Youth acquitted of killing father as police fail to trace body
25 Oct 2014 5:40 AM IST
The alleged motive in itself cannot be an incriminating evidence, Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala noted while absolving Delhi resident Diwakar of charges of murder, abduction and conspiracy.
Besides Diwakar, who was estranged from his father Niranjan Singh, the court also acquitted five others arrested in the case.
‘In this case, police could not recover the body of Niranjan Singh, therefore it is still a question that whether he is alive or is dead. None of the witnesses of prosecution has stated that they had seen the murder of Niranjan so as to establish the fact that he had actually been murdered,” the judge said.
The court also noted that prosecution witnesses, who had earlier told the police that they had last seen the victim with Diwakar and his five accomplices, had turned hostile. The prosecution had based the case on circumstantial evidence and on the basis of last seen theory. However, none of the witnesses supported the case of prosecution by deposing any fact which could establish and support the last seen theory,’ it said.
According to prosecution, on 15 November, 2006, Radhey Lal lodged a missing complaint of his brother Niranjan who had not returned home for two days. Lal told the police that Niranjan had separated from his wife and son Diwakar and there was a property dispute between them because of which Diwakar conspired to killed him. Diwakar and his accomplices were later arrested.
Besides Diwakar, who was estranged from his father Niranjan Singh, the court also acquitted five others arrested in the case.
‘In this case, police could not recover the body of Niranjan Singh, therefore it is still a question that whether he is alive or is dead. None of the witnesses of prosecution has stated that they had seen the murder of Niranjan so as to establish the fact that he had actually been murdered,” the judge said.
The court also noted that prosecution witnesses, who had earlier told the police that they had last seen the victim with Diwakar and his five accomplices, had turned hostile. The prosecution had based the case on circumstantial evidence and on the basis of last seen theory. However, none of the witnesses supported the case of prosecution by deposing any fact which could establish and support the last seen theory,’ it said.
According to prosecution, on 15 November, 2006, Radhey Lal lodged a missing complaint of his brother Niranjan who had not returned home for two days. Lal told the police that Niranjan had separated from his wife and son Diwakar and there was a property dispute between them because of which Diwakar conspired to killed him. Diwakar and his accomplices were later arrested.
Next Story
