Delhi District Court
Saldana vs . State Air 1960 Kerala 200. on 18 May, 2009
-:1:-
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK GARG
ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE: FAST TRACK COURT
ROHINI:DELHI
SC No. 34/1
Date of institution of the case: 22/11/2008
Date of Decision: 16/02/2009
State
Versus
Naresh Kumar
Son of Sh. Kishan Chand
R/o H.No. 338, Ward No.14,
Ashok Nagar, Gannaur,
District Sonepat (Haryana)
FIR No. 430/2000
PS : Adarsh Nagar
U/s. 186/353/333/341/506 IPC
Judgment
The present FIR was registered on the complaint
dated 02/09/2000 of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi wherein she
stated that since March 1997, she was working as Vice
Principal in Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar,
Delhi. She further stated that there was also an Assistant
Teacher,namely, Sh. Naresh Kumar in the said school who
had been transferred to Administration Branch, North-West-A
-:2:-
District, Hakikat Nagar around 1-1½ month back. She further
stated that on 02/09/2000 at about 10 a.m., when she was
present in her office, the said Naresh Kumar came to her Vice
Principal room and asked for his salary and she asked him to
deposit the money that he had collected from the students
towards preparation of their identity cards, and to collect his
salary cheque. She further stated that upon this, the said
Naresh Kumar lost temper and started beating her in her
office. She further stated that when other teachers,namely,
Sh. Narender Singh and Mrs. Saroj Bala tried to intervene,
Naresh also gave them beatings, and she further stated that
when she tried to raise alarm, the said Naresh Kumar
prevented her from doing so and he had given fist blows to
her, while he was beating her. She further stated that she had
received injuries on her right hand and her nose was bleeding
and she was taken to Jaipur Golden Hospital by an another
teacher,namely, Sh. Pramesh Kumar. She was examined by
Dr. M.M. Bansal in the said hospital. The two other
injured,namely, Sh. Narender Singh and Smt. Saroj Bala were
also taken to Babu Jagjivan Ram Hospital where they were
examined by Dr. Anil Kumar Garg.
-:3:-
On receipt of DD No. 8A regarding the incident at
the said school, SI Ram Prasad alongwith Constable Raj Pal
reached Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, and on
inquiry, they came to know that Vice Principal Smt. Santosh
Chaturvedi had already been taken to Jaipur Golden Hospital
and in pursuance of the same, they reached Jaipur Golden
Hospital where they found Smt. Santosh Chatuvedi admitted
and the doctor opined her to be fit for statement and
subsequently the Investigating Officer recorded statement of
the Vice Principal and on the basis of the same, he prepared
ruqqa and got the FIR registered. They subsequently went to
Babu Jagjivan Ram Hospital where Smt. Saroj Bala and Sh.
Narender Singh were under treatment. The police officials
carried out necessary investigation and subsequently arrested
accused Naresh Kumar. After completion of investigation, the
police filed charge-sheet against accused Naresh Kumar U/s.
186/353/333/341/506 IPC.
After compliance with provisions of Section 207 CrPC, case was committed to Court of Session vide order dated 01/07/2004.
Prima facie case having been made out, charge -:4:- for offences U/s. 186/333/353/341/506 IPC was framed against the accused on 10/09/2004. Since the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, prosecution was called upon to lead its evidence.
In support of its case, prosecution has examined, in total, 11 witnesses i.e. PW1 Head Constable Virender Singh; PW2 Constable Rajpal; PW3 Sh. B. Srivastava; PW4 Sh. Narender Singh; PW5 Sh. Parmesh Kumar: PW6 Dr. Anil Kumar Garg ; PW7 Smt. Saroj Bala; PW8 Vinita Garg; PW9 Dr. M.M. Bansal; PW10 SI Sanjeev Arora; PW11 Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi; PW12 Sh. Prabodh Bhardwaj and PW13 Dr. Shakuntala Rani.
