Delhi District Court
State vs Krishan@Kali on 28 November, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHEFALI SHARMA:
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-02( NORTH ):
ROHINI DISTRICT COURTS : DELHI
In the matter of:-
(Sessions Case No. 432/2019)
FIR No. 97/2019
Police Station Mahendra Park
Charge sheet filed 307 IPC & 25/27/54/59
Under Section Arms Act
Charge framed Under 307 IPC & 25/27/30 Arms
Section Arms Act
State Vs. (1) Krishan @ Kali
S/o Sh. Rai Singh
R/o H.No. A-59, Ramgarh,
Jahangir Puri, Delhi.
(2) Arun Kumar
S/o Sh. Hukum Singh
R/o H.No. 319 (H.No. 224),
Village Dhirpur, Delhi.
...Accused Persons
Date of institution 23.07.2019
Arguments concluded on 18.11.2023
Judgment Pronounced on 28.11.2023
Decision Acquitted
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS
1. Events which set the prosecution machinery into motion are that on 07.03.2019 at about 11.15 p.m. at Ramgarh, A SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 1 of 35Block Wali Open Gali, Jahangir Puri, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Mahendra Park, the accused Krishan @ Kali caused a gunshot injury on the person of one Yash, S/o Jai Kishan/complainant with the intention/ knowledge that he would have caused death of the injured in such circumstances and hence and FIR under Section 307 IPC had been registered. Also, since the revolver used in the offence was in contravention of the provisions of the Arms Act, Section 27 Arms Act had been imposed. Further, accused Arun Kumar handed over the weapon of offence i.e. the revolver to Krishan @ Kali which was licenced in the name of Arun Kumar and therefore, provisions under Section 30 Arms Act had also been incorporated in the present case.
2. During investigation, the IO recorded statement of the witnesses. The injured PW2 Yash in his statement recorded before the police on 16.03.2019 had stated that accused Krishan @ Kali tried to stop the wedding ceremony which was going on that day at the spot by pointing a pistol and had threatened saying that "main dekhta hu ki hamari gali mein iss shadi ko kaun pura karta hai aur yeah shadi kaise hoti hai" and when the injured intervened, accused Krishan @ Kali pointed the pistol towards him and fired upon him and thereafter, fled away from the spot.
After completion of investigation, charge sheet for the offence under Section 307 IPC & 25/27/54/59 Arms Act was filed in the court.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 2 of 35CHARGE
3. On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, vide order dated 03.11.2020 charge under Section 307 IPC & 25/27 Arms was found to be made out against accused Krishan @ Kali. Charge under Section 30 Arms Act was found to be made out against accused Arun Kumar. The formal charge under Section 307 IPC & 25/27 Arms Act was framed against accused Krishan @ Kali and charge under Section 30 Arms Act was framed against accused Arun Kumar, on the said date. Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. Thereafter, prosecution in support of its case have examined 08 witnesses in all.
PW1 Jai Kishan, is the complainant whose deposition is as under:
"On 07.03.2019, I alongwith my family members went to attend the marriage of my nephew Vicky who is son of my brother namely Om Prakash. We went to Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri for attending the marriage of Vicky. My younger son Yash age about 15 years went to answer the nature's call / urinate. When he did not return after about 10-15 minutes, I went in search of my son Yash. I saw my son Yash was carrying a pistol type object in his hand. When I reached near my son Yash, to whom I asked as to what he was carrying. When I shouted at my son Yash, accidentally the trigger of said pistol pressed and the face of the naal / barrel was towards him. The bullet which accidentally fired hit against his chest. My son Yash got injured and fell down. The pistol from the hand of my son fell down on the SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 3 of 35
ground. I alongwith the help of my relatives lifted my son Yash and taken him to Dr. BSA Hospital where my son was medically examined.
Someone made a call to the police. Police officials met me and my family in the hospital. Police obtained my signatures on some blank papers. Later on, my son Yash was referred to Safdarjung Hospital. I was present in Safdarjung Hospital where some police officials of PS Mahendra Park met me. On inquiry, by the police officials, I informed them that I do not know who owned the said pistol. Police told me that the pistol by which my son got injured belongs to brother-in-law of Kaali @ Krishan.
On next day, I was called in the police station where my signatures were obtained on some blank papers. I do not know any person by the name of Krishan @ Kaali.
Except this, I do not know anything else in this case and except this I do not want to say anything else in this case.
He was also cross examined by the Ld. Additional PP for the State as he was resiling from his earlier statement and several documents were exhibited i.e. his statement Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW1/B, arrest memo of accused Krishan @ Kali Ex.PW1/C, personal search memo of accused Krishan @ Kali Ex.PW1/D, seizure memo of revolver and cartridges Ex.PW1/E, sketch of the revolver Ex.PW1/F, site plan of the place of recovery Ex.PW1/G, pointing out memo of the scene of crime Ex.PW1/H and site plan of the scene of crime Ex.PW1/J. PW2 Yash, is the injured whose deposition is as under:
"On 07.03.2019 I had gone to attend the marriage of my cousin brother Vicky s/o Sh. Om Prakash. I alongwith my family had SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 4 of 35
gone to Burari from Jahangir Puri. The marriage party left Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri for Burari, Delhi. At about 10:30-11:00 PM when ribbon cutting ceremony were going on. I was present there and my family also attended the said marriage function. The witness pointed out one of the accused who is present in the court. Witness said that "ye uncle uss din bahut parshan thay kuki unki pistol gum gai thi". (Accused revealed his name Arun Kumar). I went outside the pandal/marriage tent where tables and chairs were lying. I saw the pistol was lying on the table. I picked up the said pistol and went upto my father. After seeing pistol in my hand my father started shouting "yeh kaha se laya". I become perplexed and due to confusion I pressed the trigger of said pistol and a shot was fired from the said pistol. I fell down on the ground and become unconscious. I was taken to Dr. BSA hospital thereafter I was transferred to another hospital.
