Delhi District Court
Criminal Case/240/1999 on 16 December, 2010
FIR No. 240/99 1
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANISH GUPTA, ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (OUTER DISTRICT),
ROHINI COURTS , DELHI
FIR No. 240/1999
Unique Case ID No. 02401R0077042000
Police Station Alipur
Under Section 323/341/34 of the Indian Penal Code
State v. Joginder Singh etc.
JUDGMENT
(a) Serial number of the case :1232/2
(b)Date of the commission of the offence : 04.08.1999
(c)Name of the complainant :Smt. Sukhminder Kaur W/o Shri Mukhtar Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(d)Name of the accused & address :(1). Joginder Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(2). Ladha Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(3). Baldev Singh S/o Shri Ladha Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(4). Balwinder Singh S/o Shri Ladha Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(Expired during trial).
Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 2(5).Harjit Singh S/o Shri Ladha Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(6).Smt. Sheela Bai W/o Shri Ladha Singh, R/o Village Jhangola, Delhi.
(e)Charge against the accused :323/341/34 IPC (f)Plea of the accused :Pleaded not guilty (g)Final order :Acquitted (h)Date of such order :16.12.2010 Date of Institution :08.08.2000 Date on which arguments heard and Judgment reserved. :16.12.2010 Date of Judgment :16.12.2010 BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR DECISION
1. Charge sheet in the present case was filed on behalf of the state on 8.8.2000 and after taking cognizance of the offence, the accused persons were supplied with copy of charge sheet and documents. The accused persons were on police bail and were present on the date of filing of chargesheet. They were also admitted to court bail. After hearing arguments on behalf of the state as well as accused persons, notice u/s 251 Cr.P.C. was framed against all the accused persons on 11.09.2002. The allegations against the accused persons are that on 4.8.1999 at about 6:30 PM infront of fields of Jageer, Village Jhangola within the jurisdiction of police station Alipur, all the Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 3accused persons in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained the complainant Smt. Sukhminder Kaur from proceeding in the desired direction and voluntarily caused simple hurt on the person of Smt. Sukhminder Kaur and Smt. Gian Kaur and thus they committed offences punishable u/s 323/341/34 IPC. The accusation as contained in the notice were explained to the accused persons and they were questioned whether they want to plead guilty or claim trial. All accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
2. I have already heard final arguments and perused the record.
3. The prosecution has cited seven witnesses as per the list of witnesses. PW-1 Ct. Satya Narain, PW-2 Smt. Sukhminder Kaur, PW-3 Dr. Hemant Sharma, PW-4 Smt. Gian Kaur, PW-5 ASI Ranbir Singh, PW-6 Shri Kewal Krishan and PW-7 SI Vijender Rana, IO were examined on behalf of state.
4. PW-1 Ct. Satya Narain deposed that on 4.8.1999 he was posted as constable at police station Alipur and on that date a call regarding quarrel was received and he alongwith SI Surender Rana went to the spot. This witness again stated that he alongwith SI Gajender Rana went to the spot and there he took the injured person to BJRM hospital and he do not remember as to how many injured were there and he also do not remember their names. Witness further stated that he collected the MLCs and handed over the same to the IO at police station and he do not know what investigation was conducted by the Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 4IO subsequently. This witness was cross examined by the Ld. APP and he stated that he do not remember whether he took two injured ladies namely Sukhminder Kaur and Gian Kaur to HRH for medical examination and stated that no injured person has given statement in his presence to the IO and he do not know that on 7.8.1999 the IO recorded statement of Sukhminder Kaur and got the case FIR registered. The cross examination of this witness on behalf of the accused is nil despite opportunity given.
5. PW-2 Smt. Sukhvinder Kaur who is also complainant as well as the injured stated that she does not remember the date, however, the incident is about 5 or 6 years old and at about 6:00 PM she was present in her fields about 1 Km away from the village and she was alongwith her sister-in-law (Devrani) Smt. Gian Kaur, and, six persons present in the court namely Ladha Singh, Joginder Singh, Baldev Singh, Baljeet, Binder Singh and Sheela Bai were hiding themselves and there they started beating them by use of lathi, sword and phawra and she sustained injuries in her left hand and her one finger got cut. PW-2 further stated that her sister-in-law Gian Kaur also received injuries on her hand and stated that she lodged complaint in police station against accused persons which is Ex. PW- 2/A. She stated that she is illiterate and further stated that she was medically examined in Hindu Rao Hospital and accused persons gave beatings on account of previous enmity. In the cross examination PW-2 stated that her statement Ex. PW-2/A was not read over to her by the police but she had given the statement to the police on the date Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 5of incident and her statement was taken 2-3 times. She further stated that she was coming back from field to her house and Baljit was having sword in his hand and he struck the sword on her hand and she cannot tell length of sword and it was naked sword. She further stated that the said sword was one side sharp edged. PW-2 further stated in cross examination that Joginder Singh gave beatings by Phawara but it did not hit her and Virender was having danda in his hand which was about 5/6 feet in length. She stated that the danda had struck her on her left leg and accused persons were concealing themselves near a bush and suddenly they had come infront of her and she had gone to hospital at about 10:00 PM and they went to hospital in their own vehicle i.e. Mahindra Car. She further stated that no quarrel took place between Mukhtiar and Harpal and accused persons and admitted that the accused persons had made call on 100 number but she do not know whether police came on that call or not. PW-2 admitted in cross examination that Mukhtiar and Harpal were taken by police and denied the suggestion that she is giving false statement to save Harpal and Mukhtiar from the accused persons. She denied that she was afraid of police case to be made against her husband. The name of husband of PW-2 is Shri Mukhtiar Singh.