After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused U/s. 313 CrPC was recorded in which the accused denied the entire incident. He further denied that on 02/09/2000 at about 10 a.m., he had gone to the Office of Vice Principal, Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, or that he had demanded his salary cheque or that he voluntarily beat her or any other teacher of the school. He further stated that he was working in the said school as Assistant Teacher since February 1997 and on 29/07/2000, -:5:- Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi, Vice Principal, had relieved him from the school for some alleged misconduct and he was directed to report to the Office of Deputy Director (Education), District NW-A, Hakikat Nagar. He further stated that he made a complaint to the Deputy Director to take appropriate legal action against the Vice Principal and that due to the same, he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
The accused has examined two witnesses in defence. DW1 Ms. Jaswinder Kaur, Principal, Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, brought the original attendance register of the staff of the said school pertaining to September 2000 and the said register depicts the attendance of all the teaching staff including the Vice Principal and the Superintendent of the school, and the photocopy of the said record is Ex. DW1/A and Ex. DW1/B. DW2 Smt. Jaswinder, Head Clerk, Directorate of Education, Hakikat Nagar, Delhi, brought the attested record of transfer order dated 14/08/2000 pertaining to Sh. Pramesh Kumar who was transferred from Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya to Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, and the record is Ex. DW2/1-3.
-:6:-
The evidence led by the prosecution can be broadly divided in following categories:
(I) Statement of complainant and other public witnesses:
Complainant Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi has been examined as PW11whereas Superintendent of the School Sh. Narender Singh and the Assistant Teachers,namely, Sh. Pramesh Kumar and Smt. Saroj Bala have been examined as PW4, PW5 and PW7 respectively. I shall discuss about their testimony in the later part of the judgment.
PW8 Vinita Garg is the physical Education Teacher of Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar. She has proved the identity of accused but denied that accused ever collected the money for preparation of I/card as the same was collected by her.
PW12 Sh. Prabodh Bhardwaj, Dy. Education Officer, Zone-14 District West, Karampura, New Delhi has proved service record Ex. PW12/A of accused Naresh Kumar.
(II) Medical Evidence on Record:
Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was examined by PW9 Dr. M.M. Bansal, Consultant Orthopedic Surgeon, Jaipur -:7:- Golden Hospital, Delhi. He has stated that Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was admitted in the hospital on 02/09/2000 at 11.41 a.m., and she was initially examined by Dr. Reeta Dua, who referred the case to his orthopedic department, and the MLC has been proved as Ex. PW7/A. He further stated that x-
ray report of her right wrist had a fracture and the radiologist report has been proved as Ex. PW7/B. He opined the injuries to be grievous in nature caused by blunt force.
PW6 Dr. Anil Kumar Garg had examined Sh.
Narender Singh and Mrs. Saroj Bala and their MLCs have been proved as Ex. PW4/A and Ex. PW6/A respectively. Injuries on the person of both the injured were found to be of simple nature caused by blunt force.
PW13 Dr. Shakuntala Rani has proved MLC Ex. PW4/A of Narender Singh prepared by Dr. Nirpal Singh as the concerned doctor was not available.
(III) Investigation conducted by the police:
On 02/09/2000, DD No.8A was received in PS Adarsh Nagar and in pursuance of the same, PW2 Constable Raj Pal together with ASI Ram Prasad reached Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, and on inquiry, they came to -:8:- know that injured-Vice Principal Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi had already been taken to Jaipur Golden Hospital and subsequently they reached the said hospital where Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was found admitted and the doctor opined her to be fit for statement on the MLC and accordingly, ASI Ram Prasad recorded statement of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi (which has been proved by her as Ex. PW11/A) and on the basis of the same, the Investigating Officer prepared an endorsement and PW2 Constable Raj Pal took the same to the police station and got the FIR registered which was recorded by PW1 Head Constable Virender Singh He alongwith the Investigating Officer also went to BJRM hospital where the other injured,namely, Smt. Saroj Bala and Sh. Narender Singh had gone for treatment and Investigating Officer collected their MLCs as well.
PW1 Head Constable Virender Singh was the duty officer at the relevant time who recorded the present FIR, copy of which has been proved as Ex. PW1/A. Initial Investigating Officer ASI Ram Prasad has not been examined but SI Sanjeev Arora has been examined as PW10 who recorded the statement of PW Vinita Garg and -:9:- PW Pramesh Garg which are Ex. PW10/A and Ex. PW10/B respectively. He has also proved the signatures of previous Investigating Officer ASI Ram Prasad and the endorsement Ex. PW10/C made by him on the statement of the complainant. He has also identified the signatures of ASI Ram Prasad on the site plan Ex. PW10/D. He also obtained necessary sanction for prosecution of the accused.
