodafone, Delhi
(17) PW-17 Smt. Kuntesh
(18) PW-18 Sh. Pawan Singh, Nodal Officer, IDEA,
Delhi
(19) PW-19 Dr. P. Siddambary, Junior Scientific Officer,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:41
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.5 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavCFSL, Hyderabad, Telangana
(20) PW-20 Smt. Jaswanti Devi
(21) PW-21 Sh. Jai Bhagwan
(22) PW-22 Sh. Manish Kumar Godara
(23) PW-23 HC Satya Pal
(24) PW-24 Sh. Dhani Ram
(25) PW-25 Sh. Yogesh Tripathi, Alternate Nodal Officer,
Reliance Communication Ltd., Delhi
(26) PW-26 Sh. Deepak
(27) PW-27 Retired SI Braham Prakash
(28) PW-28 Ct. Ankur
(29) PW-29 Retired SI Charan Singh
(30) PW-30 HC Padmakar Shankar Asawale
(31) PW-31 Inspector Surender Singh Rathee
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY THE
PROSECUTION
7. (1) Copy of Customer Application Form Mark PW-1/1
(2) Copy of ration card Mark PW-1/2
(3) FIR Ex.PW-4/A Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:49
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.6 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(4) Endorsement on rukka Ex.PW-4/B
(5) Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-4/C
(6) DD No. 48-A Ex.PW-4/D
(7) Police Control Room Form Ex.PW-5/A
(8) Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-5/B
(9) Scene of Crime Team Report Ex.PW-6/A
(10) Photocopy of extract of entries Ex.PW-8/A
(11) RC No. 52/21/14 Ex.PW-8/B and RC No. 71/21/14
Ex.PW-8/C
(12) Acknowledgments Ex.PW-8/D and Ex.PW-8/E
(13) Copies of entries in register no. 19 and 21
Ex.PW-10/A and Ex.PW-10/B
(14) Arrest memo of the accused Ex.PW-11/A
(15) Personal search memo of the accused Ex.PW-11/B
(16) Disclosure statement of the accused Ex.PW-11/C
(17) Seizure memo of documents/certificates/educational
documents of deceased Vikas Ex.PW-11/D
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:08:57
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.7 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(18) Mark-sheet of middle examination bearing no. AE
014204 of deceased Vikas Ex.P-1
(19) Mark-sheet of secondary examination bearing no.
AK015835 of deceased Vikas Ex.P-2
(20) OBC certificate dated 25/05/2009 of deceased Vikas
Ex.P-3
(21) Haryana Resident Certificate dated 25/05/2009 of
deceased Vikas Ex.P-4
(22) Seizure memo of car bearing registration No. HR-
26AG-4749 Ex.PW-11/E
(23) One envelope of Maruti Suzuki, one RC of Alto car
bearing registration No. HR-26AG-4749, warranty
registration certificate, photocopy of affidavit of
Sanjay Yadav, photocopy of affidavit of Dhani Ram,
pollution certificate dated 11/01/2014 of said Alto
car and original insurance policy of the said Alto car
alongwith photocopy dated 09/10/2013
Ex.PW-11/A1 (colly).
(24) Crime Scene Report of Sr. Scientific Officer,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:09:09
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.8 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavBiology, FSL Ex.PW-13/A
(25) Copy of customer Application Form of mobile no.
9991115148 Ex.PW-16/A
(26) Copy of Ration Card Ex.PW-16/B
(27) Call details of mobile no. 9991115148 w.e.f
09/03/2014 to 13/03/2014 Ex.PW-16/C
(28) Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-16/D
(29) Statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Smt. Kuntesh
Ex.PW-17/A & Ex.PW-17/B
(30) Copy of customer Application Form of mobile no.
8684993005 Ex.PW-18/A
(31) Copy of Ration Card Ex.PW-18/B
(32) Call details of mobile no. 8684993005 w.e.f.
09/03/2014 to 10/03/2014 Ex.PW-18/C
(33) Copy of customer Application Form of mobile no.
9992701007 Ex.PW-18/D
(34) Copy of conductor license of Sudhir Kumar
Ex.PW-18/E
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:09:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.9 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(35) Call details of mobile no. 9992701007 w.e.f.
09/03/2014 to 13/03/2014 Ex.PW-18/F
(36) Copy of customer Application Form pertaining to
mobile no. 8743898922 Ex.PW-18/G
(37) Copy of driving license of the accused Ex.PW-18/H
(38) Call details of mobile no. 8743898922 w.e.f.
09/03/2014 to 23/03/2014 Ex.PW-18/I
(39) Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-18/J
(40) FSL report Ex.PW-19/A
(41) Statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Smt. Jaswanti Devi
Ex.PW-20/A
(42) Complaint/statement of complainant Sh. Jai
Bhagwan Ex.PW-21/A
(43) Seizure memo of copy of appointment letter
Ex.PW-21/B
(44) Copy of appointment letter Ex.PW-21/C
(45) Photograph of deceased Ex.PW-21/D
(46) Pointing out and seizure memo of bones
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:09:28
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.10 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavEx.PW-22/A
(47) Statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of Sh. Manish Kumar
Ex.PW-22/B
(48) Photographs of the spot and bones Ex.PW-23/A1 to
Ex.PW-23/A17
(49) Negatives of the aforesaid photographs
Ex.PW-23/B1 to Ex.PW-23/B17
(50) Affidavit of Dhani Ram Ex.PW-24/A
(51) Form No. 29 Ex.PW-24/B
(52) Form No. 30 Ex.PW-24/C
(53) RC of Maruti Alto Car bearing no. HR-26AG-4749
Ex.PW-24/D
(54) Seizure memo of RC of Maruti Alto Car bearing no.
HR-26AG-4749 and two affidavits Ex.PW-24/E
(55) Affidavit of Deepak Ex.PW-24/F
(56) Photographs of Alto car bearing registration no.
HR-26AG-4749 Ex.PW-24/G1 to Ex.PW-24/G3
(57) Copy of Customer Application Form of mobile no.
8287972769 Ex.PW-25/A
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:09:41
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.11 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(58) Copy of Election I-card of Jaswanti Devi
Ex.PW-25/B
(59) Certified copy of call details of mobile number
8287972769 w.e.f. 09/03/2014 to 13/03/2014
Ex.PW-25/C
(60) Certificate u/s 65-B of Evidence Act Ex.PW-25/D
(61) Endorsement Ex.PW-27/A
(62) Pointing out and seizure memo of laptop, dongle and
cash of Rs. 20,000/- Ex.PW-29/A
(63) Pointing out memo regarding search of clothes,
shoes and appointment letter of deceased Vikas
Ex.PW-29/B
(64) Supplementary disclosure statement of the accused
Ex.PW-29/C
(65) Pointing out memo regarding search of mobile
phone of deceased Vikas Ex.PW-29/D
(66) Site plan of the place of recovery of the bones of
deceased Vikas Ex.PW-31/A
(67) Letter seeking permission to dig the field to trace the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:09:51
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.12 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavremaining bones of the deceased Ex.PW-31/B
(68) Site plan of the place of recovery of the laptop,
dongle and cash of Rs.20,000/- Ex.PW-31/C
(69) Application for filing FSL result Ex.PW-31/D
(70) Photographs of bones of deceased Vikas
Ex.PW-31/E1 to Ex.PW-31/E7.
It is pertinent to mention here that statement u/s 161
Cr.P.C. of Sudhir Kumar Ex.PW-2/D1, statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C.
of Karamjeet Singh @ Sonu Ex.PW-3/DA and application for
issuance of process u/s 83 Cr.P.C. against the accused
Ex.PW-31/DA were also exhibited during the course of cross-
examination of PW-2, PW-3 and PW-31 respectively.
It is pertinent to mention here that on 31/05/2018,
counsel for the accused had admitted the FSL report dated
01/09/2014 and the same was exhibited as Ex.PX-1.
Apart from aforesaid documentary evidence, the
prosecution has also relied upon the other evidence (case
property) i.e. car Ex.PW-11/P1, DVD Ex.PW-12/A, Hard Disk
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:10:05
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.13 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavEx.1 (HD), Laptop Ex.PW-19/1 (aforesaid Laptop was also
exhibited as Ex.PW-29/A1), 77 bones of deceased Vikas
Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly), dongle Ex.PW-29/A2, Charger
Ex.PW-29/A3, amount of Rs.20,000/- of old currency (Rs.500 x
40) Ex.PW-29/A4 (colly).
8. TESTIMONIES OF PROSECUTION WITNESSES
(i) PW-1 in his testimony had deposed that he had
obtained SIM bearing no.09991115148 of Vodafone Telecom
Services in the year 2008 and had given the same to his sister
Badho Devi w/o Jai Bhagwan r/o Malkosh, PS Bondkalan, Distt.
Bhiwani. He had filled up application form Mark PW-1/1 and
had given ID i.e. copy of ration card Mark PW- 1/2.
PW-1 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(ii) PW-2 in his testimony had deposed that he was
working as a labourer /mate in Petrolium Bhandar Depot,
Jalandhar, ASC Department of Millitary for the last about 6
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:10:12
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.14 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavmonths and prior to that, he was running a barber shop opposite
Bus stand Bhiwani, Haryana. Deceased Vikas was his friend and
he was of his native village. He was also searching a job and he
used to talk with him daily. On 01/03/2014, Vikas told him that
he had got job in Agriculture Department in Delhi. Perhaps on
10/03/2014, Vikas made telephonic call to him and requested him
to get recharge his mobile phone for roaming free of Rs.17/- and
he got recharge the same. In the noon time on the same day,
Vikas again called him and asked if there is any medical store
near his shop and told him to verify about the tablet Alprex 2.5
mg and tablet of Alovera. Vikas also told him to verify the
purpose of 3-4 Alprex tablets and its dose. He went to the
medical store, which was near his shop but there was heavy rush
on shop, so he could not verify the same and in the meantime, the
telephone of Vikas was disconnected. Again in the noon time
around 12 noon -1 pm, he had received telephonic call of Vikas
and he replied him that he could not verify about the Alprex
tablets from the medical store. At that time, there were customers
at his shop and he asked them as to for what purpose tablet
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:10:58
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.15 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavAlprex is taken and on this, he was told that tablet Alprex is
taken by heart patient and also for sleep. He does not remember
anything else about this case.
PW-2 was permitted to cross-examine by Addl. PP
for the State, as he was resiling from his previous statement made
to the police. PW-2 was cross-examined by Addl. PP for the
State. PW-2 was cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
(iii) PW-3 in his testimony had deposed that Vikas Yadav
was his brother-in-law (sala). He was married with sister of Vikas
Yadav namely Pinki about four years back. On 12/03/2014, he
along with his father-in-law Sh. Jai Bhagwan had gone to the
house of Satish Kumar in search of his brother-in-law Vikas at
Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar. The house of accused Satish was
found locked. He had called the police on 100 No. and police
arrived there and made enquiry from him and his father-in-law.
His father-in-law had left Vikas with Satish at Mohan Garden on
10/03/2014 at about 11:00 AM and this fact was told to him by
his father-in-law. On 11/03/2014, he had talked with accused
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:11:10
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.16 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavSatish on his mobile phone with his mobile phone and he
enquired from him about Vikas. Satish told him that he has
arranged a job for Vikas. He asked him to let him talk with Vikas
on which, Satish told him that he can not get Vikas to talk with
him at this time. Satish also told him that, ” Vikas aur paise kal
aap ke ghar pahunch jayenge jyada enquiry karne ki jarurat nahi
hai “. He told Satish that he want to meet him once, on which,
Satish told that there is no need to meet him. He also told, ” mere
se milne aayenga to mai goli maar dunga ” fearing that he did not
went to Satish. On 12/03/2014, he along with his father-in-law
and other villagers, who had come along with his father-in-law
reached the house of accused at Mohan Garden. The house of
accused was found locked. He had made the call at 100 number
after taking mobile phone from one of the persons, who had
gathered there. He had seen the accused first time when he had
gone to his in-laws house before this incident and met him there.
In-laws and maternal uncle of the accused pressurized him and
threatened to kill to settle the dispute.
PW-3 was cross-examined by counsel for the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:11:18
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.17 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavaccused.
(iv) PW-4 in his testimony had deposed that on
12/03/2014 at about 09:30 pm, he had received rukka from Ct.
Ankur sent by SI Braham Prakash and on the basis of the same,
he got recorded the FIR Ex.PW-4/A of this case through
Computer Operator. He had also made endorsement on rukka
Ex.PW-4/B and after registration of FIR, he had handed over the
copy of FIR and original rukka to Ct. Ankur to hand over the
same to SI Braham Prakash for investigation. He had also issued
certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-4/C. He had also recorded the DD No.48A Ex.PW-4/D at
about 05:32 PM on the same day, on the basis of message
received from wireless operator regarding not returning of person
namely Satish, who had to arrange the job for the brother-in-law
of caller (Satish naam ka aadmi caller kai saale ke naukri dilaney
ke liya abhi tak nahi aaya).
PW-4 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:11:26
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.18 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
(v) PW-5 in her testimony had deposed that on
12/09/2014 at 17:21 hours, she had received message from
mobile no.9891073050 and she had mentioned the same in Delhi
Police Control Room Form Ex.PW-5/A and sent the same to Net
for onward transmission to District Control Room. Certificate
u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW-5/B was issued by Nodal
Officer of PHQ.
PW-5 was not cross-examined by counsel for the
accused, despite opportunity.
(vi) PW-6 in his testimony had deposed that on
08/06/2014, he was posted as ASI/In-charge, Mobile Crime
Team, West Distt. Delhi. On that day, on receipt of wireless
message, he alongwith Ct. Satpal and Ct. Sukham Pal, Proficient
had visited Addl. CP Office, Rajouri Garden, where Inspector
S.S. Rathi met them and thereafter, they along with Inspector S.S.
