Hemant Chawla was found dead on July 4, 2017
Irked by the silence of the three accused in the New Friends Colony murder case, Delhi Police in their chargesheet said the burden to prove the case does not lie “entirely” on the prosecution.
The incident took place on July 4 last year, when Indian-born US citizen Hemant Chawla was found dead at his friend’s home. Five months after his death, the Crime Branch arrested Nitin Sabharwal (47), Mohammed Tazim (27) and Pritam Saini (37) after a board of three AIIMS doctors unanimously concluded that the cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation.
According to police, Chawla died at Nitin’s home, and the two other accused were there at the time. Chawla’s autopsy report suggested he had died as a result of “manual strangulation”.
According to police, the medical board said the time since death mentioned in the autopsy report is an approximation, and is affected by many environmental factors and preservation in cold chambers. “The time since death… is 12 hours, which can vary in range of 2-3 hours on either side. The board also said that ‘asphyxial death’ in case of strangulation may be immediate as well, as the deceased may remain in gasping stage for some time before death,” police said.
The chargesheet, filed before a Delhi court, also said that where such an offence is committed in secrecy inside a house, the initial burden is on the prosecution, but it cannot be of the “same degree” when compared to other cases of circumstantial evidence. Citing Section 106 of the Evidence Act, police said there is corresponding burden on the occupants of the house to give a “cogent explanation” as to how the crime was committed.
“The inmates cannot get away by… offering no explanation on the supposed premise that the burden to establish its case lies entirely upon the prosecution, and that there is no duty on the accused to offer any explanation,” the chargesheet said.
Citing various judgments, the chargesheet said that if the accused do not offer any explanation, then they are held responsible for the crime. “… Since Hemant died an unnatural death in the room occupied by Sabharwal, the cause of death was known to Sabharwal and his associates, who were in the room. There is no evidence that anyone else had entered or could have entered the room and caused his unnatural death. The principle laid down in Section 106… is applicable to this case. There is, therefore, a very ‘strong presumption’ that Hemant was ‘murdered’ by them,” police said.
Police also said that during questioning, the accused were silent on how the injuries were inflicted on Hemant. Police said one of the injuries is a “pressure injury”, and that two other could have been inflicted by possible use of force. “If the accused were going out, nothing prevented them from calling Hemant’s driver to take him home… It should have been a normal conduct of a person. By not doing so, the conduct of accused is highly suspicious. They waited till morning to plan their defence. They deployed Bhim Singh, a domestic help, to look after the deceased without informing him of his actual condition,” police said.
For all the latest Delhi News, download Indian Express App