(IV) Discussion on the testimony of
complainant/injured and other public
witnesses:
Complainant/injured Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi (PW11) is the star witness of the prosecution. She has deposed that on 02/09/2000, she was posted as Vice Principal at Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, and on that day between 9.45 a.m.-10 a.m., when she was present in her office, accused Naresh Kumar suddenly came in her room and demanded his salary cheque. She further stated that she advised him to deposit the money that he had collected from the students towards preparation of their identity cards and then to collect his salary, and on this, the accused became annoyed and instead of listening of her advise, he started beating her in her office. She further stated -:10:- that in pursuance of the same, she fell down and sustained injuries on her nose and it started bleeding profusely and her right wrist started swelling up. She further stated that one teacher,namely, Smt. Saroj entered the room hearing the commotion and seeing the situation, she tried to make a telephonic call but the accused prevented her by snatching the telephone and struck the instrument on her head as a result of which she received injuries. She also stated that in the meantime, Superintendent Narender Singh also came into the room and she noticed that he was also bleeding and then on her request, an another teacher,namely, Pramesh took her to Jaipur Golden Hospital for medical treatment. She has correctly identified the accused in court. She has been cross examined by counsel for the defence but there is nothing in her cross examination to weaken her testimony. Her testimony is consistent, trustworthy and reliable.
Sh. Narender Singh, Superintendent of the said school has been examined as PW4 who has stated that on 02/09/2000 at about 10 a.m., he was present in his room and accused Naresh Kumar came to his room and asked for the salary cheque. He further stated that he requested him to -:11:- meet the Vice Principal Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi regarding clearance of his salary as she was working and looking after the school as Vice Principal with the powers of Head of Institution. He further stated that Naresh Kumar went to the office of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi and after 5/6 minutes, he heard some noise and he went to the room of Vice Principal and at that time, neither the Vice Principal nor the accused was present there and then he saw the accused coming out of the side room and the accused pushed aside and went away. As per the case of prosecution, he had witnessed the accused beating Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi but the witness was hostile on this point and he was cross examined by ld. Addl. PP in which he denied that he saw the accused beating and causing injuries on the person of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi and Smt. Saroj Bala who was the other teacher in the school.
Smt. Saroj Bala, an assistant teacher in the said school, has been examined as PW7 and she stated that on 02/09/2000, Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was working as Vice Principal in the school and she was taking a meeting of teachers and 4/5 teachers were sitting and accused Naresh -:12:- Kumar who was working as Assistant Teacher, entered the room and inquired from the Vice Principal about his salary cheque. She further stated that Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi asked him to deposit the money of the children collected by him for preparation of I/Cards to the concerned teacher and directed him to go to the office of DDO and collect his salary cheque from him. She further stated that thereafter, he went away and the meeting also came to end. She further stated that after 2/3 minutes, when she was present near the office of Vice Principal, she heard the noise of "bachao-bachao" and saw that 3/4 teachers were pulling back accused Naresh, but she stated that she did not know as to who was being beaten. As per the case of prosecution, she was also a witness to the alleged beating given by the accused to Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi but she was hostile on this point and she has been cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP in which she has denied that she saw the accused beating Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi. It is relevant here to state that the witness further stated that she rushed towards the telephone and lifted the receiver for making information to the police but before she could even dial the number, accused Naresh rushed towards -:13:- her and pushed her aside and pulled out the telephone wire and threw the telephone and went away from there. She further stated that she could not say as to what exactly hit her but she stated that she sustained injuries above her eye. She further stated that she later on saw that Sh. Narender Singh, DDO, as well as Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi had also received injuries.
Sh. Pramesh Kumar (PW5) who was also an Assistant Teacher in the said school stated that he heard noise in the school and saw that some teachers had assembled there and Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi had sustained injuries and he took her to Jaipur Golden Hospital.
As stated above, Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi has identified the accused in court and she has supported the case of prosecution and has deposed on the lines of the complaint made by her to the police regarding the beatings given to her by the accused. Although, Sh. Narender Singh (PW4) and Smt. Saroj Bala (PW7) are partly hostile on the point of their having seen the accused beating Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi, but Sh. Natrender Kumar (PW4) has clearly deposed that it was he who had sent accused Naresh to the -:14:- room of the Vice Principal Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi, and Smt. Saroj Bala (PW7) has clearly deposed that accused Naresh Kumar had entered the room of the Vice Principal for seeking his salary cheque and he was told by Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi to deposit the amount of the children collected by him for preparation of I/cards and then to collect his salary cheque. She has further clearly stated that when she heard the noise of "bachao-bachao, she saw that 3/4 teachers were pulling back the accused Naresh. She has further supported the case of prosecution stating that when she lifted the receiver for making telephone call to the police, the accused rushed towards her and pushed her aside and pulled out the telephone wire and threw the telephone and went away from there. It clearly proves the conduct of the accused after the incident regarding which Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi has deposed in detail in her statement. Although, Sh. Narender Singh (PW4) and Smt. Saroj Bala (PW7) are partly hostile in court, but they are proving the conduct/act of the accused prior to and after the main incident of beating and the main incident of beating has been proved by Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi in her testimony as PW11.