Rathi reached at the spot i.e. in the field of Tek Chand son of Sh.
Indraj, Vill. Dhool Shrish, Near Ganda nala, Najafgarh drain.
Accused Satish was also with the IO Inspector S.S. Rathi. He had
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:11:35
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.19 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavinspected the spot. The remnants of bones were found lying in
the field. The CFSL team was also with the IO and member of
the team also inspected the spot. There were about 77 bones lying
in the field and the IO kept the same in plastic jars and seized the
same. The photographs of the bones and spot were taken. Later
on, he had prepared scene of crime report Ex.PW-6/A and handed
over the same to the IO.
PW-6 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(vii) PW-7 in her testimony had deposed that on
04/07/2014, she alongwith her husband and police officials had
gone to FSL Rohini, where her blood sample was taken and she
had given her blood sample voluntarily.
PW-7 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(viii) PW-8 in his testimony had deposed that on
29/03/2014, he was posted as MHC(M) at PS Uttam Nagar,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:11:55
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.20 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavDelhi. On that day, he had received one Maruti Alto Car bearing
registration No. HR-26AG-4749, RC and some documents from
the IO/SI Charan Singh and he had made the entry of the same at
Sl.No. 4186/14. On 08/06/2014, he had received one sealed
parcel, which was sealed with the seal of SSR from the IO and
parcels of exhibits i.e. blood sample and earth control, which
were also sealed with the seal of SSR from IO Inspector S.S.
Rathi and he had made the entry of the same at serial no.4307.
On 09/06/2014 again, he had received one laptop with adapter
and lead, one dongle and Rs.20,000/- from the IO of this case and
he had made the entry of the same at serial no. 4308. On
18/06/2014, he had sent parcels of Exhibits i.e. 2 plastic jars to
FSL Rohini through HC Laxman vide RC No.52/21/14 to deposit
the same in the office of FSL Rohini and thereafter, HC Laxman
handed over the receipt of the same. He had also sent laptop and
internet dongle to CFSL Hyderabad through HC Ajay Kumar and
after depositing the same, he had handed over receipt of the same
and he had received back dongle and laptop on 29/11/2014. So
long as the parcels remained in his custody, those were not
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:03
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.21 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavtampered with in any manner and remained intact. On
09/09/2014, he had received FLS result and handed over the
same to the IO to file in the Court. Extract of the entries, RC nos.
52/21/14 & 71/21/14 and acknowledgments are Ex.PW-8/A,
Ex.PW-8/B, Ex.PW-8/C, Ex.PW-8/D and Ex.PW-8/E
respectively.
PW-8 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(ix) PW-9 in his testimony had deposed that on
13/03/2014, he had received message regarding parking of an
Alto car near Balak Nath Mandir in abandoned (lawaris)
condition. On this, he reached there and found one Alto car
bearing Registration no.HR-26AG-4749 stationed there. He tried
to trace out the owner of the same but no clue met him there.
Thereafter, he brought the same in the police station Old Delhi
Railway Station and deposited the same in the malkhana vide DD
no.15B u/s. 66 DP Act and seized the same through seizure
memo.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:11
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.22 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPW-9 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(x) PW-10 in his testimony had deposed that on
13/03/2014, he was posted as MHC(M) at PS Old Delhi Railway
Station. On that day, he had received one Alto car bearing
registration no. HR-26AG-4749 from HC Virender Singh vide
DD no.15B dated 13/03/2014 and he had made entry of the same
at serial no.1424 dated 13/03/2014. On 29/03/2014, SI Charan
Singh had received the above said car from him vide RC
no.30/21 and took the same to PS Uttam Nagar in the present
case. Relevant entries of register no.19 and 21 are Ex.PW-10/A
and Ex.PW-10/B respectively.
PW-10 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xi) PW-11 in his testimony had deposed that on
29/03/2014 and 05/06/2014, he had joined the investigation of
the present case with SI Charan Singh. On 18/06/2014, he had
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.23 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavreceived one plastic container having seal of SSR from the MHC
(M) to deposit the same in the office of FSL Rohini vide RC
No.52/21/14 and he had deposited the same in the office of FSL
Rohini and thereafter, he had handed over the receipt of the same
to the MHC (M). So long as the parcel remained in his custody, it
was not tampered with in any manner and remained intact.
PW-11 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xii) PW-12 in his testimony had deposed that on
08/06/2014, on receipt of a message, he had reached near Ganda
Nala, Najafgarh road at 4:00 pm. SDM, DCP and other police
staff were there and DCP directed him to videograph the entire
area. On his direction, he had videographed the entire area with
the Camera and after doing the videography, he had handed over
the DVD Ex.PW-12/A to the IO, who was also present there.
PW-12 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:28
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.24 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
(xiii) PW-13 in his testimony had deposed that on
08/06/2014, he along with his team members visited the spot i.e.
in the field of Sh. Manish Kumar S/o Sh. Krishan Kumar in the
area of village Dhool Siras, Delhi and they inspected the spot,
spot was videographed and photographs were also taken. 77
Bones and teeth were found on the spot and the same were put in
plastic container wrapped in cloth and sealed with the seal of
SSR. He had suggested the IO to send the bones to FSL for DNA
analysis and he prepared his report Ex.PW-13/A.
PW-13 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xiv) PW-14 in his testimony had deposed that on
28/07/2014, he along with Ct. Sonu on the directions of senior
had collected one pullanda and one envelope having seals of SSR
from HC Vijay MHC(M) PS Uttam Nagar. They both took the
sealed envelope and parcel to CFSL, Hyderabad and deposited
the same there. They took the receiving from CFSL, Hyderabad
and returned to Delhi. Photocopy of the receipt was handed over
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:35
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.25 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavto In-charge Special Staff and the original was deposited in the
malkhana of PS Uttam Nagar. Parcels were not tampered with till
it remained in his custody.
PW-14 was not cross-examined by counsel for the
accused, despite opportunity.
(xv) PW-15 in his testimony had deposed that accused
Satish is known to him and he met him in Patel Nagar, Farid Puri
through his brother-in-law. Accused Satish was residing on rent
in Farid Puri and he used to meet with him and also used to go to
his home. After some time, his brother-in-law, who was also
residing on rent in the area of Farid Puri shifted his residence at
Budh Vihar, then Satish told him to arrange rented
accommodation near his house. Then he arranged rented house
for accused near his house and his address was same i.e.
H.No.91, A-2 Block, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar. On
11/03/2014, in the evening time, accused Satish along with wife
and children left from his house and on asking, he told him that
he is going to meet his sister at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. Thereafter,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:44
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.26 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavhe did not return to his home with his family. On 12/03/2014,
police came to the residence of accused Satish in his search and
police told him that accused is involved in a case related to boy
Vikas of his native place. Police made enquiry from him and
recorded his statement. He also told to police official that Vikas
is not known to him and he had not seen him.
PW-15 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xvi) PW-16 in his testimony had deposed that customer
application form Ex.PW-16/A of mobile no.9991115148 was
issued in the name of Mahender S/o Sh. Vijay Singh
R/o H.No.12, VPO Hari Puri, Near Bhiwani Bus Stand, Haryana
and same was enclosed with copy of ration card Ex.PW-16/B.
The call details of the above said mobile w.e.f. 09/03/2014 to
13/03/2014 are Ex.PW-16/C and he had issued certificate under
Sec.65 B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW-16/D.
PW-16 was not cross-examined by counsel for the
accused, despite opportunity.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:12:52
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.27 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(xvii) PW-17 in her testimony had deposed that she knew
accused Satish. Her husband Rajesh Kumar had arranged a
tenanted house for accused near her house and accused Satish
started living there along with his wife and children. Nothing had
happened on 10/03/2014 in her presence. On 11/03/2014 accused
Satish left his house along with his wife and children in the
evening time. On 12/03/2014 some villager of Vikas and police
came to their house and they were searching accused Satish and
she came to know that Vikas is missing. Accused Satish had left
his house along with his family members to go to the house of his
sister at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. She does not know any thing else
about this case.
PW-17 was permitted to cross-examine by Addl. PP
for the State, as she was resiling from her previous statement
made to the police. PW-17 was cross-examined by Addl. PP
for the State. PW-17 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xviii) PW-18 in his testimony had deposed that customer
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:05
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.28 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavapplication form Ex.PW-18/A of mobile no.8684993005 was
issued in the name of Vikas S/o Sh.Phool Singh R/o Village
Nalkash, Bhiwani, Haryana and same was enclosed with copy of
ration card Ex.PW-18/B. The call details of the above said
mobile w.e.f. 09/03/2014 to 10/03/2014 are Ex.PW-18/C.
Customer application form Ex.PW-18/D of mobile
no.9992701007 was issued in the name of Sudhir Kumar S/o Sh.
Surender Singh R/o Vill. Dadri, Bhiwani, Haryana and same was
enclosed with copy of conductor license Ex.PW-18/E. Call
details of the above said mobile w.e.f. 09/03/2014 to 13/03/2014
are Ex.PW-18/F. Customer application form Ex.PW-18/G of
mobile no.8743898922 was issued in the name of Satish Kumar
S/o Sh. Sahdav Singh R/o H.No.1974/3, Gali no.2, Rajeev Nagar,
Gurgaon, Haryana and same was enclosed with copy of driving
license Ex.PW-18/H. Call details of the above said mobile w.e.f.
09/03/2014 to 23/03/2014 are Ex.PW-18/I. Certificate u/s 65-B
of Evidence Act for the above said three mobile numbers is
Ex.PW-18/J was issued by him.
PW-18 was cross-examined by counsel for the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:14
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.29 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavaccused.
(xix) PW-19 in his testimony had deposed that he had
examined one Laptop marked Ex.X1 and Tata Photon Plus
Dongle in the laboratory and the Hard Disk was removed from
the laptop. It was analysed using the authorized software and
hardware tools as per the cardinal rules of computer forensic/
working procedures manual adopted by the CFSL Hyderabad. On
analysis, no relevant data with respect to query No.1 and 2 of the
forwarding letter was found in the hard disk Ex.1 (HD). His
report is Ex.PW-19/A.
PW-19 was not cross-examined by counsel for the
accused, despite opportunity.
(xx) PW-20 in her testimony had deposed that she was
working as a dental assistant in Dental Clinic at 365A- 1-328,
Keshav Puram, Delhi. Till February 2013, she had worked in a
Metro Hospital in front of Shadipur Depot as aaya (patient
attendant). In October-November 2012, accused Satish got
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:29
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.30 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavtreatment related to his heart disease and he got angiography
there. During the period of treatment, they came into contact with
each other and she used to help him in the hospital and he also
used to help her financially as she used to get the salary after 20-
22 days in every month. In the year 2013, she had left her job
from Metro Hospital and thereafter, she had joined Dental Clinic,
Keshav Puram in June 2013. On the asking of accused Satish, she
had given her sim started with no.82 but she does not remember
the complete number. She got issued the said SIM on her ID.
Accused had stated that he would return her sim on purchasing
mobile and getting issued new SIM but he did not return her SIM
and used the same. On 10/03/2014 at about 3-3:30 PM, she had
received telephonic call of accused Satish on her mobile phone
and he told her that he wanted to meet her and he called her at
Dwarka Mor. At that time, she was in the house of her mother at
Patel Nagar. She went Dwarka Mor and reached at about 5 PM
but he did not arrive there and she waited for him for about 15-20
minutes. Thereafter, she had left from there and reached to her
house. After about 3 months, police called her in the police
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:39
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.31 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavstation and made enquiry from her. She does not remember any
thing else about this case.
PW-20 was permitted to cross-examine by Addl. PP
for the State, as she was resiling from her earlier statement made
to the police. PW-20 was cross-examined by Addl. PP for the
State. PW-20 was cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
(xxi) PW-21 in his testimony had deposed that he was a
farmer and deceased Vikas was his son. On 10/03/2014, he had
left his son with Satish at his house at Mohan Garden as the
accused was well known to him as he lives in his village (co-
villager). Accused Satish had taken Rs. 3 Lakh from him on the
pretext of getting job for his son and the accused had also sent
appointment letter in this regard at his residence. Accused had
stated that he arranged the job for his son in Agriculture
Department at Pusa Road for the post of Clerk. Accused Satish
had told him on telephone to send his son to him on 10/03/2014
for the purpose of training. Accused had also told him that two
more boys would come to him for the same purpose from Riwari.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:48
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.32 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavAfter leaving his son in the house of accused Satish at Mohan
Garden, he left from there at about 11:00 AM. Accused Satish
also met him in his house at that time and he had left his son with
him. At about 12:30 PM (noon), he had received mobile call of
his son and he had told him that accused Satish had given him
six-seven tablets for the medical fitness and stated that Satish had
told him that he would be able to clear the medical. His son had
also stated the name of the tablet as Alprex and Allerance.
Thereafter, he had called Satish and asked him about the tablets,
which he had given to his son. Accused Satish had told him that
he had given the tablets for the clearance of physical test.
Accused had also told him that he had brought the mobile phone
of his son and accused had also told that he left his son at
working place (duty pe). He had also asked accused Satish as to
why he had taken the mobile phone of his son to which, accused
Satish had told him that he cannot talk to him for about 10 days
nor he can meet him. On 11/03/2014, his son-in-law came to
Delhi to verify the job of his son and told that he had gone to
Krishi Vibhag, Pusa and had met with the Director of Agriculture
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:13:57
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.33 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavDepartment, Pusa and Director had told him that no new
employee had joined the department for the last about 3 months.