I do not want to say anything. "
He was also cross examined by the Ld. Additional PP for the State as he was resiling from his earlier statement dated 16.03.2019 Ex.PW2/A. The case properties i.e. CD Ex.P1 and shirt (which he was wearing on the date of incident) Ex.P2 were exhibited during the cross examination on behalf of State, although, he had pointed that the person in the video at 9:20 minutes visible wearing a blue shirt was Krishan @ Kali but he again categorically denied that the accused Krishan @ Kali pointed any pistol towards him or that he had fired upon him and resiled from his earlier statement Ex.PW2/A. PW3 Sonu, is the public witness whose deposition is as under:
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 5 of 35
"On 07.03.2019 marriage of my sister Pinki took place in Gali No. 3, Ramgarh, A-Block near Mata ka mandir where tents were installed for attending the guests. My sister married with Sh. Vijay r/o Swaroop Vihar, Delhi. We were attending guests, I came to know that firing incident took place at the time of entering of barat in the pandal. When the ribbon cutting ceremony was taking place, firing incident took place. When I reached at the said place where ribbon cutting ceremony was taken place, I was informed that one child has been shot. I also came to know that the said child had fired a shot on himself. I had not seen the said child shot himself. My all other relatives also gathered there and pacified the guests who were running here and there. Accused krishan@ Kali is present in the court today (correctly identified by the witness.) Krishan @ Kali attended the marriage of my sister on that day. I had given the video recording of marriage of my sister Pinki with Sh. Vijay on dated 07.03.2019. The three video recording CD from our side and three video recording CD from the side of Vijay were handed over to the police who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/A bearing my signature at point A. The CDs from the side of my sister Pinki were given Sl. No. 3-G, I-G and II-G and CD from the side of Vijay were given Sl. No. 3-B, I-B and II-B and signed the same on each CD. At this stage, the six CDs are part of the record. The same are shown to the witness who correctly identified the same. The six CD is now collectively Ex. P3 (including Ex. P1 which was played on 22.07.2022).
I had also given the marriage card of my sister which was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/B bearing my signature at point A. At this stage, marriage card of Pinki Pal with Vijay is part of the record. The marriage card is Ex. P4 (witness correctly identified the marriage card). I do not want to say anything else. "
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 6 of 35He was also cross examined by the Ld. Additional PP for the State as he was resiling from his earlier statement and his statement Ex.PW3/C was exhibited.
PW4 Jag Mohan, is another the public witness whose deposition is as under:
"On 07.03.2019 my daughter Ms. Pinki married with Sh. Vijay. The marriage pandal was installed in gali No. 3, Block-A, Ramgarh, near Mata ka mandir. DJ was playing music in the said pandal and baratis and guests were dancing to the tunes of music. My neighbours, friends, relatives and guests attended the marriage of my daughter. The guests from the side of Vijay also attended the marriage. Accused Krishan @ Kali also attended the marriage. Accused is present in the court today (correctly identified by the witness). We heard a noise that someone had fired a shot himself outside the marriage pandal. I alongwith other went outside the pandal and we were informed that the said child has been removed to the hospital. The marriage ceremony was performed and after marriage ceremony, I went to the hospital where I saw one boy aged about 15-16 years was found injured condition and he was under medical treatment. The said boy and his father attended the marriage of my daughter. I alongwith my family members regularly visited the hospital and after discharged of the said boy from the hospital we visited the house of said boy in order to inquire improvement in his health.
My son Sonu had given the marriage card of my daughter which was seized by the police. My son also gave the CDs of marriage from our side and from the side of Vijay to the police.
At this stage, marriage card of Pinki Pal with Vijay is part of the record. The SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 7 of 35
marriage card is already Ex. P4 (witness correctly identified the marriage card). I do not want to say anything else. "
He was also cross examined by the Ld. Additional PP for the State as he was resiling from his earlier statement.
PW5 is Retd. ASI Jai Prakash. He has deposed that on 08.03.2019, he was posted at PS Mahendra Park and working as duty officer from 12:00 midnight to 08:00 AM. That at about 07:35 AM SI Vikas Panwar presented a rukka for registration of FIR and he got fed the contents of rukka in computer through computer operator and computer generated copy of FIR is Ex.PW5/A. That he made endorsement Ex.PW5/B on the rukka. He further deposed that he gave certificate U/s 65B of Evidence Act Ex. PW5/C. That he handed over the copy of FIR and copy of FIR and original rukka to SI Vikas Panwar for further investigation.