-:15:-
The nature of injuries suffered by Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi which was stated by her to the police and in her deposition before this court, clearly find support from the medical evidence on record as it has come in the statement of PW9 Dr. M.M. Bansal that on 02/09/2000 at 11.41 a.m., Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was admitted in the hospital with alleged history of assault at Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, Adarsh Nagar, and had sustained injuries on her right wrist and nose. She was examined by Dr. Rita Dua who had noticed bleeding from skin over nose and pain tenderness deformity swelling present over nose. It has been further proved by the doctor that there was her right wrist had a fracture of radius with subluxation and wrist joint.
Arguments Advanced by the defence:
It is argued by counsel for the defence that the accused who was working as a teacher in the said school was transferred on the ground that there were surplus teachers and it is stated that after the same, Sh. Pramesh Kumar joined as a new teacher in the said school and hence it is stated that if there were surplus teachers, why Sh. Pramesh joined duties in the said school. On the basis of the same, it -:16:- is stated that Vice Principal was having ill-will towards the accused and hence the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. In my view, there is no merit in this contention of the defence. Whether there were any surplus teachers or not is a matter of record. There is nothing on record to suggest that the accused was transferred on this ground. There is nothing on record to show that the Vice Principal was having ill-will towards the accused and her testimony cannot be brushed aside on this ground alone.
It is further argued by the defence that PW4 Sh. Narender Singh was not present in the school on the said day and his signatures on the attendance sheet were taken subsequently and it is further stated that the attendance sheet shows that PW Saroj was present in the school till 7.00 p.m. and that the same creates doubt in the prosecution story as she was also one of the injured and had the incident occurred as per the version of the prosecution, she would not have stayed in school so late. It is relevant here to state that although the defence has brought on record the attendance sheet of the teachers of the school, but the mere fact that the entry shows departure of Smt. Saroj form the school at about -:17:- 7.00 p.m. does not mean that the prosecution case is false.
These are incidental matters.
It is further argued by counsel for the defence that there is nothing on record to explain as to why Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was taken to Jaipur Golden Hospital which was far off from the school when there is an another hospital,namely, Babu Jagjivan Ram Hospital near the said school. It is further stated that the police did not seize the shirt of Sh. Pramesh Kumar who allegedly took Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi to the hospital stating that if Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi was bleeding, the shirt of Sh. Pramesh Kumar must have received blood stains as she had gone with him on his motorcycle. In my view, there is no force in this argument of the defence as well because it has come in the testimony of PW5 Sh. Pramesh Kumar that he had suggested her for taking to BJRM hospital but she asked him to take her to Jaipur Golden Hospital for superior treatment and hence he had taken her to Jaipur Golden Hospital. In my view, the same answers the contention of the defence. Further, the mere fact that the police did not seize the shirt of Sh. Pramesh Kumar is not significant at all. The court has to concentrate on the medical -:18:- evidence of the injured on record and the truthfulness of their deposition before the court.
It is further argued by counsel for the defence that as per Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi herself, she was operated upon in Jaipur Golden Hospital for about four hours and that her MLC shows her arrival in the hospital at 11.30 a.m. and it is not clear as to how ruqqa was sent by the Investigating Officer at 1.20 p.m. because at that time her operation must be going on in the hospital. Hence it is stated that the police utilized the said time for introducing false witnesses. In my view, there is no merit in this contention as well because Investigating Officer has not been examined in the case and hence although there is nothing on record to explain the same, but that in itself does not make the case of prosecution doubtful.
It is further argued by the counsel for the defence that it has come in the cross examination of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi that when she was rushing out at the time of recess, somebody came abruptly and knocked at her nose and that as a result of the same, she fell down and she could not see the face of the person who had knocked her. In my -:19:- view, the entire deposition of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi has to be taken into consideration. Although it is correct that there is nothing to explain as to in what context the said statement of the witness has come in her cross examination, but the total tone and tenure of her statement is such that she is fully supporting the case of prosecution and she has identified the accused as the person who had hit her and had beaten her. Applicability of Section 186/333/353 IPC A public servant is often exposed to considerable risks in discharge of his official duties and the law therefore, throws round him, a special protection by prescribing special deterrent sentence to those who offend against the majesty of the law, of which he is a minister. However, it is not intended to encircle with a perennial halo of sanctity and inviolability, the penal code has throughout, in regard to him, protected him only when he is in the execution of the duty. It is clear that he shall be left, at every times, to have recourse to the ordinary law applicable to all alike. It was so held in Richard Saldana Vs. State AIR 1960 Kerala 200.