His son-in-law conveyed the said information to him on phone
on the same day. On 12/03/2014, he went to PS Uttam Nagar in
the evening hours at about 6:00 PM and had made the
complaint/statement Ex. PW-21/A in the PS against the accused
Satish. Thereafter, he along with police officials went to the
house of accused Satish but he did not meet them there as his
house was found locked. Thereafter, he went to his village and
called the Panchayat of 12 villages and the relatives of the
accused Satish including his brother, sister, brother-in-law and
father-in-law were called in the Panchayat. The father-in-law of
the accused namely Khyali Ram told in the Panchayat that his
son had been killed by accused Satish and had also told in the
Panchayat that he had received the telephonic message of Satish
in this regard. On this, the members of the Panchayat asked the
father-in-law of accused Satish to show the dead body of his son.
On this, Khyali Ram, father-in-law of accused Satish told in the
Panchayat that accused Satish had switched off his phone after
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:13
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.34 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavdisclosing the above said fact that accused had committed the
murder. On 15-16/03/2014, he had again visited the PS Uttam
Nagar and met with the IO of this case to know the progress of
the case and his son. He also met with the Joint Commissioner of
Police and had given written complaint to him about the murder
of his son and not finding his dead body. He had requested the
Joint CP to transfer the case to Crime Branch and case was
transferred to Crime Branch. Thereafter, the investigation of this
case was conducted by Inspector SS Rathi. Members of
Panchayat of his village met with Inspector Rathi and requested
him to search the son and if he is dead then trace out the dead
body. During the said period, the mobile phone of the accused
Satish and his wife remained switched off. Thereafter, police
arrested the accused from Mumbai and accused disclosed that he
had committed the murder of his son and shown the place, where
he had disposed off the dead body. The accused had also
disclosed that he had thrown the nude dead dead body of his son
there. The police had recovered the bones of his deceased son but
the dead body could not be recovered. This fact was told to him
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:21
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.35 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavby the police. Thereafter, police had taken him and his wife to
some hospital at Paschim Vihar. Police had taken two
photographs of his and his wife and the copy of the ration card
and also their blood sample. He had handed over the copy of
appointment letter of his son to the IO and IO had seized the
same vide memo Ex. PW-21/B. Police had also recovered the
documents of his son from the custody of accused Satish after his
arrest and the same fact was told to him by the IO of this case.
He had given Rs. 25,000/- to accused Satish, when he had left his
son in the house of accused Satish with him and all the currency
notes were of the denomination of Rs. 500/- each. He had also
given Rs. 2,75,000/- in three installments to the accused Satish
before the issuance of appointment letter. The SIM of mobile
number 9991115148, which he was using, was in the name of his
brother-in-law Mahender.
PW-21 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xxii) PW-22 in his testimony had deposed that on
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:28
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.36 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav08/06/2014, in the evening time, he had gone to his field outside
the village Dulsiras, Sector-24, Dwarka, Delhi, where he saw that
police vehicles and police personals were present there and from
the police officials, he came to know that the accused namely
Satish, who was in the custody of the police had thrown the dead
body of a boy in the field of wheat. On that day, he came to know
from the police officials that the accused had thrown the dead
body of a person after committing his murder. The police
officials had demarcated the area, where the accused had thrown
the dead body and police officials had picked the bones from the
field. The police officials had picked the bones in his presence
and those were in numbers 70-80 but he does not remember the
exact numbers of bones. The police officials had also kept the
said bones in a plastic jar and sealed the jar in a cloth parcel and
sealed the same with the seal of SSR. Police officials had also
recorded his statement and obtained his signatures and police had
seized the said bones vide memo Ex.PW-22/A. He does not know
anything else of this case.
PW-22 was permitted to cross-examine by Addl. PP
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:35
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.37 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavfor the State, as he was resiling from his previous statement made
to the police. PW-22 was cross-examined by Addl. PP for the
State. PW-22 was cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
(xxiii) PW-23 in his testimony had deposed that on
08/06/2014, he was posted as Ct./photographer in Mobile Crime
Team, West District, Delhi. On that day, he alongwith In-charge,
Crime Team ASI Ajit Singh and Proficient Ct. Sukrampal
reached at DCP Office, Rajouri Garden, Delhi, where IO Insp. S.
S. Rathi and accused Satish met them and thereafter, they
reached at Najafgarh Ganda Nala, Village Dhul Siras. They went
in a field near Ganda Nala, where the electric pole no.BN5 of
high tension wire was installed. Accused Satish led them there
and shown the places, where bones were lying in the area of
7×6.5 ft. As per the instructions of the In-charge of the Crime
Team and the IO, he took 17 photographs Ex.PW-23/A1 to
Ex.PW-23/A17 (negatives of the photographs Ex.PW-23/B1 to
Ex.PW-23/B17) of the spot and the bones lying there, from
different angles.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:46
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.38 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPW-23 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xxiv) PW-24 in his testimony had deposed that he was a
farmer and registered owner of Maruti Alto car bearing
No.HR-26AG-4749 LXI of silver colour. He had purchased the
same from one Sanjay Yadav R/o Village Kasan, District
Gurgaon, Haryana. On 12/02/2014, he had sold the same to one
Deepak @ Bittu R/o Village Gothara, District Rewari for the sum
of Rs.1,10,000/- and he had prepared the affidavit in this regard
and handed over the same to Deepak for transferring the said car
in his name. Later on, police came to him and made inquiry from
him about the said car and he came to know that the said car was
sold by Deepak to Satish. He had also handed over his affidavit
Ex.PW-24/A, Form No. 29 Ex.PW-24/B and Form 30
Ex.PW-24/C to Deepak alongwith the affidavit of Deepak
Ex.PW-24/F for getting transferred the said car in the name of
Deepak. He had also handed over the RC Ex.PW-24/D of the said
car to Deepak.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:14:54
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.39 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavAddl. PP for the State was permitted to put the
leading question to PW-24 and PW-24 had deposed that he had
handed over the abovementioned documents and RC alongwith
the affidavit of Deepak Ex.PW-24/F to the IO, who seized the
same vide memo Ex.PW-24/E. PW-24 was not cross-examined
by counsel for the accused, despite opportunity.
(xxv) PW-25 in his testimony had deposed that customer
application form Ex.PW-25/A pertaining to mobile
no.8287972769 was issued in the name of Jaswanti Devi W/o
Mange Ram R/o 30-B, Budh Vihar, Phase-I, Block-C, Delhi and
the ID proof i.e. election I card Ex.PW-25/B was also enclosed
with the customer application form. Call details of the above said
mobile number w.e.f. 09/03/2014 to 13/03/2014 including the
location chart are Ex.PW-25/C and certificate under Section 65-B
of Evidence Act is Ex.PW-25/D.
PW-25 was not cross-examined by counsel for the
accused, despite opportunity.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:03
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.40 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(xxvi) PW-26 in his testimony had deposed that he knew
accused Satish Kumar as he is the resident of Village of
matrimonial home of his sister Malkosh, Bhiwani, Haryana. In
the year 2014, accused told him that he wanted to purchase a car.
He had purchased one Alto car bearing registration No.
HR26-AG-4749 of Silver colour on 12/02/2014 from one Dhani
Ram S/o Sh. Ram Avtar R/o Baghthala, District Rewari, Haryana
in the sum of Rs.1,10,000/- on affidavit Ex.PW-21/F and he had
sold the same to accused Satish Kumar in the same amount.
Dhani Ram had also given his affidavit Ex.PW-24/A in this
regard to him. He had also signed Form No.29 Ex.PW-24/B and
Form No. 30 Ex.PW-24/C. He had also given the delivery of the
said car on the same day i.e. on 12/02/2014 alongwith the above
said document to the accused Satish and since then, he was using
the same car. At that time, accused was residing at Mohan
Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and he used to keep his car there.
Dhani Ram had requested him several times to get transferred the
same in his name but he could not give his identity proof to
Dhani Ram and due to the said reason, the car could not be
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:11
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.41 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavtransferred in his name. In the month of March, 2014, accused
Satish had gone to some unknown place alongwith the car. IO of
this case met him and recorded his statement.
PW-26 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xxvii) PW-27 in his testimony had deposed that on
12/03/2014, upon receipt of DD No.48A Ex.PW-4/D, he
alongwith Ct. Ankur reached at the spot i.e. House No.91, A-2
Block, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi, where one Jai
Bhagwan met him and made complaint regarding kidnapping of
his son. He had recorded his statement Ex.PW-21/A and attested
and endorsed the same vide his endorsement Ex.PW-27/A. He
had handed over the original statement and rukka to Ct. Ankur
for getting registered the FIR from PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi.
Thereafter, he had made inquiries from the nearby people and the
neighbours and he had recorded the statement of one Kuntesh
W/o Rajesh. He had also searched the accused but accused could
not be traced out. Ct. Ankur returned back at the spot and handed
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.42 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavover him the copy of FIR and original rukka for investigation.
Thereafter, they searched the accused in the area of PS Uttam
Nagar but he could not be traced out and thereafter, they returned
back to the PS. He had recorded the statement of Ct. Ankur. On
13/03/2014, he had given the missing message of Vikas in
Doordarshan, in missing person squad and in CBI Office, R. K.
Puram. On the same day, he had also visited the spot. One Rajesh
met him there and he had made inquiry from him and recorded
his statement u/s 161 Cr. P.C. and thereafter, they searched the
accused in the nearby area but he could not be traced out and
thereafter, they returned back to the PS. On 15/03/2014, he
alongwith Ct. Fateh Singh went to in-laws house of accused
Satish at Narnole, Haryana in his search and he went in the local
PS and made his arrival entry there and met with the SHO of that
local PS. Father-in-law and brother-in-law of accused Satish were
called in the local PS and he had made inquiries from them about
the accused in the presence of PWs Anil and Karamveer, who
were also with him at that time. Father-in-law and brother-in-law
of accused Satish had disclosed that on 10/03/2014, they had
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:30
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.43 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavreceived the call of accused Satish and Satish had disclosed that
Vikas had met with an accident but he did not disclose the place
of accident nor the vehicle number to them. Both of them also
disclosed that thereafter, accused Satish switched off his mobile
phone. Thereafter, both of them relieved from investigation. On
16/03/2014, they returned back to Delhi. On 16/03/2014, he had
made request through DCP to the mobile companies to provide
the call details of six mobile phones, which were being used by
the accused and his family members. On 18/03/2014, he got
issued the NBW of accused Satish from the concerned Court and
thereafter, as per the directions of the DCP, further investigation
of this case was transferred to Special Staff, West District, Delhi.
PW-27 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xxviii) PW-28 in his testimony had deposed that on
12/03/2014, he had joined the investigation of the present case
with IO SI Braham Prakash.
PW-28 was cross-examined by counsel for the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:38
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.44 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavaccused.
(xxix) PW-29 in his testimony had deposed that on
19/03/2014, investigation of present case was marked to him and
upon receipt of the case file, he had examined the same and
thereafter, he had visited the spot i.e. House No.91A, A2-Block,
Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi, where he made local inquiry
from the neighbours and tried to know the whereabouts of the
victim and accused but same could not be traced out. Thereafter,
he had collected the CDRs of the mobile phones of the victim as
well as accused. He had examined the same and found that two
mobile phones of the accused Satish Kumar Yadav were switched
off on 13/03/2014 and thereafter, same were not activated. He got
initiated the proceedings u/s. 82/ 83 Cr.P.C. against the accused
Satish Kumar Yadav but whereabouts of the accused could not be
traced out. On 29/03/2014, he had seized the Alto car bearing
registration No.HR-26AG-4749 from the MHC (M) of PS Old
Delhi Railway Station, which was seized and deposited there
u/s. 66 D.P.Act. The said car belonged to the accused Satish
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:46
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.45 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavKumar Yadav and was used during the commission of crime of
this case. The said car was found to contain RC and some
documents and some passport size photographs. He also got
inspected the said car from the Crime Team of North District. No
chance print was found from the car and thereafter, he had
deposited the car in the Malkhana of PS Uttam Nagar. On
03/06/2014, he came to know from the reliable source that
accused Satish Kumar Yadav was seen in the area of Kalyan near
Ambali Railway Station, District Thane, Maharashtra. He with
the permission of the senior officers alongwith his staff i.e. HC
Kirori Mal, HC Laxman and HC Sunil reached Kalyan on
04/06/2014, where he met with the local police of PS Mahatama
Phule Chowk, Kalyan, District Thane. He had tried to locate the
location of the accused with the help of the secret informer as
well as the photograph showing the public persons near the
locality of Ambali Railway Station and he came to know from
the secret informer that accused Satish Kumar Yadav is residing
in House No.931, near Water Tank, Shivaji Nagar, Patil Nagar,
Atali Kalyan, District Thane. On the basis of the secret
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:15:54
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.46 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavinformation and at the instance of the secret informer, they
overpowered the accused from the said house. He had
interrogated the accused and on confessing his guilt, arrested him
vide arrest memo Ex.PW-11/A, conducted his personal search
vide memo Ex.PW-11/B and also recorded his disclosure
statement Ex.PW-11/C. In pursuance of the disclosure statement,
accused got recovered one red colour bag from his kitchen type
room, which was on the back side of the said house. The said bag
found to contain one mark-sheet of Board of School Education,
Haryana, Secondary Examination, mark-sheet of Board of School
of Education Haryana, Middle Examination, one OBC certificate,
and one resident certificate of Haryana in respect of Vikas S/o Jai
Bhagwan and he seized the said certificates vide memo
Ex.PW-11/D. Thereafter, he got medically examined the accused
from the Govt. Hospital of Kalyan and sent him to lock-up in the
local PS of Kalyan. On the next day, he got two days transit
remand of the accused and got him to Delhi and on 07/06/2014,
he had produced him before the Inspector S. S. Rathi in their
office. The investigation of this case was transferred to Inspector
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:01
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.47 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavS. S. Rathi after adding Section 302 IPC in the investigation. On
the next day, accused was produced before the concerned court
by Inspector S. S. Rathi and got his three days PC remand.
