Delhi HC upholds life sentence to stalker for murder of DU student in 2011

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and life-term awarded to a man for the murder of a DU student in Shantiniketan area of south Delhi's Dhaula Kuan in 2011.

According to the prosecution, the convict, Vijay Saini alias Ram Singh, stalked the deceased Radhika Tanwar and when she rejected his advances, he shot her using a country-made pistol as a premeditated act on March 8, 2011. Dismissing the appeal by the convict against the trial court orders on his conviction and sentencing, a bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayal observed that the death of the deceased was “clearly homicidal in nature caused due to firearm injury” and the motive behind the crime was “also evident”.

Also Read | Student sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for 'celebrating' Pulwama attack

The court was informed that the appellant had fired one bullet at the back of the deceased resulting in her death. The court opined that the appellant's guilt was proved beyond reasonable doubt and was supported by evidence. “This court finds that the guilt of the appellant for the murder of the deceased has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and duly supported by circumstantial evidence by the prosecution. Consequently, this court finds no error in the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence by the learned trial court,” said the court in its order dated October 31.

In its 26-page order, the court noted that the recovery of the weapon of offence was at the instance of the appellant and certain persons from the locality of the deceased had even beaten the appellant two-three years before the incident for stalking and teasing the deceased. The trial court had convicted the appellant in 2017 for offences punishable under the Arms Act and Section 302 (murder) of Indian Penal Code IPC. The trial court had also convicted three others – Tabrez Ahmed, Sheikh Shekhu and Ashraf Ali – in the case for giving shelter to the appellant after he killed the woman and sentenced them for the period already undergone by them. The three did not challenge their conviction and sentence.