Delhi District Court
State vs . on 24 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA, SPECIAL JUDGE
(NDPS), NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
SC No. 58703/16
FIR No 252/2013
U/s 308/34 IPC
P.S. Bhalswa Dairy
STATE
Vs.
1. Pooran Singh
S/o Sh. Bharat Singh,
R/o New Chandrawed,
House No. 5777,
Gali No. 5 Delhi. .....Accused No.1.
2. Chinu
S/o Sh. Bharat Singh,
R/o A640 Yadav Chowk,
Bhalswa Dairy, Delhi. .....Accused No.2.
3. Vinod Kumar
S/o Sh. Bharat Singh,
R/o A640 Yadav Chowk,
Bhalswa Dairy, Delhi. ..... Accused No.3.
4. Prem Lata
W/o Sh. Vinod Kumar,
R/o A640 Yadav Chowk,
Bhalswa Dairy, Delhi. ..... Accused No 4.
Date of institution : 16.10.2015
Date of arguments : 02.04.2018
Date of judgment : 24.04.2018
State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 1 of 15
(FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)
JUDGMENT:
1. All four accused were arrested by the Police of Police Station Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi and was challaned to the Court for trial for commission of offence punishable under Section 308/34 IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31.08.2013 at about 5.00 AM on main road outside H. No.8640, near Yadav Chowk, Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of P.S. Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi all four accused with their common intention had beaten Smt. Promila and caused hurt to her due to which she suffered simple injuries and had also voluntarily caused simple injuries to Harish Kumar with such intention or knowledge and under circumstances that if they would have caused his death, they would have been guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is alleged that eye witness Pradeep Yadav stated in his statement that there was dispute between his father and Tau (brother of father) regarding the property and on 31.08.2013, at about 5.00 AM, Vinod had attacked his father on his head and inflicted injuries on his left foot. When he tried to rescue his father, wife of Vinod threw stone on his mother, which hit her head. It is further stated that during scuffle, his Tau Vinod and his Tai also received injuries and were also sent to BJRM hospital by the PCR van. On the basis of statement of Pradeep Yadav Ex. PW3/1, an FIR No. 252/13, U/s 308/34 IPC was registered and the matter was investigated by the police. All four accused were State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 2 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) arrested and their disclosure statements were recorded. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completing investigation and conducting other necessary formalities, chargesheet was filed in the court.
3. After supplying copies of the documents to the accused U/s 207 Cr.P.C., ld. Metropolitan Magistrate committed the present case to the Court of Sessions.
4. Vide order dated 23.11.2015, charge U/s 308/34 IPC & U/s 323/34 IPC was framed against all the four accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. They were accordingly put to trial.
5. Trial proceeded and in the course of trial, prosecution in order to substantiate its case against all the four accused persons, examined total fourteen witnesses.
6. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of all the four accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C wherein all the incriminating evidence, which had come on record during trial against all four accused persons, was put to them and an opportunity was given to all the accused persons to explain about the same. Accused persons pleaded that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They stated that PW3, PW5, PW6 & State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 3 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) PW8 have deposed falsely. They stated that a property dispute was pending between Vinod & Harish and in that dispute, some scuffle occurred involving Pooran Singh, Harish, Pradeep and Promila and all three of them had caused injuries to Vinod and Prem Lata. No injury was caused to Harish by either of them. It is further stated that this case has been lodged by Harish to pressurize Vinod to settle the property dispute with them.
7. I have heard Sh. J.S. Malik, ld. Addl. PP for the State and Ms. Nidhi Kalia, ld. Counsel for all the four accused persons. I have also perused the material on record.
8. Ld. Defence Counsel has contended that the allegations made in the present FIR are false and the accused is innocent. She further contended that the allegations made in the FIR are false and they are innocent. She further contended that the accused persons have been falsely implicated by the complainant in the present case due to family dispute. It is further contended that the present case is a counter blast of the case of FIR No.311/13, PS Bhalaswa Dairy, which was registered against PW8 wherein the accused persons are complainant. It is further vehementally argued that injuries are self inflected only with a view to implicate the accused persons in the present case. It is further submitted that the complainant was discharged from the BJRM Hospital and later on admitted in St. Stephens Hospital to create evidence against the accused persons.
State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 4 of 15(FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)
9. Per contra, ld. Addl. PP for State has contended that prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts and there is not an iota of doubt in coming to the conclusion that all the four accused persons have committed the offence, and, hence, they are liable to be convicted in this case.