During the journey from Bombay to Delhi in the train, his case
file, which was kept by him in his bag got misplaced and he had
informed the senior officers in this regard and submitted his
report with permission to reconstruct the file. After about 4-5
days, a message was received in the office of DCP from Surat,
Gujarat regarding finding of case file of this case. HC. Laxman
and HC Sunil went there and brought the file and on checking the
same, they found that original rukka was not in the file and same
was missing and remaining file was intact. Inspector S. S. Rathi
had also interrogated the accused during his PC remand and
according to disclosure statement of accused, FSL team from
FSL, Rohini and Crime Team of West District were called at
DCP Office. Thereafter, in pursuance of disclosure statement,
accused Satish Kumar Yadav led the police team, crime team and
FSL team at Najafgarh Drain near Dhool Saras Village and inside
the 500-600 towards BSF Chhawla Camp, Najafgarh, Kapashera
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:11
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.48 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavRoad towards the field and shown the place, where he had
thrown the dead body of Vikas after committing his murder. They
searched the field and some bones were lying there. They marked
that place with the help of white powder (chuna), which was
measuring about 7×6.5 meters. The spot was got photographed
by the Crime Team and FSL Team. The FSL Team had inspected
the spot and took the remnants of bones of hand, legs, ribs, jaw,
etc. On counting the same, those bones were 77 in number and
same were kept in a plastic jar and sealed the cap of the jar with
the help of cloth and sealed with the seal of SSR. IO had also
lifted sample of earth from the same field and also kept the same
in plastic jar and sealed the cap of jar with the help of cloth and
sealed with the seal of SSR. IO had prepared the pointing out
memo and seizure memo of the same. After use, seal was handed
over to him and IO had also prepared the site plan of the place of
recovery of the said bones. Thereafter, they returned back to the
office of Special Staff, Tagore Garden and accused was sent to
lock-up of PS Rajouri Garden. On the next day i.e. on
09/06/2014, in pursuance of disclosure statement of the accused,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.49 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavthey reached his above-said house at his instance and from the
Almirah, which was kept in the last room of his house, he took
out one laptop make Acer, one dongle of TATA Photon + and
Rs.20,000/- (500×40) and produced the same to the IO Inspector
S. S. Rathi. Accused had disclosed that Rs.20,000/- was the part
money of the amount of Rs.25,000/-, which was given by Jai
Bhagwan, father of the deceased Vikas on 10/03/2014, when he
left his son with the accused for job purpose. IO had kept the
laptop and dongle in a cloth parcel and sealed the same with the
seal of SSR after receiving back from him and after use, it was
again handed over to him. IO had seized the same vide memo
Ex.PW-29/A. Accused had also disclosed that he had
downloaded the logo of ICAR from the website and prepared
fake appointment letter in the name of Vikas. IO had also
prepared the site plan of the place of recovery. Thereafter, they
returned back to their office. Accused had also disclosed on
interrogation that he had thrown the clothes, shoes and
appointment letter of Vikas in the Najafgarh Drain after
committing his murder. Thereafter, they went there in search of
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:29
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.50 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavthe same but the same could not be traced out. IO had prepared
memo Ex.PW-29/B in this regard. On the next day i.e. on
11/06/2014, accused was taken out from the lock-up and again
interrogated by the IO Inspector S. S. Rathi and accused gave his
supplementary disclosure statement Ex.PW-29/C. Accused had
disclosed that he had thrown the mobile phone of deceased from
the Peeragarhi Flyover on the Railway Track. Thereafter, they
reached the said place of Railway Track but mobile could not be
recovered. IO had prepared the memo Ex.PW-29/D in this
regard. Thereafter, they produced the accused before the court
and he was sent to judicial custody. On 04/07/2014, parents of
deceased were taken to FSL Rohini for collecting their blood
samples for the purpose of DNA profiling and their blood
samples were taken by the FSL Team. On the same day, father of
deceased Sh. Jai Bhagwan had produced the photocopy of
appointment letter Ex.PW-21/C, which was given by the accused
to him and IO had seized the same vide seizure memo
Ex.PW-21/B. Thereafter on 30/08/2014, he had again joined the
investigation of this case and on that day, one Dhaniram Yadav
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:45
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.51 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcame in the office of Special Staff, Tagore Garden, Delhi and met
with the IO Inspector S. S. Rathi and he had produced the RC of
Alto car bearing registration No.HR-26AG-4749 Ex.PW-24/D
and two affidavits i.e. of Dhani Ram S/o Sh. Ram Avtar and
Deepak Kumar S/o Sh. Jaswant Singh Ex.PW-24/A and
Ex.PW-24/F respectively, regarding the sale-purchase of the said
Alto car to the IO and IO had seized the same vide seizure memo
Ex.PW-24/E. IO had recorded his statement.
PW-29 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
(xxx) PW-30 in his testimony had deposed that on
05/06/2014, he was posted as Police Nike at Police Post
Ambiwali of PS Mahatama Phule Chowk, Kalyan, District
Thane, Maharashtra and on that day, he had joined the
investigation of the present case with SI Charan Singh.
PW-30 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:16:53
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.52 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(xxxi) PW-31 in his testimony had deposed that on
08/06/2014, investigation of this case was taken up by him as per
the direction of the senior officers and he had received the case
file from SI Charan Singh, who was the first IO of this case.
Accused Satish Kumar Yadav was also produced before him by
SI Charan Singh, who was on transit remand and was brought
from Kalyan, Maharastra. He had interrogated the accused and
thereafter, he had produced the accused before the Duty MM. He
had obtained three days PC remand of the accused for the
recovery of the body of the deceased, laptop and for further
investigation of the case. The disclosure statement of the accused
had already been recorded by SI Charan Singh. Thereafter, they
reached DCP Office, Rajouri Garden. He had informed his senior
officials regarding the police custody of the accused as well as
the requirement of FSL team for the inspection. The mobile
crime team as well as FSL team met him in the office of DCP,
West and thereafter, he had apprised the said teams about the fact
of the case and disclosure statement of the accused. Thereafter,
accused Satish Kumar in pursuance of the disclosure statement
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:00
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.53 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavled them at field which was near Ganda Nala, Chhawla, Village
Dhul Saras. Accused Satish shown them the field, which was
empty (there was no crops in the field and the same was
ploughed). In the meantime, 2-3 villagers reached there and he
made inquiry from them and he came to know that the field,
which was shown by the accused belongs to one Manish and
Manish was one of them. He had also disclosed the facts of the
case to Manish as well as the disclosure made by the accused that
he had thrown the dead body of a boy in his field. The said field
was adjoining the nala. The accused led them in the field about
20 meter from the wall/bank of the nala. They found that pieces
of bones were lying in open in the field scattered at different
places over the area of about 7×6.5 meters. The accused had
disclosed that when he had thrown the dead body of deceased in
the field, at that time the crop of wheat was standing in the field.
The photographer of the mobile crime team took the photographs
of the bones from different angles. The FSL team and mobile
crime team had collected the pieces of bones and on counting,
they found that they were 77 in number. He had kept all the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:08
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.54 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavpieces of bones in a plastic container and sealed the same with
the seal of SSR. He had also lifted the earth control from the field
and also get the same in a plastic container and same was also
sealed with the seal of SSR and seized the same vide seizure
memo Ex. PW-22/A. After use, he had handed over the seal to SI
Charan Singh. He had prepared the site plan of the place of
recovery of the bones Ex.PW-31/A and also contacted the SDM
and took permission from him to dig the field to trace the bones
vide his letter Ex.PW-31/B. The SDM had also made
endorsement on his letter, however, no other bone was found. He
had recorded the statements of witnesses namely Manish and the
members of the mobile crime team. Thereafter, they alongwith
the accused and case property left from there and reached in their
office at Tagore Garden and he had deposited the case property in
malkhana of PS Uttam Nagar. He had collected the reports from
mobile crime team and FSL team Ex.PW-6/A and Ex.PW13/A
respectively and thereafter, he sent the accused to lock up of PS
Rajouri Garden. On the next day, he took out the accused from
lock-up of PS Rajouri Garden for further investigation of this
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:15
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.55 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcase. Thereafter, accused Satish led them at his house bearing no.
91/A-A2, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and at that time,
his rented house was locked. He took the key from his neighbour
namely Smt. Kuntesh and then opened the lock of his rented
room. Smt. Kuntesh also met them there and they disclosed her
about the facts of the case and she also joined the investigation of
this case. Thereafter, accused took out one laptop, one dongle,
charger and cash of Rs. 20,000/- from almirah, which was lying
in the last room of his rented house and produced the same
before him. Accused had disclosed that the laptop, which he had
produced, is the same from which he had prepared the forged
appointment letter of the deceased Vikas for ICAR, Pusa, Delhi.
He had also disclosed about the cash of Rs. 20,000/- is the part
money of Rs. 25,000/-, which was given by the father of
deceased to him and he had spent Rs. 5000/- for his own use. He
had also disclosed that the said amount of Rs. 25,000/- given by
the father of the deceased on the day, when he had left his son to
him for joining him in ICAR, Pusa for the job. He had seized the
above said articles and the cash money vide seizure memo
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:22
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.56 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavEx.PW-29/A. He had sealed the laptop and the dongle in separate
cloth parcels and sealed the same with the seal of SSR, which he
had taken from SI Charan Singh and after using the same, he had
handed over again it to SI Charan Singh. He had prepared the site
plan of place of recovery of the said articles Ex.PW-31/C and
thereafter, accused locked his rented premises and handed over
the key to Smt. Kuntesh and he had recorded the statement of
Smt. Kuntesh. He had deposited the case property in the
malkhana of PS Uttam Nagar and thereafter, they returned to
their office at Rajouri Garden. On the next date, during the PC
remand of accused, accused led them to the Chhawla Drain,
where he had thrown the clothes, which he had removed from the
dead body of deceased and after throwing his body in the field as
well as his bag but despite their best efforts, the same could not
be traced out. He had prepared the memo in this regard
Ex.PW-29/A and thereafter, they returned to their office. Accused
was again interrogated regarding the mobile of the deceased and
accused had disclosed that he had thrown the same near the
Peeragarhi Railway Line from the flyover. The supplementary
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:29
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.57 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavdisclosure statement of the accused Ex.PW-29/C was recorded.
They went there in search of the mobile phone of the deceased
but the same could not be traced out. He had prepared the memo
Ex.PW-29/D in this regard. He had also called PW Jaswanti Devi
in their office and he had recorded her statement u/s. 161 Cr.P.C.
Thereafter, they produced the accused before the Court and
accused was remanded to JC. During the investigation, he had
sent the bones of deceased to FSL, Rohini and remaining case
property to CFSL, Hyderabad for expert opinion. During the
investigation, the parents of the deceased were taken to FSL,
Rohini for their blood sample for DNA profile and their blood
samples were taken by the FSL team. The father of the deceased
had also produced the photocopy of the appointment letter, which
was given by the accused to him. He had seized the same vide
seizure memo Ex. PW-21/B. During the investigation, he had
also collected the CDRs, CAF and other related documents of the
mobile phone of the accused as well as the witnesses and placed
the same on record and he had examined the same. He had
recorded the statement of brother-in-law of Jai Bhagwan (i.e. the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:37
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.58 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavfather of the deceased) and one Sudhir (i.e. friend of deceased)
u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. He had also met the owner of the Alto Car, which
was used by the accused during the commission of crime and
recorded his statement u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. and collected relevant
documents of ownership of the said çar i.e. RC of the car, two
affidavits and Form-29 & 30 (Ex.PW-24/D, Ex.PW-24/A,
Ex.PW-24/F, Ex.PW-24/B & Ex.PW-24/C) from him and seized
the same vide memo Ex. PW-24/E. During the investigation, he
had also recorded the statements of the police witnesses, who
remained with him during investigation, MHC(M) of PS Uttam
Nagar and concerned officials, who took the exhibits of the case
property to FSL, Rohini and CFSL, Hyderabad. He had also
collected the PCR Form and the copy of relevant DDs and placed
the same on record. After completion of investigation, he had
filed the charge-sheet in the Court. He had also collected the
CFSL result from CFSL, Hyderabad and filed the same in the
Court alongwith his application Ex.PW-31/D. He had also
collected the FSL result from FSL, Rohini regarding DNA profile
and filed the same in the Court by way of supplementary charge-
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:45
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.59 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavsheet. Bones of deceased were released to the father of the
deceased in pursuance of order of the Court.
PW-31 was cross-examined by counsel for the
accused.
STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED U/S 313 CR.P.C.
9. Separate statement of the accused was recorded
u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he denied the allegations against him
and rebutted the prosecution evidence against him and claimed
that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It
was also stated that he had taken Rs.1 Lakh from the father of
deceased namely Jai Bhagwan for his heart surgery. It was also
stated that on 10/03/2014, deceased had come to him to collect
Rs.1 Lakh and he gave the money to him and then, he had
received a phone call and deceased had told him that some
persons from the village had come in the car and he was going
with them and he left his room. It was also stated that after that,
relatives of the deceased came to his house alongwith the police
officials and threatened him to tell the whereabouts of deceased,
otherwise, they would kill him and also implicate him in the false
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:17:53
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.60 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcase. It was also stated that only to solve this case, police
officials have falsely implicated him in his case under pressure of
the relatives of the deceased. It was also stated that he does not
want to lead evidence in his defence.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
10. In the present case, accused had not led defence
evidence.
FINAL ARGUMENTS
11. This Court heard the final arguments advanced by
Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused and
carefully perused the entire record including the testimonies on
record.
