Murder Inside Police Station: Supreme Court Upholds Life Sentence in Cold-Blooded Killing Case

The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment dated July 3, 2024, upheld the conviction and life sentence of Surender Singh for the murder of his relative inside a police station in Delhi. This case stands as a stark example of premeditated murder and the limitations of self-defense claims when forensic and eyewitness evidence overwhelmingly supports the prosecution’s case.

Background of the Case

The incident occurred on June 30, 2002, at Mayur Vihar Police Station, Delhi. The appellant, Surender Singh, was a police constable assigned as a guard at the station. The prosecution alleged that he shot and killed his relative, Satish, inside the police station using his official 9mm carbine. The murder was reportedly linked to a personal dispute involving the alleged extramarital affair of the deceased with the appellant’s wife.

Charges and Trial Court Verdict

Following an investigation, Surender Singh was charged under:

Section 302 IPC (Murder)
Section 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder)

The Trial Court convicted him on both counts, sentencing him to:

Life imprisonment for the murder of Satish
7 years rigorous imprisonment for the attempted murder of another police officer injured in the crossfire

The appellant then moved the Delhi High Court, which upheld the conviction. He subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.

Key Evidence Presented

1. Eyewitness Testimonies

The prosecution’s case was primarily based on eyewitness accounts, notably from:

PW-2 (Head Constable Panwati): Present at the police station, she saw the appellant firing at the deceased. She herself sustained a bullet injury during the shooting.
PW-1 (Head Constable Om Pal): Also present at the duty officer’s room and corroborated PW-2’s testimony.
PW-17 (Constable Vinod): Gave a consistent account of the shooting.
PW-11 (Head Constable Jai Prakash): Rushed PW-2 to the hospital and confirmed the injuries.

2. Medical and Forensic Evidence

The post-mortem revealed multiple gunshot wounds, including one at point-blank range.
Forensic analysis confirmed that the bullets matched the appellant’s official 9mm carbine.
PW-19 (Dr. S.B. Jangpangi) conducted the post-mortem and confirmed the fatal injuries.

3. Statement of the Appellant

Surender Singh did not deny the shooting but claimed that:

Satish attacked him first and tried to snatch his weapon.
The gun went off accidentally during the struggle.
His actions were in self-defense.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgment

1. Rejection of Self-Defense Claim

The Court dismissed the self-defense argument, stating:

“The plea of self-defense taken by the accused is childish to say the least, in the light of the facts of the case, and on the weight of the evidence of the prosecution.”

The Court noted:

The deceased was unarmed and was running away when he was shot multiple times.
There were gunshot wounds on both the front and back of the deceased, proving that he was shot while attempting to flee.
The forensic evidence, including bullet trajectory analysis, disproved the claim of an accidental discharge.

2. The Question of Grave and Sudden Provocation

The appellant alternatively claimed that if not self-defense, the act was committed due to grave and sudden provocation under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating:

“The facts of the present case do not even remotely make out any case under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC.”

The Court emphasized:

There was no immediate provocation at the time of the shooting.
The appellant had a motive (the alleged affair of the deceased with his wife) and had acted in a premeditated manner.
The use of an automatic weapon in a police station demonstrated intent to kill, not a loss of control.

3. Observations on Trial Proceedings

The Supreme Court also highlighted procedural concerns:

The cross-examination of PW-2 was unnecessarily delayed by over two months, which could have compromised the integrity of the trial.
The Court reiterated that trial courts should ensure prompt cross-examinations to prevent witness intimidation or manipulation.

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions and sentences:

Life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC.
7 years rigorous imprisonment for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC.
Directed the appellant to surrender within four weeks to serve the remaining sentence.

Key Takeaways

Eyewitness Accounts are Crucial: The testimony of police officers present at the scene was instrumental in securing the conviction.
Forensic Evidence Can Overrule Self-Defense Claims: The bullet trajectory and wounds disproved the appellant’s claim of accidental firing.
Premeditation vs. Provocation: The Supreme Court reiterated that provocation must be immediate and substantial to reduce a murder charge.
Speedy Trial Procedures are Essential: The Court expressed concerns about delays in cross-examinations and their impact on fair trials.

Conclusion

This judgment serves as a reminder that violent crimes, particularly those committed by law enforcement officers, will face stringent legal scrutiny. The Court’s detailed rejection of the self-defense and provocation claims reinforces the importance of objective evidence in criminal trials.

Petitioner Name: Surender Singh.
Respondent Name: State (NCT of Delhi).
Judgment By: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, Justice Rajesh Bindal.
Place Of Incident: Mayur Vihar Police Station, Delhi.
Judgment Date: 02-07-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: surender-singh-vs-state-(nct-of-delhi)-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-02-07-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Sudhanshu Dhulia
See all petitions in Judgment by Rajesh Bindal
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category