10. The depositions made by the witnesses are as under :
i) PW1 ASI Sarla is the Duty Officer, who has proved the copy of FIR as EX. PW1/1; her endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW 1/2 and certificate U/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act as Ex.PW1/3.
She further proved DD No. 5A dated 31.08.2013 as Ex.PW1/ 4.
Testimony of this witness remained unchallenged during crossexamination.
ii) PW2 HC Umed Singh is a formal witness, who on receipt of information, went to the spot and removed both the injured to BJRM hospital in PCR Van. He was confronted by ld. Addl. PP regarding the date of incident to which he deposed that the incident was of 31.08.2013.
iii) PW3, Pradeep Yadav, is the eye witness of the incident. He deposed as per his statement, which was recorded by the police and proved his statement as Ex. PW3/1.
During crossexamination by ld. Addl. PP, he admitted State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 5 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) that the dispute was in respect of a piece of land on which Vinod Tau had made a 'Khor' (eating place for animals) and his father had broken the same. He identified danda as Ex. P1 and further admitted that the said danda was seized by the police at his instance from a nearby nali at the spot.
He has been crossexamined at length on behalf of the accused persons.
iv) PW4, SI Rajender Kumar, is also a formal witness, who had only prepared the chargesheet in this case.
Testimony of this witness remained unchallenged during crossexamination.
v) PW5 Ms. Promila is the injured and another eye witness in this case. She has deposed as per the lines of PW3 and identified the shirt worn by her husband at the time of incident, as Ex. P2.
During crossexamination, she denied the suggestion that no incident, as stated by her, ever took place or that Vinod had received injuries during course of incident or was taken to hospital in that regard or that due to property dispute she has deposed falsely.
vi) PW6 is Danny Yadav. He deposed that on 31.08.2013 at about 55.15 AM, he was mulching the cattle. His Chacha Harish Yadav, Vinod, Pooran, Prem Lata and Chinu were State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 6 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) talking in the gali. Suddenly his Chacha Vinod hit Harish on head with a danda. Harish fell down. PW6 rushed to that place. By that time Vinod hit second danda blow on the leg of Harish. PW6 called his entire family and when his family members gathered, he called up at number 100.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused, he deposed that he has no knowledge about registration of any case against his father Roshan Lal in connection with the incident and has denied the suggestion that he has deposed falsely as his father had been implicated in a case FIR No.311/13.
vii) PW7 Constable Sumit has joined the investigation of this case with SI Rajender Singh. He is the witness of arrest of accused Pooran and has proved his arrest memo as Ex.PW7/1; personal search memo as Ex.PW7/2; disclosure statement as Ex.PW 7/3 and pointing out memo as Ex.PW7/4.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused, PW7 denied the suggestions that accused Pooran was not apprehended in the manner, as stated by him, or that accused had not made any disclosure statement or that the accused had not pointed out the spot of incident or that his signatures were forcibly obtained on blank papers.
viii) PW8 Harish Yadav is the injured. He deposed that accused persons Pooran and Vinod are his brothers, accused Cheenu is his nephew and accused Premlata is his Bhabhi. He further deposed State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 7 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) that on 31.08.2013 at about 4.00 AM, he had gone for morning walk with his wife. They returned by about 5.00 AM and his wife proceeded to make tea. He stood near a pillar by corner of his house. Pooran came from his back side and caught him (kaule bhar li). Cheenu caught hold of his hand while the other hand was caught hold by his bhabhi. Vinod hit him on his head and his leg with a lath. He became unconscious and fell down. He regained consciousness in BJRM Hospital where he got treatment. Doctors at BRJM hospital asked him to go back around 1.30 PM and claimed that he would be operated upon after 45 days. His family members took him to Stephens hospital, where he remained admitted for about 4 to 5 days. Due to high expenses there, he was got discharged and brought back home. He was then got admitted in Ishant Hospital, Rohini. He was operated upon there and got discharged after 23 days.