During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by Addl. PP for the State that the prosecution witnesses
have duly supported the case of the prosecution and from the
testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the documentary as
well as other evidence relied upon by the prosecution, the
prosecution has been able to prove its case against the accused
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:02
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.61 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavbeyond reasonable doubt and the accused be convicted for the
offences as mentioned in the charge. On the other hand, during
the course of final arguments, it was submitted by counsel for the
accused that accused has been falsely implicated in the present
case and there is no incriminating evidence on record against the
accused and the prosecution has failed to prove its case against
the accused beyond reasonable doubt and accused be acquitted in
the present case.
Counsel for the accused in support of his contentions
has relied upon the following case laws:-
(i) Bipin Kumar Mondal Vs. State of West
Bengal (AIR 2010 Supreme Court 3638)
(ii) Saloni Arora Vs. State (Crl. Rev. P.
497/2008 & Crl. M.A.10683/2008, decided
by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on
29/05/2009)
(iii) Rohit Dhingra & Anr. Vs. State (Crl. A.
926/2011 & Crl. M. (Bail) 1302/2011,
decided by the Hon’ble High Court of
Delhi on 03/02/2012)
(iv) Lallu Manjhi & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
(2003 AIR -JHAR. H.C.R. 267)
(v) Ashish Batham Vs. State of Madhya
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:10
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.62 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPradesh (AIR 2002 Supreme Court 3206)
(vi) Toran Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
(AIR 2002 Supreme Court 2807)In order to bring home conviction, the prosecution
has to show on record an unbroken chain of events leading to
commission of actual offence. Further, it is the duty of the
prosecution to prove its case in such a manner so as to bring it
outside the pale of any reasonable doubt.
INGREDIENTS OF OFFENCE
12. In the present case, charge for the offence
u/s. 302/364/420 IPC was framed against the accused.
Section 302 IPC has prescribed the punishment for
the offence of murder. The essential ingredients of the offence
under section 302 IPC are as under:-
(i) Death of a human was being caused;
(ii) Such death was caused by or in consequence of
the act of the accused
(iii) Such act was done
(a) with the intention of causing death, or
(b) that the accused knew it to be likely to
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.63 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcause death, or
(c) that the injury was sufficient in the
ordinary course of nature to cause death.
Section 364 IPC has prescribed the punishment for
the offence of kidnapping or abducting in order to murder. The
essential ingredients of the offence under section 364 IPC are as
under:-
(i) Kidnapping or abduction of any person by the
accused
(ii) Such person was kidnapped or abducted in
order to:-
(a) that such person may be murdered or
(b) that such person might be disposed of
as to be put in danger of being
murderedSection 420 IPC has prescribed the punishment for
the offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of
property. The essential ingredients of the offence under section
420 IPC are as under:-
(i) Deception of any persons;
(ii) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any
person to deliver any property; or
(iii) To consent that any person shall retain
any property and finally intentionally
inducing that person to do or omit to
do anything which he would not do or
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:28
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.64 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavomit.
13. Law relating to appreciation of evidence of the
witnesses has been elaborated by the Hon’ble High Court of
Delhi in case titled as “Satish @ Bombaiya Vs. State” { 44
(1991) DLT 561} and it was held that :-
“…….. While appreciating the evidence of a
witness approach must be whether the
evidence of the witness, read as a whole,
appears to have a ring of truth. Once that
impression is formed then undoubtedly it is
necessary for the Court to scrutinise the
evidence more particularly keeping in view
the deficiencies, drawbacks, and infirmities
pointed out in the evidence as a whole and
evaluate them to find out whether it is against
the general tenor of the evidence given by the
witness and whether earlier evaluation of the
evidence is shaken as to render it unworthy of
behalf. Minor discrepancies on trivial matters
not touching the core of the case, hyper
technical approach by taking sentences torn
out of context here and there from the
evidence, attaching importance to some
technical error committed by the investigating
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:36
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.65 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavofficer not going to the root of the matter,
would not ordinarily permit rejection of the
evidence as a whole. The main thing to be
seen is, whether those inconsistencies go to
the root of the matter or pertain to
insignificant aspects thereof. In the former
case, the defense may be justified in seeking
advantage of the inconsistencies in the
evidence. In the latter, however, no such
benefit may be available to it. That is a
salutary method of appreciation of evidence
in criminal cases.”
14. Law relating to appreciation of ocular evidence has
been elaborated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case
titled as ” Shahaja @ Shahjahan Ismail Mohd. Shaikh Vs. State
of Maharashtra” {Crl. Appeal No. 739/2017 decided on
14/07/2022} and it was held that :-
“27. The appreciation of ocular evidence is a
hard task. There is no fixed or straight-jacket
formula for appreciation of the ocular
evidence. The judicially evolved principles
for appreciation of ocular evidence in a
criminal case can be enumerated as under :-
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:49
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.66 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavI. While appreciating the evidence of a
witness, the approach must be whether the
evidence of the witness read as a whole
appears to have a ring of truth. Once that
impression is formed, it is undoubtedly
necessary for the Court to scrutinize the
evidence more particularly keeping in view
the deficiencies, drawbacks and infirmities
pointed out in the evidence as a whole and
evaluate them to find out whether it is against
the general tenor of the evidence given by the
witness and whether the earlier evaluation of
the evidence is shaken as to render it
unworthy of belief.
II. If the Court before whom the witness gives
evidence had the opportunity to form the
opinion about the general tenor of evidence
given by the witness, the appellate court
which had not this benefit will have to attach
due weight to the appreciation of evidence by
the trial court and unless there are reasons
weighty and formidable it would not be
proper to reject the evidence on the ground of
minor variations or infirmities in the matter
of trivial details.
III. When eye-witness is examined at length it
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:18:58
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.67 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavis quite possible for him to make some
discrepancies. But courts should bear in mind
that it is only when discrepancies in the
evidence of a witness are so incompatible
with the credibility of his version that the
court is justified in jettisoning his evidence.
IV. Minor discrepancies on trivial matters not
touching the core of the case, hyper technical
approach by taking sentences torn out of
context here or there from the evidence,
attaching importance to some technical error
committed by the investigating officer not
going to the root of the matter would not
ordinarily permit rejection of the evidence as
a whole.
V. Too serious a view to be adopted on mere
variations falling in the narration of an
incident (either as between the evidence of
two witnesses or as between two statements
of the same witness) is an unrealistic
approach for judicial scrutiny.
VI. By and large a witness cannot be expected
to possess a photographic memory and to
recall the details of an incident. It is not as if a
video tape is replayed on the mental screen.
VII. Ordinarily it so happens that a witness is
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:19:07
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.68 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavovertaken by events. The witness could not
have anticipated the occurrence which so
often has an element of surprise. The mental
faculties therefore cannot be expected to be
attuned to absorb the details.
VIII. The powers of observation differ from
person to person. What one may notice,
another may not. An object or movement
might emboss its image on one person’s mind
whereas it might go unnoticed on the part of
another.
IX. By and large people cannot accurately
recall a conversation and reproduce the very
words used by them or heard by them. They
can only recall the main purport of the
conversation. It is unrealistic to expect a
witness to be a human tape recorder.
X. In regard to exact time of an incident, or
the time duration of an occurrence, usually,
people make their estimates by guess work on
the spur of the moment at the time of
interrogation. And one cannot expect people
to make very precise or reliable estimates in
such matters. Again, it depends on the time-
sense of individuals which varies from person
to person. Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:19:18
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.69 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavXI. Ordinarily a witness cannot be expected
to recall accurately the sequence of events
which take place in rapid succession or in a
short time span. A witness is liable to get
confused, or mixed up when interrogated later
on.
XII. A witness, though wholly truthful, is
liable to be overawed by the court atmosphere
and the piercing cross examination by counsel
and out of nervousness mix up facts, get
confused regarding sequence of events, or fill
up details from imagination on the spur of the
moment. The sub- conscious mind of the
witness sometimes so operates on account of
the fear of looking foolish or being
disbelieved though the witness is giving a
truthful and honest account of the occurrence
witnessed by him.
XIII. A former statement though seemingly
inconsistent with the evidence need not
necessarily be sufficient to amount to
contradiction. Unless the former statement
has the potency to discredit the later
statement, even if the later statement is at
variance with the former to some extent it
would not be helpful to contradict that
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:19:42
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.70 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavwitness.”
15. FINDINGS
As per case of the prosecution, there is no eye-
witness of the murder. The case of the prosecution is based upon
the circumstantial evidence as well as direct evidence.
Before proceeding further, it is relevant to discuss
the law relating to the circumstantial evidence.
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the
settled law is that the circumstances from which the conclusion
of guilt is drawn should be fully proved and such circumstances
must be conclusive in nature. Moreover, all the circumstances
should be complete and there should be no gap left in the chain
of evidence. Further, the proved circumstances must be
consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused
and totally inconsistent with his innocence.
It is also well settled law that in a case of
circumstantial evidence, the chain has to be complete in all
respects so as to indicate the guilt of the accused and also
exclude any other theory of the crime. Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:19:49
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.71 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavLaw relating to circumstantial evidence has been
elaborated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled
as “Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra” {AIR
1984 SC 1622} and it was held that :-
(1) the circumstances from which the
conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be
fully established.
(2) the facts so established should be
consistent only with the hypothesis of the
guilt of the accused, that is to say they should
not be explainable on any other hypothesis
except that the accused is guilty,(3) the circumstances should be of a
conclusive nature and tendency.(4) they should exclude every possible
hypothesis except the one to be proved, and(5) there must be a chain of evidence so
complete as not to leave any reasonable
ground for the conclusion consistent with the
innocence of the accused and must show that
in all human probability the act must have
been done by the accused”.
It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as “State of Goa Vs. Sanjay Thakran” {2007 (3)
SCALE 740} that following test which must be satisfied in case
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:19:56
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.72 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavof circumstantial evidence to support a conviction:-
“The prosecution case is based on the
circumstantial evidence and it is a well-settled
proposition of law that when the case rests
upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence
must satisfy the following tests:-(1) The circumstances from which an
inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must
be cogently and firmly established;(2) those circumstances should be of a
definite tendency unerringly pointing towards
guilt of the accused;
(3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively,
should form a chain so complete that there is
no escape from the conclusion that within all
human probability the crime was committed
by the accused and none else; and(4) the circumstantial evidence in order to
sustain conviction must be complete and
incapable of explanation of any other
hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused
and such evidence should not only be
consistent with the guilt of the accused but
should be inconsistent with his innocence.”
It was also held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India in case titled as “Ramreddy Rajesh Khanna Reddy Vs.
State of Andhra Pradesh” {(2006) 10 JCC 172} that:-
“It is now well-settled that with a view to
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:05
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.73 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavbase a conviction on circumstantial evidence,
the prosecution must establish all the pieces
of incriminating circumstances by reliable
and clinching evidence and the circumstances
so proved must form such a chain of events as
would permit no conclusion other than one of
guilt of the accused. The circumstances
cannot be on any other hypothesis. It is also
well-settled that suspicion, however, grave
may be, cannot be a substitute for a proof and
the courts shall take utmost precaution in
finding an accused guilty only on the basis of
the circumstantial evidence.”
16. Now, this Court shall discuss the merits of the
present case.
(i) Testimony of the complainant/father of the deceased
As per case of the prosecution, there is no eye-
witness of the murder of Vikas (deceased).
Case of the prosecution in respect of murder of
Vikas (deceased) is based upon last seen theory as well as other
incriminating circumstantial evidence.
It is the case of the prosecution that before
10/03/2014, accused Satish Kumar Yadav had cheated and
dishonestly induced the complainant Jai Bhagwan to part with
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:12
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.74 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavRs. Three Lakh by deceiving him that he would arrange an
employment for his son namely Vikas (deceased) in the
Agriculture Department, ICAR for the post of Clerk but no such
appointment/employment was given to Vikas in the Agriculture
Department, ICAR and the accused had handed over a forged
appointment letter to him. It is also the case of the prosecution
that on 10/03/2014, accused had called Vikas and Vikas was left
by the complainant at the residence of the accused bearing House
No. 91-A, A-2 Block, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi
and thereafter, accused had abducted Vikas in his Alto car
bearing No. HR-26AG-4749 with intent that he be put into
danger of being murdered and was so murdered. It is also the
case of the prosecution that on 10/03/2014 after 12:30 PM
between 5:05 PM to 6:10 PM near Sector-14, Dwarka, New
Delhi, accused had committed the murder of Vikas by throttling
his neck with intention of causing such bodily injury as was
likely to cause death and with the knowledge that the accused by
the said act by throttling the neck of Vikas would cause his death.
Law relating to last seen theory has been elaborated
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:20
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.75 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavby the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as “State of
U.P. Vs. Satish” {AIR 2005 SC 1000} and it was held that:-
“The last seen theory comes into play where
the time-gap between the point of time when
the accused and the deceased were seen last
alive and when the deceased is found dead is
so small that possibility of any person other
than the accused being the author of the crime
becomes impossible. It would be difficult in
some cases to positively establish that the
deceased was last seen with the accused when
there is a long gap and possibility of other
persons coming in between exists. In the
absence of any other positive evidence to
conclude that the accused and the deceased
were last seen together, it would be hazardous
to come to a conclusion of guilt in those
cases. In this case there is positive evidence
that the deceased and the accused were seen
together by witnesses PWs. 3 and 5, in
addition to the evidence of PW-2.”It was also held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India in case titled as “Ravirala Laxmaiah Vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh” {2013 (9) SCC 283} that:-
“In cases where the accused has been seen
with the deceased victim (last seen theory), it
becomes the duty of the accused to explain
the circumstances under which the death of
the victim has occurred.”