In view of the above, it is necessary that there must be some intention or knowledge on the part of the -:20:- accused that his act will result in obstruction of duty which is to be carried out by a public servant. Each and every fight/quarrel with a public servant cannot come in the domain of Section 186/333/353 IPC. If loose interpretation is given to the said provisions, each and every fight with a public servant will be covered under the same.
In the present case, it is clear that the accused Naresh Kumar had gone to the office of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi who was working as Vice Principal of the school to collect his salary cheque and on being advised by her to deposit the amount of money collected by him on the record for preparation of I/card of the children, he beat her in her office. There is nothing on record to suggest that there was any intention on the part of the accused to deter her from performing her duties. The mere fact that she was acting as Vice Principal at the relevant time when the incident in question occurred, shall not be sufficient to cover U/s. 186/333/353 IPC.
Hence Section 186, 333 and 353 IPC are clearly not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case and hence the prosecution has failed to prove the case qua the -:21:- said provisions.
It is further relevant here to state that there is nothing on record to suggest that the accused tried to restrain Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi when she attempted to leave the room or that he threatened her with danger to her life. Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi is clearly silent regarding the same and hence Section 341 IPC and Section 506 IPC are also not proved.
As stated above, it is proved that the accused had beaten Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi and as per the medical evidence on record, she had received grievous injuries by blunt force. Hence in totality of the circumstances, the accused is convicted for the offence U/s. 325 IPC. Let he be heard on the point of sentence on 19/02/2009. Announced in Open Court on Dated 16th of February, 2009 ( Deepak Garg ) Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court Rohini : Delhi -:22:- IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK GARG ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE: FAST TRACK COURT ROHINI:DELHI SC No. 34/1 Date of institution of the case: 22/11/2008 Date of order on sentence: 18/05/2009 State Versus Naresh Kumar Son of Sh. Kishan Chand R/o H.No. 338, Ward No.14, Ashok Nagar, Gannaur, District Sonepat (Haryana) FIR No. 430/2000 PS : Adarsh Nagar U/s. 325 IPC ORDER ON SENTENCE 18-05-2009 Present: Addl. PP for State.
Convict Naresh Kumar is present on bail with Sh. J.S. Kalra, advocate.
Injured Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi is present in the court. She had moved an application U/s. 320 CrPC for compounding the case with the convict. The same is also -:23:- accompanied by a compromise deed bearing her signature. She has brought in court her passport for identification purpose and copy of the same is kept on record and original is returned to her. Let her statement be recorded. Statement of Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi wife of late Sh. Krishan Gopal, R/o 74, Pocket 3, Sector 24, Rohini, Delhi-85. On SA.
I have voluntarily compromised with the convict Naresh Kumar. I am forgiving him. I do not want to proceed against him. I have moved an application U/s. 320 CrPC which is Ex. PX which bears my signature at point A. The same is also accompanied by a compromise deed Annexure A which is Ex. PY which bears my signature at point A. The same is also accompanied by an affidavit which is Ex. PZ which bears my signature at point A and B. Necessary orders may be passed by the court.
RO&AC ( Deepak Garg) ASJ:FTC:Rohini/18-05-2009 The perusal of the file reveals that convict Naresh Kumar has been convicted by the Court for the offence U/s. 325 IPC vide judgment dated 16/02/2009. The said offence is compoundable with the permission of the court U/s. 320 -:24:- CrPC.
It is stated by ld. Addl. PP that permission of the court should not be granted as the case is at the stage of hearing the convict on sentence. In my view, there is no merit in the said contention of the State as it cannot be said that trial has got concluded. If the offence is compoundable U/s. 320 CrPC, it can be compounded at any stage before the trial court and it can also be compounded before the appellate court.
The statement of the injured Smt. Santosh Chaturvedi has already been recorded above. She does not want to proceed against the convict. It appears that she has moved the application U/s. 320 CrPC accompanied by compromise deed etc with her free will and without any coercion or undue influence.
In the totality of the circumstances, the Court grants its permission U/s. 320 CrPC and the offence is compounded. The convict is accordingly acquitted U/s. 320 CrPC. His bail bond is cancelled. Surety discharged. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court ( Deepak Garg) On 18th of May,2009 ASJ:FTC:Rohini