He further deposed that on the same day, at about 01:18:23 hours he received information from Ct. Sukhram Pal of Dr. BSA Hospital who informed that Yash s/o Jai Kishan was admitted with firearm injury vide MLC 3050/19 by his father. That he conveyed this information to SI Vikas Panwar for taking necessary action at his end. He further deposed that the SHO was also informed in this regard. That he recorded DD No. 003A Ex.PW5/D. PW6 is ASI S. Uttam. He has deposed that on 07.03.2019 he was posted at PS Mahindra Park as HC and on that day, he alongwith SI Vikas Panwar was on emergency duty. That SI Vikas Panwar received DD No. 3A and thereafter he alongwith SI Vikas Panwar and HC Manna Lal reached at BSA SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 8 of 35Hospital Rohini, where injured Yash was found admitted. That his father Jai Kishan also met them and he was taking his son Yash to Safdarjung Hospital as injured Yash was referred to Safdarjung Hospital from BSA Hospital. He further deposed that the concerned treating doctor handed over IO/SI Vikas Panwar the sealed pullanda alongwith sample seal which was seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/A. That thereafter, he alongwith IO and Ct. Manna Lal reached at the spot. He further deposed that the IO called the crime team at the spot. That Crime Team reached at the spot and inspected the scene of crime. That thereafter, he alongwith IO and HC Mannal Lal reached at Safdarjung Hospital and IO recorded the statement of Sh. Jai Kishan father of injured Yash Ex. PW1/A and IO prepared tehrir. He further deposed that thereafter, they came back to PS and IO got registered the FIR U/s 307 IPC. That thereafter, they again visited the place of occurrence but none met there. Thereafter they came back to PS. He further deposed that complainant Jai Kishan came to PS and thereafter he alongwith IO and complainant reached at the place of occurrence at the instance of complainant and IO prepared site plan Ex. PW1/J. He further deposed that the complainant Jai Kishan pointed out towards the accused and at his instance IO arrested the accused Kishan @ Kali vide arrested memo Ex.PW1/C. That his personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/D and IO recorded the disclosure statement of accused Kishan Ex.PW6/B. He further deposed that accused led them to the place of incident and at his instance IO prepared pointing out memo Ex.PW1/H. He further SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 9 of 35deposed that accused Kishan got recovered one revolver which was kept inside the bed in a room of his house. That IO checked the revolver and found three live cartridges and one empty cartridge in the said revolver. That IO prepared the sketch of the revolver and the cartridges Ex.PW1/F. That IO kept the said recovered revolver and cartridges in a plastic box and sealed the same with the seal of Vp and took in possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/E. That IO prepared the site plan of place of recovery of the said revolver and cartridges Ex.PW1/G. He further deposed that complainant Jai Kishan was relieved from there and thereafter they came back to PS. That case property was deposited in malkhana and accused was lodged in lockup.
He has identified the case property i.e. one plastic box containing one revolver and fired cartridges and correctly identified the same and states that the said revolver alongwith three cartridges and one empty cartridge were recovered at the instance of accused Kishan @ Kali and proved the same as Ex. P1 (colly.) PW7 is ASI Manna Lal. He has deposed that on 07.03.2019 he was posted at PS Mahindra Park as HC and on that day, he alongwith SI Vikas Panwar and HC S. Uttam was on emergency duty. He further deposed that SI Vikas Panwar received DD No. 3A and thereafter he alongwith SI Vikas Panwar and HC S. Uttam reached at BSA Hospital Rohini, where injured Yash was found admitted and his father Jai Kishan also met them and he was taking his son Yash to Safdarjung Hospital as injured Yash was referred to Safdarjung Hospital from BSA SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 10 of 35Hospital. He further deposed that the concerned treating doctor handed over IO/SI Vikas Panwar sealed pullanda alongwith sample seal which was seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/A. That thereafter, he alongwith IO and HC S. Uttam reached at the spot. That IO called the crime team at the spot and Crime team reached at the spot and inspected the scene of crime. That thereafter, he alongwith IO and HC S. Uttam reached at Safdarjung Hospital. That IO recorded the statement of Sh. Jai Kishan father of injured Yash Ex.PW1/A and IO prepared tehrir. That thereafter, they came back to PS and IO got registered the FIR U/s 307 IPC. That thereafter they again visited the place of occurrence but none met there. Thereafter, they came back to PS. He further deposed that complainant Jai Kishan came to PS and thereafter he alongwith IO, HC S. Uttam and complainant reached at the place of occurrence and at the instance of complainant, IO prepared site plan Ex. PW1/J. Complainant Jai Kishan @ Kali pointed out towards the accused and at his instance, IO arrested the accused Kishan @ Kali vide arrested memo Ex.PW1/C and his personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/D and IO recorded the disclosure statement of accused Kishan Ex.PW6/B. He further deposed that accused led them to the place of incident and at his instance IO prepared pointing out memo Ex.PW1/H. That accused Kishan got recovered one revolver which was kept inside the bed in a room of his house. That IO checked the revolver and found three live cartridges and one empty cartridge in the said revolver. That IO prepared the sketch of the revolver and the cartridges Ex.PW1/F. SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 11 of 35He further deposed that IO kept the said recovered revolver and cartridges in a plastic box and sealed the same with the seal of VP and took in possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/E. That IO prepared the site plan of the place of recovery of the said revolver and cartridges Ex.PW1/G and complainant Jai Kishan was relieved from there. That thereafter they came back to PS, case property was deposited in malkhana and accused was lodged in lockup. He further deposed that after the medical examination of accused Kishan he was produced before Ld. MM and he was sent to JC.
He further deposed that on 10.03.2019 he alongwith IO reached at H. No. D-42, Ramgarh Jagangir Puri where Sonu, brother of Pinky and his father Jagmohan met them. That Sonu handed over the marriage card Ex.P4 of the sister to IO, which was the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/D. That IO recorded the statement of Jagmohan and Monu and thereafter they reached at H.No. 224, Dhirpur, where accused Arun met them and produced arms license of the revolver Ex. PW7/P1. That IO seized the same vide Ex.PW7/A. He further deposed that IO arrested the accused Arun vide arrest memo Ex. PW7/B, his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW7/C. That after making interrogation accused was released on bail. IO recorded my statement.