In his crossexamination by ld. Addl. PP, PW8 admitted that during evening hours of 30.08.2013, Vinod had tried to construct a 'khor' for animals on the plot in dispute and on his objection as well as on the intervention of neighbours, Vinod stopped constructing the same and the dispute was settled. He further admitted that Vinod again raised 'khor' during intervening night of 30 & 31.8.2013 and he demolished the same in the morning of 31.8.2013. He further admitted that Vinod had hit him on head twice with lath, which was of iron and cement and he identified the said lath as Ex.P1. He further admitted that when his wife tried to save him, Prem Lata hit her with a stone on her head. It is correct that all the four accused fled away State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 8 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) from the spot after beating him. He identified his blood stained shirt as Ex. P2, which was handed over to the doctor in B.J.R.M Hospital.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused, PW8 admitted that an FIR was got registered against him and his son in respect of injury received by Vinod and his wife. He denied the suggestion that no incident, as stated by him, ever took place or that the accused have been falsely implicated in this case due to property dispute.
ix) PW9, Dr. Mohit Tiwari, is the Medical Officer in PHC, Palipartapur, Bulandsehar, UP and has proved the MLC prepared by Dr. Pankaj as Ex. PW 9/1.
His testimony remained unchallenged during cross examination.
x) PW10, Dr. R.S. Mishra, CMO BJRM Hospital proved the MLC No. 65531 dated 03.08.2013 in respect of patient Harish as Ex. PW 10/1, which was in the handwriting of Dr. Khaliullah.
His testimony also remained unchallenged during cross examination.
xi) PW11 is Constable Narender Kumar, who has joined the investigation alongwith IO/SI R.S. Khatri. He deposed that on 31.08.2013, on receipt of DD No.5A, he along with SI R.S. Khatri State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 9 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) had gone to Yadav Chowk, Bhalswa Dairy, where on local enquiry it transpired that the injured had been removed to BJRM hospital by PCR. Blood was found in the gali, outside H. No.A640. He further deposed that after leaving him at the spot, SI R.S Khatri went to BJRM hospital and before leaving to hospital, SI Khatri had picked up blood stained 'mitti' from the spot and he proved the seizure memo of the same as Ex.PW11/1. After he returned at the spot from the hospital, after about two hours, SI Khatri recorded statement of Pradeep Yadav, who was the brother of injured. Thereafter, on receipt of rukka from SI Khatri, he got registered an FIR from the PS and handed over the same to the IO. He further proved the seizure memo of the cemented danda as Ex. PW11/2, which was taken out from the nali on the pointing out of accused before he left the spot for getting registered the FIR.
PW11 was crossexamined by ld. Addl. PP on some material points after taking permission of the Court. During cross examination, he admitted that Pradeep Yadav returned to the spot alongwith SI Khatri when he came from the hospital. He further deposed that as he was not sure, he could not say if Pradeep was son of injured and not his brother. He also proved the seizure memo Ex.PW 11/3 of a pullanda, which was produced by the doctor of BJRM Hospital containing blood stained shirt of injured Harish.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused, he denied the suggestion that he had never visited the spot alongwith SI Khatri or that no proceedings were conducted at the spot in his State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 10 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) presence or that nothing was seized in his presence or that he had merely signed documents in P.S. at the instance of Investigating Officer.
xii) PW12, SI Rajender Singh, is the Investigating Officer of this case. He corroborated the statement of PW11 and deposed about the proceedings conducted by him during investigation. He proved his endorsement as Ex.PW12/1 on the statement Ex.PW 3/1 of eye witness Pradeep and site plan as Ex.PW12/2. He also proved the arrest memos of accused persons namely Vinod, his wife and his son as Ex.PW12/3, Ex.PW12/4 & Ex.PW12/5; their personal search memos as Ex.PW12/6, Ex. PW12/7 and Ex. PW12/8 and their disclosure statements as Ex.PW12/9, Ex.PW12/10 and Ex. PW 12/11. He further deposed that after completing the investigation, he prepared chargesheet and filed it in the court.
PW12 was crossexamined by ld. Addl. PP on some material facts after taking permission of the Court. During cross examination, he admitted about the proceedings done by him and also proved the pointing out memo of the spot of accused persons Vinod, Cheenu and Prem Lata as Ex.PW12/12 and Ex. PW12/13.
He was crossexamined at length on behalf of all accused persons.
xiii) PW13, ASI Sandeep, is the MHC(M) who proved entry No. 1465 in register No.19 as Ex. PW 13/1 vide which one State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 11 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) danda and two sealed pullandas sealed with the seal of RSK & BJRM hospital were deposited in malkhana by SI R.S. Khatri.
xiv) PW14 is Dr. Neeraj Chaudhary, CMO, BJRM hospital, who has deposed about the MLC No. 65531 dated 31.08.2013 Ex. PW10/A and stated that the injury was opined as grievous. He further deposed that on 31.08.2013 patient Harish was brought in casualty with the history of physical assault.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE :
11. In this case PW8 is the victim. PW5 is the wife of PW 8, who is another victim. PW3 is the son of PW5 and PW 8. It is the defence by way of suggestion given to all the three PWs by ld.
