Delhi District Court
State vs Ram Kumar Khandelwal on 16 July, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH. AKASH JAIN, METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE06, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
State Vs Ram Kumar Khandelwal
FIR No : 100/05
U/s : 285/337/304A IPC
PS : Vasant Vihar
JUDGMENT
a) Sl. No. of the case : 186/02
b) Unique Case ID No. : 02403R0524162007
c) The date of commission of the
offence : 04.03.2005
d) Name of the complainant : Sh. Rajender Singh Yadav
e) Name, parentage & address
of accused : Ram Kumar Khandelwal S/o Sita Ram
R/o RZ/B15, Dabri Extn., Gali No.2, near
Rangoli Cable, New Delhi.
f) Offences complained of : 285/337/304A IPC
g) The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
h) Final Judgment : Acquitted
i) Date of institution of case : 06.08.2002
j) Date of final arguments : 21.06.2014
k) Date of Judgment : 16.07.2014
BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
1. In the present case chargesheet was filed by the State under Sections 285/337/304A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter mentioned as 'IPC') against the accused Ram Kumar Khandelwal on 06.08.2002. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.03.2005, at unknown time, at Tpoint, Olf Palme Marg, Major Shob Nath Road, Sector08, R.K. Puram, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of police station Vasant Vihar, accused was illegally using CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 1 of 11 LPG and other combustible articles in his car bearing no.DL2CJ8330, so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life or likely to cause hurt or injury to any person or that accused being in possession of such combustible matter knowingly or negligently omitted to take such order as is sufficient to guard against the probable danger to human life from any such fire or other combustible material. Further, it is the case of prosecution that accused having committed the above mentioned act in above said manner, caused injuries upon Ram Kumar and Rajender and caused death of Ram Kishan and thereby committed the offences punishable under section 285/337/304A of IPC.
2. On the basis of aforesaid chargesheet, Ld. Predecessor Court took cognizance of the offences under section 285/337/304A IPC against the accused. Upon appearance of the accused, the documents were supplied to him in compliance of section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter mentioned as 'Cr.P.C.'). Notice under section 251 Cr.P.C. qua offences under section 285/337/304A IPC was served upon the accused by this Court to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial on 18.05.2011. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for prosecution evidence.
3. In order to prove its case prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. PW1 is Rajender Singh Yadav, who deposed that on 04.03.2005, he was working as leading fireman at Bhikaji Cama Place, Fire Station. On that day at about 05:30 PM, he had received a call from his Fire Control Room on number 101 about the incident of fire at Tpoint, Olf Palme Marg, CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 2 of 11 Major Shob Nath Marg, Sector08, R.K. Puram, near Swami Malai Mandir, New Delhi. Thereafter, he alongwith his fireman Kaptan Singh and Fire Operator Sanjay Kumar and driver Ram Kishan with his water tender (169) reached at the spot where they found a maruti van car bearing no.DL2CJ 8330 having LPG Kit inside the car containing ceiling fan, light choke, tube and other electrical articles burning with fire. As soon as they moved to prevent the fire, the LPG cylinder got blasted and hit the driver/ pump operator Ram Kishan (Batch No.123) and carried him about 20 feet away from the fire engine. PW1 stated that Ram Kishan sustained grievous injuries on his body and face and he became unconscious later. PW1 further stated that at the same time, he and his other two colleagues fell down on the ground and consequent to the incident, he had sustained grievous injuries on his face and both hands. PW1 further stated that thereafter, he alongwith other colleagues were shifted to S.J. Hospital by the private vehicle. After 0304 days treatment, Ram Kishan was declared dead by the doctors. PW1 deposed that police had recorded his statement Ex. PW1/A on 04.03.2005. Police had also prepared the site plan at his instance.
4. PW2 is Rajender Kumar, who deposed that on 04.03.2005, he was working as a driver in Asian Deployment Bank. He deposed that on the said date at about 05:00 PM, at Petrol Pump, Olf Palme Marg, he had seen a Maruti of white colour bearing no.DL2CJ8330 having LPG Kit inside the car containing ceiling fan, light choke, tube and other electrical articles burning with fire. Several persons were gathered at the spot and someone had called the fire brigade. After 20 minutes at about 05:30 PM, fire CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 3 of 11 brigade reached at the spot and they were moved to stop the fire. As soon as they moved to prevent the fire, the LPG Cylinder got blasted and hit the driver/ pump operator and other two workers of fire brigade and carried them about 20 feet away from the fire engine. They sustained grievous injuries on their bodies. PW2 further stated that he fell down on the ground and consequent to the incident he sustained grievous injuries on his face and blood started oozing out from his face. Thereafter, PW2 alongwith other workers of fire brigade were shifted to S.J. Hospital by private vehicle. After getting the treatment on the next day, he got released from the hospital.