He further deposed that on 25.03.2019 he alongwith IO reached at Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj where the security staff of the said hospital handed over sealed parcel purported to be containing bullet recovered from body of the injured Yash SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 12 of 35alongwith sample seal of Fortis Hospital. That IO seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/D and thereafter they came back to PS. IO deposited the case property in the malkhana.
He has identified the case property i.e. one plastic box containing one revolver and fired cartridges Ex. P1 (colly).
PW8 is SI Vikas Pawan. He has deposed that on 07/08.03.2019 he was posted at PS Mahindra Park as SI and on that day, on receipt of DD No. 3A Ex. PW5/D regarding Yash s/o Jai Kishan was admitted in injured condition with gun shot injury at Ramgarh Village, Jahangir Puri, Delhi, he alongwith HC S. Uttam and Mana Lal reached at BSA Hospital Rohini, where injured Yash was found admitted and his father Jai Kishan also met them and he was taking his son Yash to Safdarjung Hospital as injured Yash was referred to Safdarjung Hospital from BSA Hospital. That he requested him to give statement but he was in hurry to take his injured to Safdarjung Hospital. He further deposed that the concerned treating doctor handed over him sealed pullanda alongwith sample seal which was seized by him vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/A. That thereafter, they reached at the spot and he called the crime team at the spot and Crime team reached at the spot and inspected the scene of crime and photographer took the photographs.
He further deposed that he alongwith HC S. Uttam and HC Mana Lal reached at Safdarjung Hospital where they met Jai Kishan and recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A. He further deposed that he made endorsement Ex. PW8/A on Ex. PW1/A and prepared tehrir and they came back to PS. He further SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 13 of 35deposed that he presented the rukka to duty officer ASI Jai Prakash who registered FIR U/s 307 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act and duty officer handed over him the copy of FIR and original rukka for investigation. He further deposed that they again visited the place of occurrence but none was present there. He further deposed that he met one secret informer who informed him that Yash was shot by Kishan @ Kali s/o Rai Singh r/o A-59, Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri, Delhi. We went to the said house but he was not found in that house. He further deposed that the complainant Jai Kishan came to PS who informed that his son is serious due to the injury. That secret informer came to PS and informed that accused Krishan was present in his house if raid conducted he can be apprehended. That on receipt of this information, he alongwith police staff and complainant went to the house of accused Krishan @ Kali who was found at his house. He further deposed that accused was identified by the complainant and he arrested the accused Kishan @ Kali vide arrested memo Ex.PW1/C. That his personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/D. That he recorded the disclosure statement of accused Krishan @ Kali Ex.PW6/B. That accused Krishan @ Kali got recovered one revolver which was kept inside the bed in a room of his house. That he checked the revolver and found three live cartridges and one empty cartridge in the said revolver. That he prepared the sketch of the revolver and the cartridges Ex.PW1/F. That the same was measured having length of barrel 7cm, butt 8.3 cm and chamber 4.6cm. That the length of the cartridge 3cm and length of fired cartridge SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 14 of 352.3cm. That he kept the said recovered revolver and cartridges in a plastic box and sealed the same with the seal of VP and took in possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/E. That he prepared the site plan of place of recovery of the said revolver and cartridges Ex.PW1/G. He further deposed that accused led them to the place of incident and he prepared pointing out memo Ex.PW1/H. He further deposed that at the instance of complainant he prepared site plan Ex.PW1/J and recorded supplementary statement of complainant. He further deposed that they came back to PS and case property was deposited with malkhana. That after the medical examination of accused Krishan @ Kali, he was produced before Ld. MM and was sent to JC and recorded statements of witnesses.
He further deposed that on 10.03.2019 he alongwith HC Manna Lal reached at H. No. D-42, Ramgarh Jagangir Puri where Sonu, brother of Pinky and his father Jagmohan met them. That Sonu handed over the marriage card Ex. P4 of the sister to him which he seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/D. That he recorded the statement of Jagmohan and Monu and thereafter they reached at H.No. 224, Dhirpur, where accused Arun met them and produced arms license Ex. PW7/P1 of his revolver. That he seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW7/A. He further deposed that he interrogated and arrested the accused Arun vide arrest memo Ex. PW7/B and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW7/C. That after making interrogation accused was released on bail he recorded statement of the witness.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 15 of 35He further deposed that on 16.03.2019 he went to Fortis Hospital where he recorded statement of injured Yash U/s 161 Cr.P.C. That on 22.03.2019 he collected medical documents of the injured and place the same on record. That on 25.03.2019 he alongwith IO reached at Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj where the security staff of the said hospital handed over sealed parcel containing bullet recovered from body of the injured Yash alongwith sample seal of Fortis Hospital and he seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/D and deposited the case property in the malkhana.
He further deposed that accused Kishan @ Kali had been correctly identified by the witness. That on 27.03.2019 he deposited the MLC of injured with Dr. BSA Hospital for opinion as to nature of injury. That on 02.04.2019 the exhibits were sent to FSL through Ct. Suresh who deposited the same and obtained the acknowledgement of FSL which he handed over to MHC(M). That on 22.04.2019 the doctor opined grievous injury on the MLC of injured Yash. That he prepared chargesheet which was forwarded by SHO and sent by ACP in the court.
He further deposed that on 27.06.2019 he collected arms license verification report Ex.PW8/B which he placed the same on record. That on 06.07.2019 he alongwith Ct. Suresh, complainant and injured Yash went to BJRM Hospital where injured was medically examined. That the hospital/staff handed over him sealed pullanda with sample seal Ex. PW8/C. That on 11.07.2019 Ct. Mukesh deposited the exhibit vide RC No. 144/21/19 and obtained the acknowledgement of FSL which he SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 16 of 35handed over to MHC(M). That on 23.09.2019 Sonu produced CD containing the recording of marriage function. The said CD was seized by him vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/A and two sets of CD containing the recording of marriage from the side of bride and groom are on the record. He has correctly identified the said CD sets.
