Wed. Sep 23rd, 2020

Atambir Singh @ Chota Babla vs State Of Delhi on 29 July, 2015

1 min read


(Ex.PW18/B) prepared by the IO for purposes of death report and
application for post-mortem examination. This document dated 13.06.1995
sets out the background facts on same lines as of rukka/FIR. It makes no
reference to the version added by PW6 & PW20 to the knowledge of the IO.
This, the counsel argued, shows that these witnesses had not come up till
13.06.1995.
52. We are not impressed. The purpose of the document Ex.PW-18/B
was only to bring to the knowledge of the autopsy doctor the requisite
background facts. The facts incorporated in the same were sufficient to
assist in reaching appropriate conclusions as to the cause of death. The
autopsy doctor would not be interested in the identity of the assailants or, for
that matter, of the witnesses to the occurrence. The version of PW-6 and
PW-20 about the events leading to the crime from such document is,
therefore, inconsequential.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply