Poor probe, hostile witness: Man let off in murder case in Gurugram

GURUGRAM: A man on trial in a 2018 murder case was acquitted by a court in Gurugram after the main prosecution witness - the victim's brother - apparently turned hostile.
On June 24, 2018, Jagbir, the victim's brother, filed a police complaint against two men - Jasbir alias Jassi and Dhanpal - after his elder brother Rajender's body was found in a drain.
Jassi, Dhanpal and three others had consumed liquor with Rajender before his death, according to Jagbir's complaint, based on which an FIR for murder was lodged in the case
Subsequently, Jassi, a resident of Damdama, was arrested and he admitted to killing Rajender during police interrogation.
However, police found no evidence against the others who also had to undergo polygraph tests.
Eventually, a chargesheet was filed against Jassi.
However, additional sessions judge Jasbir Singh freed Jassi on Saturday on benefit of doubt, citing the prosecution's failure in proving beyond reasonable doubt its case against the accused. The court decision came after Jagbir told the court that the accused had nothing to do with the death of his elder brother.
"Benefit of doubt is extended to the accused and he is acquitted of the charges levelled against him," the judge said in its order, rejecting the confessional statement recorded by the police in custody.
However, public prosecutor Pradeep Kumar said that they had proved beyong doubt the involvement of the accused in the murder and police also recovered an iron pipe used in the crime implicating him.
"Prosecution has adequately established an unbroken chain of incriminating circumstances against the accused," he said.
However, Sanjeev Jain, counsel for the accused, argued that the complainant, Jagbir, did not identify the accused in the court.
"The disclosure statement of the accused is not admissible in evidence. There were material discrepancies in the statement of the witness, which make the case of prosecution doubtful," he said.
"Merely because the iron pipe was recovered from the accused, it does not mean he is liable for conviction," said Jain. "Once the disclosure statement is ignored as being inadmissible as evidence, there remains no other evidence available which connects the accused with the commission of the offence in any manner."