He further deposed that he collected the mobile crime report and placed the same on record vide Ex.PW8/D. That he collected FSL result dated 05.11.2019 with Allelic data which are collectively Ex. PW8/E. That he prepared supplementary chargesheet which was forwarded by SHO and sent by ACP in the court.
He further deposed that he collected ballistic expert report of dated 30.01.2020 Ex. PW8/F and FSL result dated 23.01.2020 Ex. PW8/G. That he applied for sanction U/s 39 Arms Act. The sanction U/s 39 Arms Act Ex. PW8/H was given by the then Additional DCP Brijendra Kumar Yadav. He further deposed that he had placed all these reports and sanction on the record and prepared supplementary charge-sheet which was forwarded by SHO and sent by ACP in the court.
He has identified the case property i.e. one revolver and fired cartridges Ex. P1 (colly) and stated that the said revolver alongwith three cartridges and one empty cartridge were recovered at the instance of accused Krishan @ Kali.
STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 294 Cr.P.C.
5. Vide separate joint statements under Section 294 SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 17 of 35Cr.P.C. recorded on 19.07.2023, 09.08.2023, 14.09.2023 and 03.11.2023, accused persons admitted the following documents respectively:
1 MLC of Yash bearing no. 3050 dated Ex.P1 08.03.2019 prepared at BSA Hospital
2. Admission and discharge summary of Yash Ex.P2 bearing MRD no. 201921280 prepared at S.J. Hospital
3. Admission and discharge summary of Yash Ex.P3 bearing UHID no. 2067658 prepared at Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj
4. Ballistic report bearing No. SFSL Ex.A1 DLH/3132/BAL/516/19 dated 30.01.2020
5. Ballistic report bearing No. SFSL Ex.A2 DLH/6785/Bio/1941/19/BAL/1619/19 dated 23.01.2020.
6. MLC of Yash bearing No. 174459 dated Ex.A3 06.07.2019 of BJRM Hospital
7. Sanction under Section 39 Arms Act by Ex.PW8/ Additional DCP-I Sh. Brijender Kumar H Yadav.
8. Scene of crime visit report No. 199/19 Ex.PW8/ dated 08.03.2019 prepared by SI Manzoor D Alam
9. 18 Photographs of scene of crime Ex. PX-1 (colly)
10. FSL result with allelic data dated Ex.PW8/ 05.11.2019 E
11. Statement of Ct.Suresh who deposited the Ex. PX-2 exhibits in FSL vide RC No. 75/21/19
12. Statement of Mukesh who deposited the Ex. PX-3 exhibits in FSL vide RC No.114/21/19 SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 18 of 35
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 Cr.P.C
6. After closure of PE, the statement of the accused persons was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. on 03.11.2023, wherein they denied all the evidence put to them and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the present case and that witnesses have not deposed against them. Accused Arun Kumar further stated that the shot was fired by the victim himself and caused injuries to him by a licenced pistol which was issued in his name.
Accused persons chose not to lead any defence evidence.
7. Thereafter, matter was fixed for final arguments.
ARGUMENTS
8. I have heard Sh. Harvinder Nar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Mr. Pradeep Rana, Ld. Counsel for both accused persons and perused the entire record.
9. It was argued by Ld. Addl. PP that the allegations levelled against the accused persons are of serious nature. It was further argued that all the witnesses have clearly proved the manner of offence and prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. That merely because some of the witnesses have not deposed entirely in favour of the prosecution, that alone cannot absolve the guilt of the accused persons and the relevant portion of their testimony can be read.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 19 of 3510. Per contra, Mr. Pradeep Rana, Ld. Counsel for the accused persons has argued that accused persons have been falsely implicated. It was further argued that prime prosecution witnesses had not supported the case of the prosecution and denied all the allegations levelled against the accused persons and there was no incriminating evidence against them and the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, accused persons deserve acquittal.
As regards accused Arun Kumar for the offence under Section 30 Arms Act, it is argued by ld. Counsel that there is connecting evidence on record which could impute required knowledge or intention on the part of accused Arun Kumar that he deliberately contravened the Provisions and Rules of the Arms Act. That there is nothing to suggest on record that he had consented to part away with the revolver or that he had willfully handed over the same to co-accused or that he had slightest of knowledge that the same could have been misused.
FINDINGS
11. The accused Krishan @ Kali had been charged for the commission of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC & 25/27 Arms Act. Accused Arun Kumar charged for the offence punishable under Section 30 Arms Act.
12. The relevant Section is reproduced as under for the sake of clarity:
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 20 of 35
SECTION 307 IPC "Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under any circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is herein before mentioned."
SECTION 25 ARMS ACT "....... Whoever acquires, has in his possession or carries any prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition in contravention of section 7 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, but which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine".
SECTION 27 ARMS ACT "Punishment for using arms, etc.-
(1) Whoever uses any arms or ammunition in contravention of section 5 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. (2) Whoever uses any prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition in contravention of section 7 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 21 of 35(3) Whoever uses any prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition or does any act in contravention of section 7 and such use or act results in the death of any other person, shall be punishable with death."
SECTION 30 ARMS ACT "Punishment for contravention of licence or rule.-- Whoever contravenes any condition of a licence or any provision of this Act or any rule made thereunder, for which no punishment is provided elsewhere in this Act shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both."