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:29
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.76 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPW-21 is the complainant in the present case. PW-21
is the father of Vikas (deceased). Complainant/PW-21 has duly
supported the case of the prosecution. Complainant/PW-21 in his
testimony had duly proved on record the complaint
Ex. PW-21/A, on the basis of which, the present case FIR was
got registered. Complainant/PW-21 in his complaint Ex.PW-21/A
has specifically mentioned the name of the accused Satish Kumar
Yadav. Name of the accused Satish Kumar Yadav has also been
specifically mentioned in the FIR Ex.PW-4/A. The contents of
complaint Ex.PW-21/A and FIR Ex.PW-4/A have been duly
proved on record and corroborated by the complainant / PW-21
and other prosecution witnesses.
As per complainant/PW-21, accused Satish Kumar
Yadav had taken Rs.3 Lakh from him on the pretext of providing
the job of Clerk to his son Vikas (deceased) in Agriculture
Department, ICAR, Pusa Road and the accused had also given
forged appointment letter of his son. As per complainant/PW-21,
accused Satish Kumar Yadav had asked him to send Vikas
(deceased) on 10/03/2014 for the purpose of training and on
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:36
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.77 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav10/03/2014, he left his son Vikas (deceased) at the house of the
accused. Accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. had admitted
the fact that he had taken Rs.1 Lakh from the complainant for his
heart surgery and on 10/03/2014, Vikas (deceased) had come to
him to collect Rs.1 Lakh. Factum regarding coming/presence of
Vikas (deceased) on 10/03/2014 at the house of accused Satish
Kumar Yadav at Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi is
admitted by the accused. Call details of 10/03/2014 of mobile
phones of the accused and Vikas (deceased) shows the location of
their mobile phones at Uttam Nagar. Call details of mobile
phones of the accused and Vikas (deceased) also proved the fact
that on the date of incident i.e. 10/03/2014, accused and Vikas
(deceased) were present at the house of the accused at Mohan
Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. Call details of mobile phone
of the complainant also proved the fact that on the date of
incident i.e. 10/03/2014 at relevant time, complainant was
present at the house of the accused at Mohan Garden, Uttam
Nagar, New Delhi. From the testimony of PW-21, it is clear that
on the date of incident, complainant had lastly seen the accused
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:44
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.78 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavand his son Vikas (deceased) together. PW-21 had lastly seen the
accused and his son Vikas (deceased) together on 10/03/2014 at
relevant time at the house of the accused.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 10/03/2014,
accused had taken/abducted Vikas (deceased) in his car bearing
no. HR-26AG-4749 from his house situated at Mohan Garden,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and thereafter, the accused had
committed the murder of Vikas (deceased) and thrown the dead
body of Vikas (deceased) at the agricultural field belonging to
PW-22 at Village Dhool Siras, Sector-24, Dwarka, Delhi.
PW-17 in his cross-examination had deposed that on
the date of incident i.e. 10/03/2014, she had seen accused Satish
Kumar Yadav going in the car. In view of the same, it is clear that
on 10/03/2014, PW-17 had also seen the accused in his car while
leaving his house.
Call details of 10/03/2014 of mobile phone of the
accused also shows the location of his mobile phone at Village
Dhool Siras. Call details of mobile phone of the accused also
proved the fact that on the date of incident i.e. 10/03/2014,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:20:52
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.79 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavaccused was present at Village Dhool Siras from where 77
bones/skeletal remains of Vikas (deceased) were recovered at the
instance of the accused.
As per prosecution witnesses, on 11/03/2014 i.e.
next day of the murder of Vikas (deceased), accused fled away
from his house alongwith his wife and children in his car bearing
no. HR-26AG-4749 and he left his car near Balak Nath Mandir
in abandoned condition and thereafter, started residing in House
No. 932-A, Shivaji Nagar, near water tank, Patil Nagar, Atali,
Kalyan, District Thane, Maharashtra from where he was arrested
by the police on 05/06/2014.
PW-15 in his testimony had deposed that on
11/03/2014, in the evening time, accused Satish, his wife and
children left their house and on being asked, accused told him
that he is going to meet his sister at Bhiwadi, Rajasthan.
In view of the law laid down in Ravirala Laxmaiah
case (supra), in case of last seen theory, it was the duty of the
accused to explain the circumstances under which the death of
Vikas (deceased) has occurred. In the present case, dead body of
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:21:00
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.80 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavVikas (deceased) was not recovered, however, 77 bones/skeletal
remains of Vikas (deceased) were recovered at the instance of the
accused from the agricultural field of PW-22. In the present case,
77 bones/ skeletal remains of Vikas (deceased) were recovered
only after the arrest of the accused. From the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses, it is clear that the factum regarding
throwing of dead body of Vikas (deceased) was only in the
exclusive knowledge of the accused. It is well settled law that on
the information/disclosure of the accused to the police, which led
to the recovery of the incriminating article/case property/weapon
is admissible in evidence u/s 27 Indian Evidence Act. There is
nothing in Section 27 Indian Evidence Act, which renders the
statement/disclosure of the accused inadmissible, if recovery of
the article/case property/weapon was made from any place which
is open or accessible to others. As per call details record of
mobile phone of the accused, location of mobile phone of the
accused of 10/03/2014 was found to be of Village Dhool Siras
from where, 77 bones/skeletal remains of Vikas (deceased) were
recovered at the instance of the accused. Accused has also failed
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:21:24
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.81 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavto explain as to under which circumstances, the death of Vikas
has occurred.
As per complainant/PW-21, accused Satish Kumar
Yadav had taken Rs.3 Lakh from him on the pretext of providing
the job of Clerk to his son Vikas (deceased) in Agriculture
Department, ICAR, Pusa Road and the accused had also given
forged appointment letter of his son.
As per case of the prosecution, part cheated amount
of Rs.20,000/- was recovered at the instance of the accused from
his house situated at Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar. Pointing out
and seizure memo Ex.PW-29/A has been duly proved on record
by the prosecution for the same. Accused has failed to clarify as
to how amount of Rs.20,000/- was found lying in his house
situated at Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
Appointment letter Ex.PW-21/C has been duly proved on record
by the prosecution. There is nothing on record to show that
appointment letter Ex.PW-21/C was genuine and valid
appointment letter issued by the competent authority/department.
As per case of the prosecution, documents/
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:21:34
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.82 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcertificates/educational documents of deceased Vikas Ex.P-1 to
Ex.P-4 were recovered at the instance of the accused from the
House No.931, near Water Tank, Shivaji Nagar, Patil Nagar, Atali
Kalyan, District Thane, Maharashtra. Seizure memo Ex.PW-11/D
of the same has been duly proved on record by the prosecution.
Accused has failed to clarify as to how the aforesaid documents/
certificates/ educational documents of deceased Vikas were
found lying at his aforesaid house situated at Thane,
Maharashtra.
All aforesaid facts clearly shows that the accused
had cheated the amount of Rs.3 Lakh from the complainant on
the pretext of providing job of Clerk to his son Vikas (deceased)
in Agriculture Department, ICAR, Pusa Road, Delhi and after
abducting Vikas (deceased), accused had committed the murder
of Vikas (deceased).
In the present case, the accused had not led any
defence evidence in support of his defence and to rebut and
contradict the case of the prosecution.
On the other hand, PW-21 has duly supported the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:21:47
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.83 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcase of the prosecution. Testimony of PW-21 is also corroborated
with the testimonies of other prosecution witnesses and
documentary evidence as well as other evidence relied upon by
the prosecution.
There is nothing on the record to disbelieve the
testimony/version of PW-21. In the cross-examination of PW-21,
no material contradiction/inconsistency has been surfaced or
pointed out except some minor ones which are but natural.
(ii) Testimonies of other public witnesses
PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-7, PW-15, PW-17, PW-20,
PW-22, PW-24 and PW-26 are the other public witnesses
examined by the prosecution in the present case.
PW-1 in his testimony had deposed that he had
obtained SIM no.09991115148 of Vodafone in the year 2008 and
he had given the same to his sister Badho Devi. As per case of
the prosecution, the SIM of the aforesaid mobile number was
being used by the complainant at the relevant time and period.
Accused neither disputed the said fact nor lead any evidence to
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:21:55
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.84 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavrebut the said fact.
PW-2 is stated to be the friend of Vikas (deceased)
and user of mobile phone no. 9992701007. As per PW-2, on the
date of incident i.e. 10/03/2014, PW-2 had telephonic
conversation with Vikas (deceased). PW-2 in his cross-
examination by Addl. PP for the State had deposed that Vikas
(deceased) told him on phone that accused Satish Kumar Yadav
had given 5-6 tablets of Alprex and tablets of Alovera to him.
Factum regarding telephonic conversation between PW-2 and
Vikas (deceased) is duly proved from the call details record of
mobile phone of PW-2 and Vikas (deceased).
PW-3 is the brother-in-law of Vikas (deceased) and
he called the police at 100 number. PW-3 in his testimony had
deposed that his father-in-law i.e. complainant/PW-21 had told
him that on 10/03/2014, he left Vikas (deceased) at the house of
the accused.
PW-7 is the mother of Vikas (deceased) and she
deposed that on 04/07/2014, she alongwith her husband and
police officials had gone to FSL, Rohini, where her blood sample
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:13
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.85 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavwas taken.
PW-15 is stated to be the friend of the accused. As
per PW-15, he had arranged the rented accommodation for the
accused in Uttam Nagar. PW-15 in his testimony had deposed
that on 11/03/2014 in the evening time, accused Satish Kumar
Yadav alongwith his wife and children left his house and on
asking, accused told him that he is going to meet his sister at
Bhiwadi, Rajasthan.
PW-17 is stated to be the neighbour of the accused.
As per PW-17, her husband i.e. PW-15 had arranged the tenanted
house for the accused near his house and accused started living
there alongwith his wife and children.
PW-20 is stated to be known to the accused, who
had given the SIM of mobile no.8287972769 to the accused,
which was being used by the accused at the relevant time, date
and place.
PW-22 is stated to be the owner of the agricultural
field from where 77 bones/ skeletal remains of the deceased
Vikas were recovered. PW-22 has duly proved on record the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:23
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.86 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavpointing out and seizure memo of the bones of the deceased
Ex.PW-22/A.
PW-24 is the registered owner of Alto car bearing
No. HR-26-AG-4749. As per PW-24, he sold the aforesaid
vehicle to PW-26 Deepak @ Bittu and the said car was further
sold by Deepak @ Bittu to the accused.
PW-26 in his testimony had deposed that he
purchased the Alto car bearing No. HR-26-AG-4749 from PW-24
and he sold the same to accused Satish Kumar Yadav,
The testimonies of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-7,
PW-15, PW-17, PW-20, PW-22, PW-24 and PW-26 are
corroborated with the testimonies of other prosecution witnesses
and documentary evidence as well as other evidence relied upon
by the prosecution.
There is nothing on the record to disbelieve the
testimonies/versions of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-7, PW-15,
PW-17, PW-20, PW-22, PW-24 and PW-26. In the cross-
examination of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-7, PW-15, PW-17,
PW-20, PW-22, PW-24 and PW-26, no material contradiction/
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:30
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.87 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavinconsistency has been surfaced or pointed out except some
minor ones which are but natural.
(iii) Factum regarding death of Vikas (deceased)
It is the case of the prosecution that the accused had
abducted and committed the murder of Vikas (deceased) and
thereafter, thrown the dead body of Vikas (deceased) in the
agricultural field of PW-22. In the present case, the dead body
of the deceased Vikas has not been recovered, however, 77
bones/ skeletal remains of deceased Vikas were recovered from
the agricultural field of PW-22 at the instance of the accused on
08/06/2014.
It is pertinent to mention here that on 31/05/2018,
counsel for the accused had admitted the FSL/DNA report in
respect of bones of the deceased Ex.PX-1.
It is mentioned in the DNA report of bones of the
deceased Ex.PX-1 that “DNA (STR) profile were performed on
the exhibits ‘1’ (pieces of Bone), ‘3’ (Blood sample of Shanti
Devi) and ‘4’ (Blood sample of Jai Bhagwan) is sufficient to
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:37
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.88 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavconclude that exhibit ‘3’ (Blood sample of Shanti Devi) is the
biological mother and exhibit ‘4’ (Blood sample of Jai Bhagwan)
is the biological father of exhibit ‘1’ (piece of Bone)”.
Recovery of 77 bones/ skeletal remains of Vikas
(deceased) established the fact that Vikas (deceased) is not alive.
Factum regarding death of Vikas (deceased) has also not been
disputed by the accused. Even otherwise, factum regarding death
of Vikas has been duly established by the prosecution from the
testimonies of prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence
as well as other evidence relied upon by the prosecution.
(iv) Identity of deceased
It is the case of the prosecution that in the present
case, the dead body of the deceased Vikas has not been
recovered, however, 77 bones/ skeletal remains of deceased
Vikas were recovered from the agricultural field of PW-22.
It is mentioned in the FSL/DNA report of bones of
the deceased Ex.PX-1 that “DNA (STR) profile were performed
on the exhibits ‘1’ (pieces of Bone), ‘3’ (Blood sample of Shanti
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:45
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.89 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavDevi) and ‘4’ (Blood sample of Jai Bhagwan) is sufficient to
conclude that exhibit ‘3’ (Blood sample of Shanti Devi) is the
biological mother and exhibit ‘4’ (Blood sample of Jai Bhagwan)
is the biological father of exhibit ‘1’ (piece of Bone)”.
On 31/05/2018, counsel for the accused had
admitted the FSL/DNA report in respect of bones of the deceased
Ex.PX-1. Vide separate statement of counsel for the accused
recorded on 31/05/2018, identity of bones of the deceased
Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly) was not disputed.