6. PW-3 Dr. Hemant Sharma from Hindu Rao Hospital was examined who stated that he medically examined both the injured persons namely Sukhvinder Kaur and Gian Kaur and their detailed MLCs are Ex. PW-3/A and Ex. PW-3/B respectively. In cross examination PW-
Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 63 stated that it is correct that injuries as mentioned in the MLCs Ex. PW-3/A and Ex. PW-3/B can be caused by falling on a blunt surface.
7. PW-4 Smt. Gian Kaur was examined who stated in her chief examination that she does not remember the exact date, month and year but it was almost three years back when one day she alongwith her Jethani Sukhwinder Kaur was coming to their residence from their agricultural field and at about 6:00 PM all accused persons present in the court namely Ladha Singh, Joginder Singh, Baldev Singh, Sheela Bai and Jita Singh started giving beatings to them and due to the said beatings she became unconscious and regained her consciousness in police station and she cannot say which accused was having which weapon. In the cross examination she stated that the quarrel took place near the filed of one Vikram of Palla and it was 200 meters from their agricultural fields and it was dark at that time. She further stated in the cross examination that nobody was present at that time and firstly her jethani was beaten by accused persons and after 15/20 minutes she was beaten and she became conscious in PS Alipur and her statement was recorded in PS Alipur from where she was taken to Hindu Rao Hospital and she do not remember the name of police official who had taken her to the hospital and she was discharged from the hospital on the next day. She further stated that her statement was not read over to her and statement of her jethani was also recorded in her presence at police station. PW-4 admitted in cross examination that they were having some land dispute with the accused persons prior to the incident and she denied the suggestion Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 7that she has deposed falsely because of previous enmity with the accused persons.
8. PW-5 ASI Ranbir Singh who was duty officer exhibited FIR No. 240/99, PS Alipur as Ex. PW-5/A.
9. PW-6 Shri Kewal Kishan, Medical Record Clerk from Hindu Rao Hospital was examined who stated that he is working as medical record clerk for the last 27 years. He stated that he has brought the summoned record pertaining to MLC No. 10766 dated 4.8.1999 pertaining to injured Sukhwinder Kaur and MLC No. 10769 dated 4.8.1999 pertaining to injured Gian Kaur and stated that both the MLCs were prepared by Dr. Hemant Sharma and opinion about nature of injuries on both the MLCs were given by Dr. Naveen Kothari who has left the services of the hospital and stated that the MLCs are already Ex. PW-3/A and Ex. PW-3/B respectively and opinion on the MLC of injured Sukhwinder Kaur Ex. PW-3/A given by Dr. Naveen Kothari is Ex. PW-6/A bearing the signatures of Dr. Naveen Kothari at Point X and further stated that no opinion has been given on MLC No. 10769 of injured Gian Kaur Ex. PW-3/B as patient absconded from the hospital and remarks of Dr. Naveen Kothari is Ex. PW-6/B bearing his signatures at Point X. Witness stated that he identifies the signatures of Dr. Naveen Kothari as he has seen him writing and signing in the course of his duties. In cross examination he stated that the present whereabouts of Dr. Naveen Kothari are not Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 8known and admitted that Dr. Naveen Kothari has not put his signatures on Ex. PW-6/A and Ex. PW-6/B in his presence.