13. It is a settled law of criminal jurisprudence that a person is believed to be innocent till the guilt is proved against him. This principle is called The Presumption of Innocence. In another words, the accused is entitled to take advantage of reasonable doubt in respect of his crime. The principle finds its genesis in the Declaration of Human Rights under Article 11 Section 1 incorporated by the United Nations in 1948. It is also mentioned in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights in Article 6 Section 2 and United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights under Article 14, Section 2.
Presumption of Innocence is a re-statement of the rule that in criminal matters the prosecution has the burden of proving guilt of the accused in order to be convicted of the crime of which he is charged.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 22 of 35In Chandrashekhar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh decided on 06.07.2018 relying on judgment of Data Ram Singh Vs. State of UP passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 06.02.2018, it was held that:
"the freedom of an individual is utmost important and cannot be curtailed specially when guilt if any, is yet to be proved. It is settled law that till such time guilt of a person is proved, he is deemed to be innocent........ A fundamental postulate of criminal juris prudence is a presumption of innocence meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty..........
Thus, the inference which is culled out from the above is that it is for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
14. In this backdrop, I proceed to delve upon the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution.
MATERIAL WITNESS/INJURED
15. The prosecution has heavily relied upon the testimony of injured PW2 Yash. At the very outset it is important to note the relevancy of the testimony of the injured.
In the case of Abdul Sayed Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2010 AIR SCW 5701, it is held as under:
"The law on the point can be summarised to the effect that the testimony of the injured witness is accorded a special status in law. This is as a consequence of the fact that the injury to the witness is an in-built guarantee of his presence at the scene of the crime and because the SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 23 of 35
witness will not want to let his actual assailant go unpunished merely to falsely implicate a third party for the commission of the offence. Thus, the deposition of the injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies therein."
In State of U.P. Vs. Naresh & Ors (2011) 4 SCC 324, it is held as under:
"The evidence of an injured witness must be given due weightage being a stamped witness, thus, his presence cannot be doubted. His statement is generally considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence and this lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence. Thus, the testimony of an injured witness is accorded a special status in law. The witness would not like or want to let his actual assailant go unpunished merely to implicate a third person falsely for the commission of the offence."
The above mentioned observations are also reiterated in the latest case of Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Criminal Appeal Nos. 1200-1202 of 2022 arising out of SLP (Criminal) Nos. 8624-8626 of 2019, by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
In the backdrop of aforesaid case law, I proceed to delve upon the testimony of the injured PW2 Yash in the present case.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 24 of 35PW2 injured Yash had deposed as under:
"On 07.03.2019 I had gone to attend the marriage of my cousin brother Vicky s/o Sh. Om Prakash. I alongwith my family had gone to Burari from Jahangir Puri. The marriage party left Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri for Burari, Delhi. At about 10:30-11:00 PM when ribbon cutting ceremony were going on. I was present there and my family also attended the said marriage function. The witness pointed out one of the accused who is present in the court. Witness said that "ye uncle uss din bahut parshan thay kuki unki pistol gum gai thi". (Accused revealed his name Arun Kumar). I went outside the pandal/marriage tent where tables and chairs were lying. I saw the pistol was lying on the table. I picked up the said pistol and went upto my father. After seeing pistol in my hand my father started shouting "yeh kaha se laya". I become perplexed and due to confusion I pressed the trigger of said pistol and a shot was fired from the said pistol. I fell down on the ground and become unconscious. I was taken to Dr. BSA hospital thereafter I was transferred to another hospital.
I do not want to say anything. "
Despite a lengthy cross examination by the Ld. Additional PP for the State, as the said witnesses resiled from his earlier statement, he still categorically denied that accused Krishan @ Kali had committed the offence and reiterated that accused had not fired upon the injured. That the pistol was picked up by the injured himself in the marriage function and accidentally got injured.
Thus, the very injured person PW2 Yash has himself not supported the case of the prosecution and has categorically denied any injury being caused to him by accused Krishan @ SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 25 of 35Kali.
OTHER MATERIAL WITNESS
16. The prosecution has heavily relied upon the testimony of PW1 Jai Kishan, PW3 Sonu and PW4 Jag Mohan, who were the public witness.
Now, I proceed to delve upon the testimony of other material/public witnesses i.e. complainant/PW1 Jai Bhagwan, PW3 Sonu and PW4 Jagmohan, who have deposed as under:
PW1 Jai Kishan:
"On 07.03.2019, I alongwith my family members went to attend the marriage of my nephew Vicky who is son of my brother namely Om Prakash. We went to Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri for attending the marriage of Vicky. My younger son Yash age about 15 years went to answer the nature's call / urinate. When he did not return after about 10-15 minutes, I went in search of my son Yash. I saw my son Yash was carrying a pistol type object in his hand. When I reached near my son Yash, to whom I asked as to what he was carrying. When I shouted at my son Yash, accidentally the trigger of said pistol pressed and the face of the naal / barrel was towards him. The bullet which accidentally fired hit against his chest. My son Yash got injured and fell down. The pistol from the hand of my son fell down on the ground. I alongwith the help of my relatives lifted my son Yash and taken him to Dr. BSA Hospital where my son was medically examined.
Someone made a call to the police. Police officials met me and my family in the hospital. Police obtained my signatures on some blank papers. Later on, my son Yash was referred to Safdarjung Hospital. I was present in Safdarjung Hospital where some SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 26 of 35
police officials of PS Mahendra Park met me. On inquiry, by the police officials, I informed them that I do not know who owned the said pistol. Police told me that the pistol by which my son got injured belongs to brother-in-law of Kaali @ Krishan.
