Delhi High Court Allows Murder Convict To Lead Additional Evidence Based On PTI News Report On Victim's Identity

The Delhi High Court recently allowed a murder convict sentenced to life imprisonment to lead additional evidence based on a PTI news report concerning the identity of the deceased, observing that the report may have a bearing on the outcome of his appeal.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja allowed an application filed by one Sunil Rajan Jaat under Section 432 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking to produce a newspaper report published on the India Today website on May 3, 2017.

The report was titled “Man's Half-Burnt Body Found In Tikona Park.” The convict submitted that the report was necessary to establish his defence and had come to his knowledge only after his conviction by the Trial Court.

The prosecution opposed the application, arguing that the newspaper report could not be taken into evidence without being duly proved.

It submitted that the publication could, at the highest, establish that such a report had been published, but could not by itself establish the truth of its contents.

The prosecution also pointed out that neither the reporter who prepared the article nor any person from PTI or India Today having actual knowledge of the source of the information contained in the article had been examined before the Trial Court.

The Bench, however, noted that according to the prosecution's case, the dead body recovered from Tikona Park on May 2, 2017 remained unidentified until May “6, when an alleged eyewitness, Ravi, came forward and disclosed that he had witnessed the incident involving the appellant and the deceased.

The Court observed that if the newspaper report is accepted in evidence, it would show that the identity of the dead body recovered on May 02 was already in public knowledge on May 3, 2017 itself.

“Today we are not to determine as to how the same will be proved by the appellant or its effect on the case of the prosecution, however, at the present stage we are of the opinion that the said evidence will have some bearing on the outcome of the appeal,” the Court said.

The prosecution case, as recorded by the Trial Court, was that a PCR call regarding a partially burnt male body was received at Civil Lines Police Station on May 2, 2017. The body was found with its hands and mouth tied and was initially unidentified.

An FIR under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC was subsequently registered against an unknown person.

During investigation, the prosecution alleged that Ravi was found as an eyewitness on May 06. He allegedly stated that he had seen the convict and co-accused quarrelling with the deceased, chasing him into a Park and subsequently assaulting and strangulating him before burning his body.

Keeping in view the fact that the convict was facing a sentence of life imprisonment, the Court said that it was necessary and proper to allow him to lead further evidence concerning the article.

“We at this stage cannot comment on how the appellant will prove the claimed article or its evidentiary value or its effect. These are to be considered once the appellant leads his additional evidence. We therefore, allow this application,” the Court said.

The convict was directed to file a list of witnesses within four weeks.

The appeal was directed to be listed before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on October 05 for recording the additional evidence on behalf of the appellant, limited to the said article.