5. PW3 is Rajesh, who deposed that his father worked as a driver in Delhi Fire Brigade. On 04.03.2005, his father had gone on a call for extinguishing fire in a Maruti Van which was caused by bursting of LPG Cylinder where during extinguishing the fire, his father was burned. Then, he was taken to S.J. Hospital and on 09.03.2005, he was shifted to Ganga Ram Hospital. On 10.03.2005, he died of burn injuries. PW3 identified the dead body of his father and after postmortem received the dead body vide Ex. PW3/A. Later on police recorded his statement.
6. PW4 is Rajpal, who deposed that on 11.03.2005 he went to the mortuary of Ganga Ram Hospital and identified dead body of his maternal uncle/ deceased Ram Kishan who was the fire man and who died on 10.03.2005 vide Ex. PW4/A. CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 4 of 11
7. PW5 is Sundar Lal, who deposed that on 04.03.2005 he was posted as a constable in Crime Team S/W District. On that day, he received a message from control room to take some photographs. Accordingly, he reached at the the spot i.e. Olf Plame Marg and took 9 photographs as per the direction of the IO. Photographs alongwith negatives are Ex.P1 collectively.
8. PW6 is HC Dharambir, who deposed that on 04.03.2005, he was posted as a constable in police station Vasant Vihar. On that day, he was on duty from 08:00 am to 08:00 pm. After receipt of DD no.25A, he alongwith IO Chander Bhushan reached the spot i.e. Olf Palme Marg, Tpoint, Sector 8, R.K. Puram where they noticed that one Maruti van bearing no.DL2CJ 8330 was in burnt condition and one fire brigade staff was pouring water on the same. They found there one rod with which the water is heated, one choke was also found in burnt condition. IO called the crime team and they arrived at the spot. PW6 further deposed that they found one LPG Gas Cylinder at the spot and also one number plate no.DL2CJ8330. IO took photographs of the same. IO recorded the statement of fire brigade staff namely Rajender Singh. PW6 further deposed that he got registered the FIR and handed over the copy of same and original rukka to the IO at the spot. IO went to hospital alongwith the injured by leaving him at the spot. After coming back at the spot, IO reportedly seized the maruti van vide memo Ex. PW6/A. IO also seized the cylinder and the number plate vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/B. On 06.03.2005, he again joined the investigation of this case. IO asked him to conduct the medical examination of the accused Ram CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 5 of 11 Kumar. He took the accused to SJ hospital and got conducted his medical examination. PW6 thereafter produced the accused before the IO. IO arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW6/C.
9. PW7 is Bhuley Ram, who deposed that he sold his maruti van bearing no. DL2CJ8330 to accused Ram Kumar Khandelwal (correctly identified by the witness) in the year 2003 for an amount of Rs.85,000/. IO had called him on 06.03.2005 and recorded his statement.
10. PW8 is HC Devender, who deposed that on 11.03.2005 he was posted as a Ct. in Police Station Vasant Vihar. On that day he along with SI C.B. Upadhyay reached Ganga Ram Hospital. IO collected the dead body of Ram Kishan and came to Safdarjung Hospital. After getting identified the dead body of Ram Kishan by his relatives, IO got conducted the postmortem of the deceased and the dead body was handed over to his relatives. IO recorded the statements of witnesses.
11. PW9 is HC Ram Mehar, who deposed that on 04.03.2005 he was posted at police station Vasant Vihar as Duty Officer from 4:00 PM to 12:00 Midnight. PW9 proved registration of present case FIR Ex.PW9/A (OSR) on the basis of rukka brought by Ct. Dharambir. PW9 also made endorsement on rukka vide memo Ex.PW9/B.
12. PW10 is HC Mehar Chand, who deposed that on 10.03.2005 he was posted at police station Vasant Vihar as DD Writer from 4:00 PM to 12:00 CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 6 of 11 Midnight. On that day at about 6:00 PM he received information regarding death of injured Ram Kishan from Ganga Ram Hospital through concerned doctor. He recorded the same vide DD No. 36A Ex.PW10/A (OSR).
13. PW11 is HC Akbar Khan, who deposed that on 09.03.2005 he was posted at police station Vasant Vihar. On that day he was on duty from 4:00 PM to 12:00 midnight. He received the information from Ganga Ram Hospital and recorded DD no. 23A which is Ex.PW11/A (OSR).
14. PW12 is Vipin Kental, Deputy Chief Fire Officer, who deposed that on 09.01.2006, his office received a letter from SHO, PS Vasant Vihar regarding fire accident occurred at R.K. Puram, Sector7, Near Malai Mandir. He had issued a report at the request of SHO concerned. His report is Ex.PW12/A on the basis of statement of Assistant Divisional Officer Mr. Harbans Lal Aneja.