On next day, I was called in the police station where my signatures were obtained on some blank papers. I do not know any person by the name of Krishan @ Kaali.
Except this, I do not know anything else in this case and except this I do not want to say anything else in this case".
PW3 Sonu "On 07.03.2019 marriage of my sister Pinki took place in Gali No. 3, Ramgarh, A-Block near Mata ka mandir where tents were installed for attending the guests. My sister married with Sh. Vijay r/o Swaroop Vihar, Delhi. We were attending guests, I came to know that firing incident took place at the time of entering of barat in the pandal.
When the ribbon cutting ceremony was taking place, firing incident took place. When I reached at the said place where ribbon cutting ceremony was taken place, I was informed that one child has been shot. I also came to know that the said child had fired a shot on himself. I had not seen the said child shot himself. My all other relatives also gathered there and pacified the guests who were running here and there. Accused krishan@ Kali is present in the court today (correctly identified by the witness.) Krishan @ Kali attended the marriage of my sister on that day. I had given the video recording of marriage of my sister Pinki with Sh. Vijay on dated 07.03.2019. The three video recording CD from our side and three video recording CD from the side of Vijay were handed over to the police who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/A bearing my signature at point A. The CDs from the side of my sister Pinki were given Sl. No. 3-G, I-G and II-G SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 27 of 35and CD from the side of Vijay were given Sl. No. 3-B, I-B and II-B and signed the same on each CD. At this stage, the six CDs are part of the record. The same are shown to the witness who correctly identified the same. The six CD is now collectively Ex. P3 (including Ex. P1 which was played on 22.07.2022).
I had also given the marriage card of my sister which was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/B bearing my signature at point A. At this stage, marriage card of Pinki Pal with Vijay is part of the record. The marriage card is Ex. P4 (witness correctly identified the marriage card).
I do not want to say anything else".
PW4 Jag Mohan "On 07.03.2019 my daughter Ms. Pinki married with Sh. Vijay. The marriage pandal was installed in gali No. 3, Block-A, Ramgarh, near Mata ka mandir. DJ was playing music in the said pandal and baratis and guests were dancing to the tunes of music. My neighbours, friends, relatives and guests attended the marriage of my daughter. The guests from the side of Vijay also attended the marriage. Accused Krishan @ Kali also attended the marriage. Accused is present in the court today (correctly identified by the witness). We heard a noise that someone had fired a shot himself outside the marriage pandal. I alongwith other went outside the pandal and we were informed that the said child has been removed to the hospital. The marriage ceremony was performed and after marriage ceremony, I went to the hospital where I saw one boy aged about 15-16 years was found injured condition and he was under medical treatment. The said boy and his father attended the marriage of my daughter. I alongwith my family members regularly visited the hospital and after discharged of the said boy from the hospital we visited the house of SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 28 of 35said boy in order to inquire improvement in his health.
My son Sonu had given the marriage card of my daughter which was seized by the police. My son also gave the CDs of marriage from our side and from the side of Vijay to the police.
At this stage, marriage card of Pinki Pal with Vijay is part of the record. The marriage card is already Ex. P4 (witness correctly identified the marriage card). I do not want to say anything else. "
All the said material witnesses reslied from their respective earlier statements and despite a lengthy cross- examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, no incriminating evidence could be culled out against the accused persons.
Thus, the very injured person PW2 Yash including the complainant PW1 Jai Kishan and other public witnesses PW3 Sonu and PW4 Jagmohan have themselves not supported the case of the prosecution and have categorically denied that accused Krishan @ Kali had committed the offence and reiterated that accused had not fired upon the injured. That the pistol was picked up by the injured himself in the marriage function and accidentally got injured and have categorically denied any injury being caused to injured PW2 Yash by accused Krishan @ Kali.
MEDICAL/FORENSIC EVIDENCE
17. The accused persons vide their joint statement under Section 294 Cr.P.C. admitted the MLC Ex.P-1 of injured Yash bearing no. 3050 dated 08.03.2019 prepared at BSA Hospital, admission and discharge summary of Yash bearing MRD no.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 29 of 35
201921280 prepared at S.J. Hospital Ex.P2, admission and discharge summary of Yash bearing UHID no. 2067658 prepared at Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj Ex.P3, ballistic report bearing No. SFSL DLH/3132/BAL/516/19 dated 30.01.2020 Ex.A1, ballistic report bearing No. SFSL DLH/6785/Bio/1941/19/BAL/ 1619/19 dated 23.01.2020 Ex.A2, MLC of Yash bearing No. 174459 dated 06.07.2019 of BJRM Hospital Ex.A3, FSL result with allelic data dated 05.11.2019 and Ex.PX-2.
At most the prosecution could prove that the injury were sustained by the witness but has miserably failed to prove that the said injury if any were inflicted by the accused Krishan @ Kali or that the revolver was deliberately handed over by accused Arun Kumar especially in the wake of the testimony of the injured PW2 himself who has denied any act on the part of accused persons.
SECTION 30 ARMS ACT QUA ACCUSED ARUN KUMAR
18. As regards accused Arun Kumar, who had been charged separately for the offence under Section 30 Arms Act having contravened the provision of Arms Act and handed over his licenced revolver and cartridges to co-accused Krishan @ Kali, it is pertinent to mention that in the testimony of PW2 Yash, who is the injured himself and was the prime prosecution witness, he himself stated that the revolver of accused Arun Kumar has been misplaced on that date and he was searching for the same. The relevant portion of his testimony is as under:
"Witness said that "ye uncle uss din bahut parshan thay kuki unki pistol gum gai thi".