During the course of examination of PW-22, bones
of the deceased Vikas were exhibited as Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly).
During the course of examination of PW-31, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that he does not have any
objection to the identity of the bones of the deceased
Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly).
During the course of his examination/testimony,
PW-21 had identified the photograph of his son Vikas (deceased)
Ex.PW-21/D.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:22:54
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.90 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcross-examination of concerned prosecution witnesses to dispute
the identity of the deceased as well as bones of the deceased
Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly). Hence, identity of the deceased Vikas has
been duly established by the prosecution.
(v) Identity of the accused
PW-3, PW-11, PW-17, PW-20, PW-21, PW-22,
PW-29, PW-30 and PW-31 during the course of their testimonies
had duly identified the accused Satish Kumar Yadav. PW-6,
PW-15, PW-23, PW-24, PW-26 and PW-27 in their testimonies
have specifically mentioned the name of the accused.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the cross-
examination of aforesaid witnesses to dispute the identity of the
accused. Hence, identity of the accused Satish Kumar Yadav has
been duly established by the prosecution.
(vi) Conduct of the accused
It is the case of the prosecution that on 10/03/2014,
accused had abducted and committed the murder of Vikas
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:00
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.91 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav(deceased) and after committing the murder of Vikas (deceased),
the accused Satish Kumar Yadav alongwith his wife and children
had absconded and he was apprehended from Thane,
Maharashtra on 05/06/2014 i.e. approximately three months.
Accused neither lead any defence evidence nor given any
reasonable explanation as to why he alongwith his wife and
children absconded from his house at Uttam Nagar and as to why
he alongwith his wife and children started residing in Thane,
Maharashtra.
It is well settled law that the act of absconding is no
doubt relevant piece of evidence to be considered alongwith
other evidence but its value would always depend on the
circumstances of each case.
In the present case, apart from the act of absconding
of the accused, there are many other incriminating circumstances/
evidence against the accused.
Hence, conduct of the accused has become relevant
to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:10
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.92 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
(vii) Call details/location of mobile phones
Vikas (deceased) was stated to be the user of mobile
phone no.8684993005. Complainant was stated to be the user
of mobile phone no.9991115148. Sudhir Kumar was stated to be
the user of mobile phone no.9992701007. Accused Satish Kumar
Yadav was stated to be the user of mobile phone numbers
8287972769 and 8743898922.
In the present case, call details record Ex.PW-16/C,
Ex.PW-18/C, Ex.PW-18/F, Ex.PW-18/I and Ex.PW-25/C of
aforesaid mobiles and certificates u/s 65-B Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW-16/D, Ex.PW-18/J and Ex.PW-25/D have been duly
proved on record by the prosecution.
Call details and location of mobile phones of Vikas
(deceased), accused, complainant and Sudhir Kumar of the date
of incident i.e. 10/03/2014 have been duly proved on record by
the prosecution. Call details and location of mobile phones of
Vikas (deceased) and accused of the date of incident i.e.
10/03/2014 clearly proved the fact that accused and Vikas
(deceased) were present at the house of the accused at Uttam
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:17
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.93 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavNagar at the same time. As per call details record, mobile
location of the mobile phone of the accused of the same day i.e.
10/03/2014 was also found to be of the agricultural field of
PW-22 from where the 77 bones/ skeletal remains of Vikas
(deceased) were recovered at the instance of the accused. The
aforesaid locations of the mobile phones of Vikas (deceased) and
accused established the presence of Vikas (deceased) and accused
at the house of the accused and location of the mobile phone of
the accused also established the presence of the accused at
agricultural field of PW-22 from where the 77 bones/ skeletal
remains of Vikas (deceased) were recovered at the instance of the
accused.
No evidence has been led by the accused in support
of his defence and to rebut and contradict the case of the
prosecution in this regard and to prove the fact that he was not
present at both the aforesaid places on the date of incident i.e.
10/03/2014 at the relevant time. On the other hand, the
prosecution has established the presence of Vikas (deceased) and
the accused at the house of the accused and also established the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:28
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.94 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavpresence of the accused at agricultural field of PW-22 from
where the 77 bones/ skeletal remains of Vikas (deceased) were
recovered at the instance of the accused.
(viii) Identity of the case properties
a) Bones/ skeletal remains of the deceased :- On
31/05/2018, counsel for the accused had admitted the FSL/DNA
report in respect of bones of the deceased Ex.PX-1. Vide separate
statement of counsel for the accused recorded on 31/05/2018,
identity of bones of the deceased Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly) was not
disputed. During the course of examination of PW-29 and
PW-31, it was submitted by counsel for the accused that he does
not have any objection to the identity of the bones of the
deceased Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly). During the course of examination
of PW-22, bones of the deceased Vikas were exhibited as
Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly).
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
cross-examination of concerned witnesses to dispute the identity
of the deceased as well as 77 bones/ skeletal remains of the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:37
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.95 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavdeceased Ex.PW-22/P1 (colly). Hence, identity of 77 bones/
skeletal remains has been duly established/proved by the
prosecution.
b) Vehicle/ Car bearing no. HR-26AG-4749 :- During
the course of examination of PW-26, car bearing no.
HR-26AG-4749 Ex.PW-11/P1 was produced in the Court
complex and the same was identified by PW-26. PW-24 and
PW-26 during the course of their examination had identified the
aforesaid car from the photographs of the aforesaid car
Ex.PW-24/G-1 to Ex.PW-24/G-3. During the course of
examination of PW-29, it was submitted by counsel for the
accused that he does not have any objection to the identity of
Alto car Ex.PW-11/P1.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
cross-examination of aforesaid witnesses to dispute the identity
of the aforesaid car. Hence, identity of the aforesaid car has been
duly established/proved by the prosecution.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:45
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.96 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
c) Laptop, dongle and charger :- During the course of
examination of PW-29 and PW-31, laptop Ex.PW-29/A-1, dongle
Ex.PW-29/A-2 and charger Ex.PW-29/A-3 were produced in the
Court and the same were identified by PW-29 and PW-31.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
cross-examination of aforesaid witnesses to dispute the identity
of the aforesaid laptop, dongle and charger. Hence, identity of the
aforesaid laptop, dongle and charger has been duly
established/proved by the prosecution.
d) Currency notes of Rs.20,000/- :- During the
course of examination of PW-29 and PW-31, currency notes of
Rs.20,000/- Ex. PW-29/A4 were produced in the Court and the
same were identified by PW-29 and PW-31. Pointing out and
seizure memo Ex.PW-29/A of the same was also proved on
record by the prosecution.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
cross-examination of aforesaid witnesses to dispute the identity
of the aforesaid currency notes. Hence, identity of the aforesaid
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:23:54
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.97 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcurrency notes has been duly established/proved by the
prosecution.
e) Educational certificates and documents of
deceased :- During the course of examination of PW-11,
educational certificates and documents of deceased Ex.P-1 to
Ex.P-4 were produced in the Court and the same were duly
identified by PW-11. Seizure memo Ex.PW-11/D of the same
was also proved on record by the prosecution.
Accused/counsel had not put any question in the
cross-examination of PW-11 to dispute the identity of Ex.P-1 to
Ex.P-4. Hence, identity of Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-4 has been duly
established/proved by the prosecution.
(ix) Forensic witnesses
PW-13 and PW-19 are the forensic witnesses,
examined by the prosecution in the present case.
PW-13 in his testimony had duly proved on record
his report Ex.PW-13/A.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:24:02
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.98 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPW-19 in his testimony had duly proved on record
his report Ex.PW-19/A.
It is pertinent to mention that on 31/05/2018, counsel
for the accused had admitted the FSL/DNA report in respect of
bones of the deceased Ex.PX-1.
FSL reports Ex.PW-13/A and Ex.PW-19/A have
been duly proved on record by PW-13 and PW-19. There is
nothing on the record to disbelieve the testimonies/
versions/opinions of PW-13 and PW-19. In the cross-examination
of PW-13 and PW-19, the counsel for the accused had not put
any question in respect of credibility of the FSL reports
Ex.PW-13/A and Ex.PW-19/A. Even otherwise, the FSL result is
per se admissible u/s. 293 Cr.P.C.
(x) Testimonies of police witnesses
In the present case, PW-4, PW-5, PW-6, PW-8,
PW-9, PW-10, PW-11, PW-12, PW-14, PW-23, PW-27, PW-28,
PW-29, PW-30 and PW-31 are the police officials examined by
the prosecution. From the testimonies of the aforesaid police
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:24:10
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.99 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavwitnesses, it is evident that investigation conducted including the
documents prepared in the present case during the course of
investigation have been substantially proved by the aforesaid
police witnesses.
PW-27, PW-29 and PW-31 are the IOs in the present
case, who deposed regarding investigation conducted by them
and they duly proved on record the documents relating to the
investigation conducted by them.
17. Contentions of counsel for the accused
(a) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that the accused had not
abducted and committed the murder of Vikas (deceased) as he
was not having any motive to abduct and murder the Vikas and in
view of the same, benefit of doubt be given to the accused. On
the other hand, it was submitted by Addl. PP for the State that
motive is not required to be proved by the prosecution as the
prosecution has duly proved its case against the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:24:18
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.100 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavFor the purpose of any offence, motive, intention
and knowledge are relevant factors.
The terms motive, intention and knowledge have
been elaborated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case
titled as ” Basdev Vs. The State of PEPSU” { AIR 1956 SC
488} and it was held that :-
“……….of course, we have to distinguish
between motive, intention and knowledge.
Motive is something which prompts a man to
form an intention and knowledge is an
awareness of the consequences of the act. In
many cases intention and knowledge merge
into each other and mean the same thing more
or less and intention can be presumed from
knowledge. The demarcating line between
knowledge and intention is no doubt thin but
it is not difficult to perceive that they cannote
different things…….”
It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” Sanjeev Vs. State of Haryana” { 2015 (4) SCC
387} that :-
“It is settled principle of law that, to establish
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2025.02.28
06:24:27
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.101 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavcommission of murder by an accused, motive
is not required to be proved. Motive is
something which prompts a man to form an
intention. The intention can be formed even at
the place of incident at the time of
commission of crime. It is only either
intention or knowledge on the part of the
accused which is required to be seen in
respect of the offence of culpable homicide.
In order to read either intention or knowledge,
the courts have to examine the circumstances,
as there cannot be any direct evidence as to
the state of mind of the accused.”
It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Kishan Pal & Ors.”
{ (2008) 16 SCC 73 } that :-
“……….the motive is a thing which is
primarily known to the accused themselves
and it is not possible for the prosecution to
explain what actually promoted or excited
them to commit the particular crime. The
motive may be considered as circumstance
which is relevant for assessing the evidence
but if the evidence is clear and unambiguous
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2025.02.28
06:24:38
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.102 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavand the circumstances prove the guilt of the
accused, the same is not weakened even if the
motive is not a very strong one……….”
It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh” { AIR 2022 SC 5273} that :-
“……….It is equally true that failure to prove
motive in cases resting on circumstantial
evidence is not fatal by itself. However, it is
also well settled and it is trite in law that
absence of motive could be a missing link of
incriminating circumstances, but once the
prosecution has established the other
incriminating circumstances to its entirety,
absence of motive will not give any benefit to
the accused.”
In view of the aforesaid case laws, it is clear that
motive is not required to be proved by the prosecution where the
prosecution has duly proved its case against the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
In the present case, the accused was having the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:24:47
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.103 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavmotive to murder Vikas (deceased) as accused Satish Kumar
Yadav had taken an amount of Rs.3 Lakh from the complainant
to provide the job/employment to Vikas (deceased) for the post of
Clerk in the Agriculture Department, Pusa, Delhi but he failed to
provide the said job to Vikas (deceased).
Even otherwise, in the present case, the motive of
the accused to murder the Vikas (deceased) is not required to be
proved as the prosecution has duly proved its case against the
accused beyond reasonable doubt. In the present case, each and
every chain of events of circumstantial evidence has been duly
proved by the prosecution. Hence, the contention of counsel for
the accused in this regard is not tenable.
(b) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that PW-2, PW-17, PW-20,
PW-22 and PW-24 have not supported the case of the prosecution
and turned hostile and in view of the same, benefit of doubt be
given to the accused.
It is well settled law that evidence of a hostile
witness cannot be discarded as a whole and relevant parts thereof
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:03
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.104 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavwhich are admissible in law can be used by the prosecution or the
defence.
Law relating to hostile witness has been elaborated
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as ” Rajesh
Yadav & Anr. Vs. State of UP” {Criminal Appeal No.339-
340/2014 decided on 04/02/2022} and it was held that :-
“The expression “hostile witness” does not
find a place in the Indian Evidence Act. It is
coined to mean testimony of a witness turning
to depose in favour of the opposite party. We
must bear it in mind that a witness may
depose in favour of a party in whose favour it
is meant to be giving through his chief
examination, while later on change his view
in favour of the opposite side. Similarly, there
would be cases where a witness does not
support the case of the party starting from
chief examination itself. This classification
has to be borne in mind by the Court. With
respect to the first category, the Court is not
denuded of its power to make an appropriate
assessment of the evidence rendered by such
a witness. Even a chief examination could be
termed as evidence. Such evidence would
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:13
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.105 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavbecome complete after the cross examination.
Once evidence is completed, the said
testimony as a whole is meant for the court to
assess and appreciate qua a fact. Therefore,
not only the specific part in which a witness
has turned hostile but the circumstances under
which it happened can also be considered,
particularly in a situation where the chief
examination was completed and there are
circumstances indicating the reasons behind
the subsequent statement, which could be
deciphered by the court. It is well within the
powers of the court to make an assessment,
being a matter before it and come to the
correct conclusion.”