10.PW-7 IO/SI Vijender Rana was also examined who stated in the chief examination that on 4.8.1999 he was posted at police station Alipur as SI and on that day DD No. 12-A, Mark-X was handed over to him by duty officer at about 7:30 PM and thereafter he alongwith Ct. Sat Narain had reached village Jhangola where two ladies namely Sukhwinder Kaur and Gian Kaur met him in injured condition and both of them were sent to Hindu Rao Hospital alongwith Ct. Sat Narain for their medical examination and they alongwith Ct. Sat Narain returned to the spot at about 1:30/2:00 AM and Ct. Sat Narain handed over MLCs of both injured ladies to him. He further stated that he asked the injured ladies as to how they sustained injuries but they refused to make any statement on the pretext that they were in severe pain and were unable to make the statement and thereafter he alongwith Ct. Sat Narain returned to the police station. He further stated that on 7.8.1999 both the injured ladies appeared at police station at about 4:00 PM and Sukminder Kaur made statement which was reduced into writing which is Ex. PW-2/A and on the basis of statement of complainant namely Sukhminder Kaur he prepared rukka Ex. PW-7/A and presented the same to duty officer for registration of FIR and after its registration he accompanied both the injured persons to the spot of incident at village Jhangola and prepared site plan at the instance of complainant which is Ex. PW-7/B. Witness stated that he recorded the statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of complainant Sukhminder Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 9Kaur and injured Gian Kaur. He further stated that on 10.8.1999 MLCs of both the injured ladies were deposited in hospital for obtaining the opinion about nature of injuries and on 16.9.1999 accused persons namely Balvinder Singh, Jogender Singh, Ladha Singh, Sheela, Baldev and Harjeet Singh were arrested from village Jhangola and their arrest memos are Ex. PW-7/C to Ex. PW-7/H and their bail bonds and surety bonds are Ex. PW-7/J to Ex. PW-7/O. Witness stated that opinion about the nature of injuries on both the MLCs were obtained and on the MLC of injured Sukhminder Kaur the concerned doctor has opined that the injury suffered by her was simple in nature and no opinion was given on the MLC of injured Gian Kaur since she had absconded from the hospital. In the cross examination PW-7 stated that he reached the spot within 15/20 minutes after receiving the DD entry and he had gone there on his personal two wheeler scooter and from village Jhagola he had gone to Yamuna Pushta and had met both the injured ladies and he remained there for about half an hour and the injured ladies were brought to village Jhangola from where they were sent to Hindu Rao Hospital alongwith Ct. Sat Narain by bus. He also stated that some independent public persons had met him at the spot but none of them were examined or made the witness in the present case as all of them refused. He further stated that after registration of FIR he visited the spot of incident once or twice in connection with the investigation of the case, however, he cannot recollect the exact dates. He stated that he visited the spot alone and the incident occurred in agricultural fields belonging to injured Sukhminder Kaur. He further stated in his Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 10cross examination that the distance between the spot of incident and the residential area of village Jhangola was about one and half kilometer. He further stated that there are agricultural fields around the agricultural field of complainant Sukhminder Kaur, however, he cannot tell as to who are the owners of those surrounding fields. No other witness was examined on behalf of the state.
11.After closing of PE, SA of accused persons was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. Proceedings against one of the accused Balvinder Singh have already abated vide order dated 26.6.2007. All the remaining five accused persons stated in their examination u/s 313 Cr.P.C. that it is incorrect that they alongwith other accused persons were hiding near the fields and they alongwith their companion attacked upon Sukhvinder Kaur and Gian Kaur with lathi, rods and phawras. They stated that it is a false case against them and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. The accused persons further stated that all the PWs have falsely deposed against them being false witnesses. The accused persons preferred not to lead any evidence in defence and stated that they are innocent and the complainant has filed a false complaint against them since they were having dispute over the land with the complainant and her family.
12.IO PW-7 SI Vijender Rana stated that he alongwith Ct. Sat Narain had reached at village Jhangola and both injured ladies were sent to Hindu Rao Hospital alongwith Ct. Sat Narain, however, PW-1 Ct. Sat Narain stated that he do not remember as to how many injured were Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 11there and he do not remember their names. PW-1 even did not state the correct name of IO. At one place he stated the name of IO as SI Gajender and at other place SI Surender. PW-1 stated that he do not remember as to whether he took two injured ladies to hospital. PW-2 stated in the cross examination that sword was in the hand of Baljit Singh and he struck the sword on her hand. In the complaint Ex. PW- 2/A the complainant had stated about the use of lathi and kassi. There is no whisper at all about the sword. In cross examination PW-2 stated that Joginder gave her beating by phawara but it did not hit her. It is strange that a person received injuries without being hit. PW-4 stated that the incident occurred almost three years back. Statement of PW-4 was recorded on 6.10.2008 and the incident is of the year 1999. PW-4 admitted that they were having some land dispute with the accused persons prior to the incident. In the testimony of PW-6 it has come that the injured Gian Kaur has absconded from the hospital, therefore, no opinion was given on her MLC no. 10769, Ex. PW-3/B. In cross examination PW-7 stated that some independent public persons met him at the spot but none of them was examined or made a witness as all of them refused. The date of incident is 4.8.1999 and the date of complaint is 7.8.1999. All the above facts and circumstances reveal that the prosecution has not been able to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubts. There was previous enmity between the parties i.e. injured persons and the accused as admitted in the cross examination by the injured.
Contd.....
FIR No. 240/99 1213.In view of the above detailed facts and circumstances and reasons given all the five accused persons namely Joginder Singh, Ladha Singh, Baldev Singh, Harjeet Singh and Sheela Bai are hereby acquitted from the charge framed in the present case. Their bail bonds stands cancelled. Sureties discharged. File be consigned to record room after completing the necessary formalities.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY i.e. 16.12.2010.
(MANISH GUPTA) ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (OUTER DISTRICT) ROHINI COURTS, DELHI Contd.....