Defence Counsel that no incident took place on 31.08.2013 as claimed by PW5 and PW8. However, this court refers MLC Ex.PW10/1 wherein various injuries have been mentioned which have been inflicted upon PW8 and similarly in Ex.PW9/1 injuries have been mentioned which were inflicted upon PW5 also. Testimony of PW 14 is also referred, who is CMO of BJRM hospital, wherein it is deposed that the patient was referred to Artho & Surgery department and the patient was examined by Artho Dr. Sachin, who opined the injury as grievous and patient was examined by Dr. Pawan. He identified the signatures of Dr. Sachin at PointA and Dr. Pawan at Point B. He further deposed that MLC was prepared under the State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 12 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) supervision of Dr. Ronal whose name was written at PointC.
12. This court further referred the testimony of PW16, who also deposed regarding nature of injury being grievous in MLC Ex.PW10/1, which is in the handwriting of Dr. Khalliullah. Thus, if the defence of ld. Defence Counsel has to be believed upon, then, how the assault and injuries, as mentioned in both the MLCs Ex.PW9/1 and Ex.PW10/1, could be inflicted upon said victims. Though, PW5 received simple injuries as deposed by PW9, testimony of PW9, PW10 and PW14 have not been challenged by ld. Defence Counsel. Therefore, it is proved that PW5 had received simple injuries whereas PW8 had received grievous injuries.
13. PW3 corroborated the testimony of PW5 and PW8. The motive is also disclosed that there was a property dispute between the complainant and the victim parties. PW8 further deposed that A3 (Vinod Kumar) hit him on his head and leg with 'lath'. He became unconscious and fell down. He regained consciousness in BJRM hospital. Thereafter, he was taken to St. Stephens hospital and remained admitted there for 45 days. Due to high expenses, he was got admitted in Ishant Hospital. He was operated there and got discharged after 2/3 days. The fact of admission in hospital of PW8 has not been challenged during crossexamination of PW8. During crossexamination of PW5 and PW8, no defence has been taken that accused persons were not present at the time of incident. Rather, State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 13 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) defence has been taken during crossexamination of PW5 that A3 (Vinod Kumar) had received injuries during the course of incident and was taken to hospital in that regard. However, no MLC has been proved. Testimony of PW6 also corroborated the incident and during crossexamination no suggestion has been given that accused persons were not present at the spot. The only defence taken by ld. Defence Counsel is that since a case was got registered by the accused persons against the victims, therefore, victims have falsely implicated the accused persons. But the fact remains that the fact of admission of PW8 in hospital is undisputed. Injuries upon the person of PW5 and PW8 have already been proved as observed above.
14. PW8 has received grievous injuries which fact has not been challenged and testimonies of PW5 and PW8 have been corroborated with the medical evidence as well as with the testimonies of PW3 and PW6. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion and of the considered view that prosecution has successfully proved its case against all the four accused persons for the offence U/s 308/34 & U/s 323/34 IPC as PW5 and PW8 have deposed about the specific role of all the four accused persons in the crime.
CONCLUSION :
15. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and upon observations made herein above, this Court is of the considered State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 14 of 15 (FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) view that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against all the four accused persons namely Pooran Singh (A1), Chinu (A2), Vinod Kumar (A3) and Prem Lata (A4) U/s 308 IPC for attempting to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder by causing grievous injuries to PW8 Harish Yadav, whose MLC proved as Ex. PW10/1. Prosecution has also successfully established its case against all the four accused persons namely Pooran Singh (A1), Chinu (A2), Vinod Kumar (A3) and Prem Lata (A4) U/s 323 IPC for causing simple injuries to PW5 Smt. Promila, whose MLC is proved as Ex. PW9/1.
13. Therefore, all the four accused persons namely Pooran Singh (A1), Chinu (A2), Vinod Kumar (A3) and Prem Lata (A4) are held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 308/34 IPC. All the abovesaid four accused persons are also held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 323/34 IPC.
Digitally signed JITENDRA by JITENDRA
KUMAR KUMAR MISHRA
Date: 2018.04.25
MISHRA 11:40:02 +0530
Announced in open Court (JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA)
today i.e. on 24.04.2018. Special Judge (NDPS)/North Rohini Courts, Delhi.
State Vs. Pooran Singh etc. Page 15 of 15(FIR No. 252/2013 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)