ANI Photo | Court acquits 3 accused of murder noting shoddy, manipulated investigation, orders departmental action against IO

A Delhi Court has recently acquitted three persons accused of murdering a youth in the Shahbad Dairy area of Delhi in December 2014.
The court acquitted the accused giving them the benefit of doubt, saying that the prosecution has failed to join the chain of circumstances.
The court has also directed department action against the investigation officer for lapses in probe.
It also directed to send copy of this order to DCP concerned for necessary action at his end.
Headless and mutilated body of deceased was recovered in Shahbad Dairy area in December 2014. The bones of chest were also missing from the body.
The court said that post-mortem report suggested that the heart was missing. It added that crime scene reflected that some tantrik worship was performed.
While acquitting the accused persons court termed the police investigation shoddy and manipulated.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Dhirendra Rana of Rohini District Court acquitted Sanjay, Sameer and Naseem. Accused persons were friends of Manjeet.
ASJ Rana said, “I am of the considered view that prosecution has failed to prove the chain of circumstances in this case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt.”
“The collected evidence has not been proved as per law and the investigation seems to be shoddy, manipulated and deliberate attempt to safeguard the actual offender,” ASJ Rana remarked.
He added that the investigation carried out by IO is not only an injustice to the deceased but also to the accused persons, who are facing trial since 2015.
“This court is of the opinion that the actual killer is still at large where the innocents are put to trial by IO Inspector Sanjeev Chahar,” the judge said in the judgement passed on October 31.
The court said that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
“Therefore, there is no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons and they are acquitted from the allegations levelled against them for committing offence under section 302/34 IPC,” the court said.
The court while questioning police investigation, referred to a judge of Supreme court who intended that court should look into the conduct of the officers attached with the case and if any misconduct, omission, negligence or deliberate effort to derail the prosecution’s case is being observed, then the court has to take such officers to the task.
The judge said, “In the present case, Inspector Sanjeev Chahar has missed important and material evidences which ought to have been collected by him to prove the case against the accused persons.”
“Hence, this court directs that suitable departmental action be taken against Inspector Sanjeev Chahar on account of his above mentioned lapses in the investigation and action taken report may be shared with this court also within four weeks from today,” the court directed.
The court said that the investigation in this case is full of lacunas resulting in failure of prosecution to prove its case against the accused persons.
The court pointed out that when the headless body was recovered, there is no investigation as to where the head had gone and for what purpose the deceased was beheaded by the murderer.
Going by the version of accused persons, they had no purpose to conceal the head of the deceased and therefore, it was the duty of the IO to investigate the matter to trace out the head of deceased Manjeet.
It is also pointed out by the court that when the police reached at the spot for the first time, there were many articles which reflected that some kind of tantrik worship or some religious act was performed at the spot. There were naked statutes of male and female, empty honey bottle, earthen pots, one quarterbottle, cane basket, etc.
The whole crime scene indicated ‘human sacrifice’ but the IO for the reason best known to him opted not to investigate the matter relating to those exhibits and the circumstances which were self-speaking at the crime scene about the motive of the murder.
The court also referred to the post mortem report and said that the head of the body was chopped off after death.
The court said that as per the post-mortem report beheading of the deceased is post-mortem injury. Had it been the case that head of the deceased was chopped off at the time of murder then the injury ought to have been ante mortem in nature and not post-mortem. This again reflects that head and chest bones were chopped of after the death of deceased.
“In fact, postmortem report is suggestive of absence of heart. Usually a dead body is not found in such mutilated condition in a murder case. IO ignored this fact and went ahead to solve the case on the basis of ‘last scene theory’, the court said in the judgement.
The deceased was last seen with the accused person. As per statement of father of deceased Manjeet, he went out for a party with friend and was with the accused persons.
The judge held that IO failed to prove identification of deceased biologically.
He took blood sample of father Mohan Lal but as per FSL result blood sample of mother was sent for comparison.
Charge sheet is absolutely silent as to when blood sample of mother of deceased was taken. Although, dead body was identified by father but it was duty of the IO to prove the identity of deceased through scientific and biological evidence, said the court

Subscribe to our Newsletter

ANI News Logo
About ANI


ANI is a leading multimedia news agency.


“Whole Rajasthan is saying, Congress is leaving, BJP is coming”: PM Modi

Will boost rank and file ahead of next Lok Sabha polls: Former Karnataka CM lauds Vijayendra’s appointment as state chief