15. PW13 is Retd. SI Chander Bhushan, who deposed on the lines of testimony of PW6. He further deposed regarding making of endorsement on statement of HC Rajender Singh as Ex. PW13/A and preparation of site plan as Ex. PW13/B. He further deposed that after completion of postmortem, dead body was handed over by him vide memo Ex. PW13/C
16. Vide separate statement under section 294 Cr.P.C. r/w Section 281 Cr.P.C. the genuineness of documents i.e. MLC no.39353 of Rajender and Xray report of Rajender, MLC No.39357, 40463 and postmortem report CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 7 of 11 426/05 dated 11.03.2005 and also death summary report prepared by Dr. Puneet had been admitted by the accused before the court. As such, the formal proof of above said documents was not required and the testimonies of witnesses sought to prove the same were dispensed with.
17. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed by the court on 30.01.2013 and the matter was proceeded further for recording of statement of accused under section 281 r/w section 313 Cr.P.C. The statement of accused was duly recorded wherein the accused disavowed all the allegations against him and took the plea that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further stated that the vehicle in question does not belong to him and it was hired by him for taking his electrical goods to Khanpur. Accused did not wish to lead any defence evidence, as such the matter was straightaway proceeded for final arguments.
18. Final arguments were heard on behalf of Ld. APP for state and accused. After perusal of the record this court is of the view that in order to bring home guilt of the accused for the offences under section 285 IPC, the prosecution was required to prove following facts beyond reasonable doubts:
i) that the accused did an act with fire or some combustible matter; and
ii) the act was so rash and negligent as to endanger human life;or
iii) the accused knowingly or negligently omitted to take such order with any fire or any combustible matter as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life.
CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 8 of 11
19. Further, in order to bring home guilt of the accused for the offences under section 337/304A IPC, following facts are required to be proved by the prosecution:
i) two persons namely Ram Kumar and Rajender received simple injuries;
ii) death of one person namely Ramkishan had been caused;
iii) the injury to the injured persons and death of the deceased was caused due to act of the accused;
iv) that such act of the accused was rash or negligent and that it did not amount to culpable homicide;
20. It is well settled that to impose criminal liability u/s 304 A IPC against the accused, it is necessary that the death should have been the direct result of rash and negligent act of the accused and that such act must be proximate and efficient cause without the intervention of another's negligence. It must be the causa causans (the immediate or operating cause); it is not enought that it may have been the causa sine qua non (a necessary or inevitable cause).
21. Keeping in view the totality of facts, circumstances of the case and arguments addressed on behalf of both the parties, this court is of the opinion that offences as alleged against the accused are not substantiated for the following reasons:
i) Prosecution has failed to bring any material on record to show any alleged act of accused qua fire or any combustible matter which was rash or negligent in nature.
ii) Prosecution has not brought any cogent piece of evidence on record to show if the vehicle in question CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 9 of 11 bearing registration no.DL2CJ8330 belongs to the accused or not.
iii) IO admittedly did not seize the registration certificate of vehicle in question during investigation and did not bother to find out the real owner of offending vehicle.
iv) Mere statement of PW7 Bhule Ram that he sold the offending vehicle to accused in the year 2003 is of no consequence in the absence of any documentary evidence to that effect. Even otherwise, testimony of PW7 is not coherent as during cross examination he stated that the car in question remained with him for 2 years and it was later on sold by him to one Peter who got the vehicle registered in his name.
v) Not a single eye witness has been produced by the prosecution to show that the offending vehicle in question was driven by the accused on the given date, time and place.
vi) PW6 HC Dharambir categorically stated in his cross examination that he did not know as to whom the electric items present in the vehicle belonged and further he did not try to find out the registered owner and actual driver of the vehicle in question. He further deposed that name of the accused was given by him at the instance of IO.
vii) As discussed earlier, prosecution has not produced any evidence as to cause of fire in the vehicle and what exactly the act committed by accused which led to fire in vehicle and subsequent blast of LPG cylinder.
viii) No expert testimony is adduced to verify as to whether the LPG cylinder was actually fitted in the vehicle in question. The possibility of LPG cylinder lying in the car for domestic purpose cannot be ruled out.
ix) Except for the LPG cylinder which provides fuel to a vehicle, no other combustible material/ device was found present in the car.
x) No alleged rash or negligent act could be substantiated qua accused by the prosecution which resulted in death of deceased and injuries to the injured persons.
CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 10 of 11
22. In lieu of facts of present case and aforementioned findings, essential ingredients of offences in question are not made out against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused Ram Kumar Khandelwal S/o Sita Ram is acquitted of the offences under section 285/337/304A IPC.
Announced in the open Court (Akash Jain)
on 16.07.2014 Metropolitan Magistrate06,
Patiala House Court,
New Delhi
CC NO.186/02 FIR No.100/05 Page no. 11 of 11