It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” Neeraj Dutta Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)”
{Criminal Appeal No.1669/2009 decided on 15/12/2022} that :-
“Therefore, this Court cautioned that even if a
witness is treated as “hostile” and is cross-
examined, his evidence cannot be written off
altogether but must be considered with due
care and circumspection and that part of the
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:22
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.106 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavtestimony which is creditworthy must be
considered and acted upon. It is for the judge
as a matter of prudence to consider the extent
of evidence which is creditworthy for the
purpose of proof of the case. In other words,
the fact that a witness has been declared
“hostile” does not result in an automatic
rejection of his evidence. Even, the evidence
of a “hostile witness” if it finds corroboration
from the facts of the case may be taken into
account while judging the guilt of the
accused. Thus, there is no legal bar to raise a
conviction upon a “hostile witness” testimony
if corroborated by other reliable evidence.”
On perusal of testimonies of PW-2, PW-17, PW-20,
PW-22 and PW-24, it is clear that the aforesaid witnesses were
not completely hostile. Aforesaid witnesses more or less
supported the case of the prosecution. PW-2 and PW-24 had
specifically mentioned the name of the accused in their
testimonies. During the course of their examination, PW-17,
PW-20, PW-22 had duly identified the accused Satish Kumar
Yadav. In view of the same, the whole testimonies of PW-2,
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:33
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.107 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavPW-17, PW-20, PW-22 and PW-24 cannot be washed off.
Even otherwise, case of the prosecution is duly
supported and corroborated with the testimonies of PW-21 and
other concerned prosecution witnesses and documentary
evidence as well as other evidence relied upon by the
prosecution.
(c) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that PW-21 is the father of
the deceased and PW-3 is the brother-in-law of the deceased and
they have falsely deposed against the accused to falsely implicate
the accused in the present case. It is well settled law that merely
because the witnesses are related to the complainant or the
deceased, their evidence cannot be thrown out.
It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” Waman & Ors. Vs. State of Maharastra”
{Criminal Appeal No. 364/2009 decided on 29/06/2011} that :-
“It is clear that merely because the witnesses
are related to the complainant or the
deceased, their evidence cannot be thrown
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:42
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.108 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavout. If their evidence is found to be consistent
and true, the fact of being a relative cannot by
itself discredit their evidence. In other words,
the relationship is not a factor to affect the
credibility of a witness and the courts have to
scrutinize their evidence meticulously with a
little care.”
In view of the specific testimonies of PW-21 and
other concerned prosecution witnesses regarding commission of
offence of cheating, abduction and murder of Vikas (deceased)
by the accused, the contention of counsel for the accused in this
regard is not tenable.
(d) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that in the present case, at
the time of arrest of the accused and recovery from Thane,
Maharashtra, no independent public witness from the nearby
residential houses was joined in the investigation of the present
case by the IO nor cited/examined in the present case. It was also
submitted that in view of the same, benefit of doubt be given to
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:25:52
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.109 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavthe accused.
It is well settled law that non-examination of any
witness per se will not vitiate the case of the prosecution and it
depends upon the quality and not the quantity of the witnesses
and its importance.
It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as ” Rajesh Yadav & Anr. Vs. State of UP” {Criminal
Appeal No.339-340/2014 decided on 04/02/2022} that:-
“A mere non-examination of the witness per
se will not vitiate the case of the prosecution.
It depends upon the quality and not the
quantity of the witnesses and its importance.
If the court is satisfied with the explanation
given by the prosecution along with the
adequacy of the materials sufficient enough to
proceed with the trial and convict the
accused, there cannot be any prejudice.
Similarly, if the court is of the view that the
evidence is not screened and could well be
produced by the other side in support of its
case, no adverse inference can be drawn.
Onus is on the part of the party who alleges
that a witness has not been produced
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:26:00
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.110 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavdeliberately to prove it….”
It is well settled law that non-joining of public
witness in the investigation is not fatal in every case. In the
present case, complainant/PW-21, PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-7,
PW-15, PW-17, PW-20, PW-22, PW-24 and PW-26 were joined
in the investigation of the present case. Hence, the contention of
counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
(e) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that the accused had not
given any appointment letter of job to Vikas (deceased) or to
complainant and the appointment letter relied upon by the
prosecution neither verified from the concerned department nor
concerned official witness was examined from the department to
prove the authenticity of the same. It was also submitted that in
view of the same, benefit of doubt be given to the accused.
It is well settled law that non-examination of any
witness per se will not vitiate the case of the prosecution and it
depends upon the quality and not the quantity of the witnesses
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:26:13
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.111 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavand its importance.
In the present case, the prosecution has duly proved
on record the appointment letter Ex.PW-21/C of Vikas
(deceased), which was stated to be given by the accused to the
complainant. There is nothing on the record to show that the
accused was having any authority/ power to recruit/appoint any
person on Government job without following due process of
recruitment. PW-31 in his cross-examination had deposed that
during the course of investigation, he had gone to ICAR, Pusa to
investigate about the aforesaid appointment letter but he came to
know that no such department exists in Pusa. In view of the
same, there was no occasion for the prosecution to examine any
witness from Agriculture Department, ICAR, Pusa. No evidence
has been led by the accused in support of his defence and to rebut
and contradict the case of the prosecution in this regard. Hence,
the contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not
tenable.
(f) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that the accused had not
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2025.02.28
06:26:20
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.112 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavtaken the amount of Rs. Three Lakh from the complainant to
provide job/ employment to Vikas (deceased) for the post of
Clerk in Agriculture Department, ICAR, Pusa and the
prosecution has not proved on record any document to show that
the accused has taken the amount of Rs. Three Lakh from the
complainant. It was also submitted that in view of the same,
benefit of doubt be given to the accused. Accused in his
statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. had stated that he had taken Rs. One
Lakh from the complainant for his heart surgery. Factum
regarding receiving of amount of Rs.One Lakh has been admitted
by the accused. In the present case, accused has not proved on
record any documentary evidence to show that the aforesaid
amount of Rs. One Lakh was taken by him from the complainant
for his heart surgery. Medical document regarding his heart
surgery has not been placed/proved on record by the accused.
As per case of the prosecution, appointment letter
Ex.PW-21/C of Vikas (deceased), which was given by the
accused to the complainant was not found to be genuine. No
evidence has been led by the accused in support of his defence
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:26:29
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.113 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavand to rebut and contradict the case of the prosecution in this
regard. Hence, the contention of counsel for the accused in this
regard is not tenable.
(g) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that in the present case, all
the alleged recoveries are doubtful and in view of the same,
benefit of doubt be given to the accused. In the present case, the
prosecution has duly proved on record the recovered case
properties as well as all documentary evidence pertaining to the
aforesaid case properties. On the other hand, no evidence has
been led by the accused in support of his defence and to rebut
and contradict the case of the prosecution in this regard. Hence,
the contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not
tenable.
(h) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that IO had not investigated
the present matter properly and in view of the same, benefit of
doubt be given to the accused. On the other hand, it was
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:26:39
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.114 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavsubmitted by Addl. PP for the State that IO had properly
investigated the present matter. There is nothing on the record to
show that IO had not investigated the present matter properly and
investigation was defective.
Even otherwise, it was held by Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in case titled as “Ambika Prasad & Anr. Vs. State
(Delhi Administration)” (AIR 2000 SC 718) that :-
…..Dealing with a case of negligence on the
part of the investigating officer, this Court in
Karnel Singh v. State of MP {(1995) 5 SCC
518} observed that in a case of defective
investigation it would not be proper to acquit
the accused if the case is otherwise established
conclusively because in that event it would
tantamount to be falling in the hands of erring
investigating officer…”
Hence, the contention of counsel for the accused in
this regard is not tenable.
(i) During the course of final arguments, it was
submitted by counsel for the accused that there are material
contradictions and inconsistencies in the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses and in view of the same, benefit of doubt
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:26:50
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.115 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavto be given to the accused. On the other hand, during the course
of final arguments, it was submitted by Addl. PP for the State that
there is no material contradiction in the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses.
It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as “Sunil Kumar Sambhudayal Gupta Vs. State of
Maharashtra” { (2010) 13 SCC 657} that:-
” While appreciating the evidence, the court
has to take into consideration whether the
contradictions/ omissions had been of such
magnitude that they may materially affect
the trial. Minor contradictions,
inconsistencies, embellishments or
improvements on trivial matters without
effecting the core of the prosecution case
should not be made a ground to reject the
evidence in its entirety. The Trial Court, after
going through the entire evidence, must form
an opinion about the credibility of the
witnesses and the appellate Court in normal
course would not be justified in reviewing
the same again without justifiable reasons.”
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:00
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.116 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar YadavIn the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, no
material contradiction and inconsistency has been surfaced
except some minor ones which are but natural. Hence, the
contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
18. In the present case, PW-5, PW-14, PW-16, PW-19,
PW-24 and PW-25 have not been cross-examined by the
accused/counsel. The testimonies of PW-5, PW-14, PW-16,
PW-19, PW-24 and PW-25 have gone un-rebutted, un-challenged
and un-controverted.
In the present case, no defence evidence had been
led by the accused in support of his defence and to rebut and
contradict the case of the prosecution.
19. In the present case, mode & manner of offence,
motive, intention and knowledge are relevant factors. The
aforesaid factors have been duly proved on record by the
prosecution.
In the present case, concerned prosecution witnesses
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:11
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.117 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavin their testimonies had specifically deposed regarding the mode
and manner in which the accused had committed the offence of
cheating, abduction and murder. The said factum has also been
duly proved on record by the prosecution witnesses including the
forensic witnesses. The prosecution has duly proved on record
the documentary evidence including FSL reports and record of
call details and locations of mobile phones. The prosecution has
also proved on record the documentary evidence as well as all
case properties.
The testimony of PW-21 has been corroborated with
the testimonies of other public witnesses, forensic and police
witnesses as well as forensic and other documents and case
properties relied upon by the prosecution.
Testimonies of PW-21, forensic witnesses, nodal
officials as well as forensic reports clearly shows the mode &
manner in which the accused had committed the offence and the
same also shows the intention and knowledge of the accused to
commit the offence of cheating, abduction and murder.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:19
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.118 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadav
20. In the present case, the prosecution has also
successfully proved each and every aspect of circumstantial
evidence and last seen theory from the testimonies of public
witnesses, forensic, nodal officials and police witnesses as well
as forensic and other documents and case properties relied upon
by the prosecution.
In the present case, there is an unbroken chain of
circumstantial evidence and each and every chain of events of
circumstantial evidence has been proved on record and the chain
of events is complete in all respect so as to indicate the guilt of
the accused. There is no gap left in the chain of events of
circumstantial evidence. All the circumstantial evidence suggests
that it is only the accused, who had committed the offence of
cheating, abduction and murder. All the circumstantial evidence
are in the proximity to the time and situation.
21. All the essential ingredients of the offence
u/s. 302/364/420 IPC have been duly proved on record from the
testimonies of prosecution witnesses and documentary as well as
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:27
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.119 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavother evidence relied upon by the prosecution.
The factum regarding un-natural death of Vikas
(deceased) is not disputed by the accused. The prosecution has
also been able to prove the fact that death of the Vikas (deceased)
was caused by or in consequence of the act of the accused. The
prosecution has also been able to prove that such act was done by
the accused with the intention of causing death of Vikas
(deceased) and the accused knew it to be likely to cause death of
Vikas (deceased).
The prosecution has also been able to prove that the
accused has cheated the amount of Rs. Three Lakh from the
complainant on the pretext of providing the Government job of
Clerk to his son Vikas (deceased) in Agriculture Department,
ICAR, Pusa. The prosecution has also been able to prove that the
accused has abducted Vikas (deceased) in his Alto car bearing
No. HR-26AG-4749 with intent that he be put into danger of
being murdered and was so murdered.
22. There is no dispute regarding the propositions laid
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:37
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.120 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavdown in the case laws relied upon by counsel for the accused,
however, the same are not applicable to the facts and
circumstances of the present case.
23. CONCLUSION
Applying priori and posteriori reasonings, this Court
is held that before 10/03/2014, accused Satish Kumar Yadav had
cheated and dishonestly induced the complainant Jai Bhagwan to
part with Rs. Three Lakh by deceiving him that he would arrange
an employment for his son namely Vikas (deceased) in the
Agriculture Department, ICAR, Pusa for the post of Clerk but no
such appointment/employment was given to Vikas in the
Agriculture Department, ICAR, Pusa and the accused had handed
over a forged appointment letter to him. It is also held that on
10/03/2014, accused had called Vikas and Vikas was left by the
complainant at the residence of the accused bearing House No.
91-A, A-2 Block, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and
thereafter, accused had abducted Vikas in his Alto car bearing
No. HR-26AG-4749 with intent that he be put into danger of
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.28
06:27:48
+0530FIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.121 of 122
State V. Satish Kumar Yadavbeing murdered and was so murdered. It is also held that on
10/03/2014 after 12:30 PM between 5:05 PM to 6:10 PM near
Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi, accused had committed the
murder of Vikas (deceased) and after committing the murder,
accused had thrown the dead body of Vikas (deceased) in the
agricultural field of PW-22.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the prosecution has been successful
to prove its case against the accused Satish Kumar Yadav beyond
reasonable doubt for the offence under section 302/364/420 IPC.
This Court is held that the accused Satish Kumar Yadav has
committed the offence punishable under section 302/364/420
IPC. Accordingly, accused Satish Kumar Yadav is convicted for
the offence under section 302/364/420 IPC.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
Announced in the open Court 2025.02.28
06:27:56
on 28/02/2025 +0530(VIJAY SHANKAR)
ASJ-04 (West)
Tis Hazari Courts, DelhiFIR No.262/2014 PS Uttam Nagar Page No.122 of 122
[ad_1]
Source link