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 30 of 35(Accused revealed his name Arun Kumar). I went outside the pandal/marriage tent where tables and chairs were lying."
He further stated that he saw that pistol was lying on the table and he took up the same and went to his father, who started shouting in despair and he became perplexed and due to confusion he himself pressed the trigger of the revolver.
There is no connecting evidence on record which could impute required knowledge or intention on the part of accused Arun Kumar for deliberately contravening the provisions and use of the Arms Act. There is nothing to suggest on record that he had consented to part away with the revolver or had willfully handed over the same to co-accused or that he had slightest of knowledge that the same could have been misused.
At this stage, reliance is placed upon the case of Tarlochan Singh @ Rana Vs. State of Punjab decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 29.03.2022, in which it is held as under:
"Once the appellant stands exonerated from offence under Section 120-B IPC by the High Court and Section 29 of the Arms Act by us on the ground that the prosecution failed to establish that the fire arm was parted by him knowingly and willingly and that it was taken away without his knowledge by the co- accused and used in the commission of an offence, there appears to be no justification to convict and punish the appellant even under Section 30 of the Arms Act. Section 30 of the Arms Act reads as under :- "Section 30- Punishment for contravention of licence or rule. - Whoever contravenes any condition of a licence or any provision of this Act or any SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.Page 31 of 35
rule made thereunder, for which no punishment is provided elsewhere in this Act shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to [six months], or with fine which may extend to [two thousand] rupees, or with both."
20. Since there is no evidence to establish any willful violation by the appellant of any of the conditions of the Act or conditions of a licence or any provision of the Act or any rule, he is liable to be exonerated from the offence of Section 30 as well.
Even PW1 had supported the testimony of PW2 and stated that his son was found in possession of pistol type object, who accidentally himself pressed the trigger of the pistol. He was not aware that the pistol belonged to accused Arun Kumar and his signatures were obtained by the police officials on some blank papers. There is no evidence to establish any willful violation by the accused Arun Kumar of any of the conditions of the Act or conditions of a licence or any provision of the Act or any rule.
25/27 ARMS ACT
19. There were allegations against accused Krishan @ Kali on the date of incident i.e. 07.03.2019, he used a revolver pistol and cartridges were found in his possession which were without any permit or licence in contravention of notice issued by Delhi Administration.
To prove the same, the prosecution has relied upon the sanction under Section 39 Arms Act Ex.PW8/H, which has SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 32 of 35been admitted by the accused persons vide their joint statement recorded under Section 294 Cr.P.C.
It was the case of the prosecution that accused Krishan @ Kali got recovered one revolver which is kept inside the bed in a room of his house. That the IO checked the revolver and found three live cartridges and one empty cartridge in the said revolver. The sketch of the revolver and the cartridge Ex.PW1/F and the seizure memo is Ex.PW1/E. The prosecution has also relied upon the testimony of PW7 ASI Manna Lal and PW8 SI Vikas who deposed that on the basis of disclosure statement of accused when they reached at the house of accused Krishan @ Kali for finding the case property and he pointed out one revolver inside his bed and on checking one empty cartridge and three live cartridges were inside the revolver. The same were sealed with seizure memo Ex.PW1/E. However, PW7 & PW8 infact in their cross examination admitted that no videography or photography was conducted at the time of recovery of pistol from the accused. No public person was joined at the time of recovery and no notice was also given to join the investigation.
I have perused the seizure memo of the revolver and cartridge Ex.PW1/E and sketch of the revolver and cartridge Ex.PW1/F recovered from the house of the accused, however, the independent witness PW Jai Kishan had stated that he had not gone through the contents of the same and denied making signatures voluntarily.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 33 of 35Thus, the argument raised by ld. Counsel for the accused that the weapon of offence has been falsely planted upon the accused does not seem to be unfounded and moreso in the wake of the testimony of injured PW2 and other public witness PW1, PW3 and PW4 denying if accused Krishan @ Kali had fired on PW1/injured Yash or caused injuries, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against accused Krishan @ Kali.
The case properties i.e. CD Ex.P1 and shirt (which he was wearing on the date of incident) Ex.P2 were exhibited during the cross examination on behalf of State, although, he had pointed that the person in the video at 9:20 minutes visible wearing a blue shirt was Krishan @ Kali but he again categorically denied that the accused Krishan @ Kali pointed any pistol towards him or that he had fired upon him and resiled from his earlier statement Ex.PW2/A.
20. The other witnesses were police officials who deposed regarding the manner of investigation but the material prosecution witnesses i.e. PW1 Jai Kishan (complainant), PW2 Yash (injured) PW3 Sonu and PW4 Jagmohan have not supported the case of the prosecution and categorically denied that the accused Krishan @ Kali inflicted the injury. There is no other public witness to the incident or any other incriminating evidence found against the accused persons and benefit of doubt has to be granted to the accused persons.
SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 34 of 35CONCLUSION
21. In view of the aforesaid discussions and findings, accused Krishan @ Kali and Arun Kumar stand acquitted of the charges levelled against them.
22. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
23. Needless to say, that in view of Section 357A Cr.P.C. the victim would be entitled to compensation even though the accused persons have been acquitted, if not awarded so far by the Delhi State Legal Authority, as may be permissible, as per subsisting rules and in accordance with law.
Dictated and announced in the open (Shefali Sharma) Court on 28.11.2023 Addl. Session Judge-02 (running into 35 pages) (North), Rohini Courts/Delhi SC No. 432/2019, FIR No. 97/2019, PS Mahendra Park State Vs. Krishan @ Kali & Anr.
Page 35 of 35