Uttarakhand High Court acquits DP Yadav in murder case

The Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday acquitted former UP Cabinet minister DP Yadav in a 29-year-old murder case of then Janata Dal MLA from Ghaziabad’s Dadri constituency, Mahendra Singh Bhati (Dharmpal Singh Yadav @DP Yadav v Central Bureau of Investigation)..In doing so, the bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Alok Kumar Verma set aside the 2015 judgment of special CBI court which had convicted Yadav under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder) and section 326 (causing grievous hurt) read with section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..Yadav who has been a member of the Samajwadi Party (SP), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is considered to be a strongman leader of the Western Uttar Pradesh. He had been sentenced for life imprisonment, ten years of rigorous imprisonment and seven years of rigorous imprisonment under the abovementioned sections respectively.The allegation went that when Bhati was on his way to record his statement in a murder case in his car, he was attacked by seven to eight unknown persons. As a result of the attack, Bhati died. His nephew then lodged a complaint at the Dadri police station.The complainant alleged that the Yadav had conspired with two other accused, Karan Yadav and Pal Sigh, to murder Bhati and even the car that the alleged murderers used to carry out the attack belonged to him.Though the murder investigation was initially handled by the local police, it was later transferred to the CBI. It was argued by the prosecution that Yadav had hired the assailants to murder Bhati because of his political rivalry, animosity and gang-war. Finally in March 2015 the special trial court convicted Yadav..The High Court however, posed serious questions about the manner in which the trial court dealt with the case and convicted Yadav. The judges also said that by agreeing to whatever the prosecution said, the trial court seemed more loyal than the King of England.The High Court held that the trial court wrongly applied the law regarding the use of statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC as well as the use of statements given by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The trial court seemed to have used these pieces of evidence to knit a story about the involvement of Bhati, the High Court said..“By the use of these statements, the learned Trial Court seems to be more loyal than the King of England himself. For, the Trial Court is not expected to accept the prosecution case as a gospel truth. As mentioned hereinabove, instead the learned Trial Court is expected to dissect and critically analyze the prosecution case with a fine tooth comb,” read the judgment..The judges also said that the trial court even failed to notice that motive, no matter how strong, cannot take the place of proof. The Court questioned the fact that the trial court did not take notice that several material witnesses including the driver of the car were not examined.“Since the prosecution has withheld material witnesses, an adverse inference should have been drawn against the prosecution. Yet, the learned Trial Court has failed to do so. Lastly, the entire conviction against the appellant is based on surmises and conjectures. It is devoid of any foundational basis which can be established from cogent and convincing evidence,” the judgment said.The judges further said that a conviction has to be based on cogent and convincing evidence. “Otherwise, the conviction is not a legal one, but a moral one. The rule of law does not permit a moral conviction.”.While Senior Counsel Surendra Singh and advocate SRS Gill appeared for Yadav, the CBI was represented by Sandeep Tandon and Tejaswina Sagar..[Read Judgment]