Delhi District Court
State vs . Kanwaljeet // Fir No. 546/05 on 21 December, 2010
1
THE COURT OF SHRI SANJAY KUMAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - I,
DISTRICT NORTH WEST, ROOM NO. 308,
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 135/09
FIR No. 546/05
PS :Hari Nagar
U/s. 452/307/506 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
KANWALJEET
S/O PREET PAL
R/O 23/2, 2ND FLOOR
TILAK NAGAR
NEW DELHI.
Date of Institution : 09.11.2005
Date of receipt of case in this court : 03.08.2009
Arguments heard On : 13.12.2010
Order Announced On : 16.12.2010
Order on Sentence : 21.12.2010
SHRI P.K. VERMA, APP FOR THE STATE
SHRI RAMBIR SINGH, COUNSEL FOR CONVICT
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05
PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC
2
21.12.2010
Present : Sh. P. K. Verma, APP for the State.
Convict Kanwaljeet on bail with counsel Sh.
Rambir Singh.
1. It has been submitted by Sh. Rambir Singh, counsel
for convict that convict Kanwaljeet is aged 34 years and is
unmarried having old and ailing mother to look after. It has
been further submitted that he is never involved in any
criminal case prior or after the present case. He requests that
lenient view may be taken against the convict.
2. On the other hand, Sh. P.K. Verma, Ld. APP for the
State states that the convict planned the incident, in which,
four innocent person were attacked by one sharp edged
weapon in which they all received dangerous and grievous
injuries. Ld. APP has vehemently submitted that convicts be
awarded maximum punishment.
3. I have heard both the parties and have perused the
record.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05
PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC
3
4. Keeping in view the circumstances, where the
convict inflicted dangerous, grievous and simple injuries to
member of one family on the intervening night of
11/12.09.2005, I award sentence to convict Kanwaljeet
to under go Rigourous Imprisonment u/s 452 IPC for a
period of 03 years (three years) and to pay a fine of Rs.
5,000/- (Five Thousand only), in default of payment of
fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a
period of 06 months (six months).
5. I further award sentence to convict
Kanwaljeet to under go Rigourous Imprisonment u/s
307 IPC for a period of 03 years (three years) and to
pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand only), in
default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple
Imprisonment for a period of 06 months (six months).
6. I also award sentence to convict Kanwaljeet
to under go Rigourous Imprisonment u/s 506 IPC for a
period of 01 year (one year) and to pay a fine of Rs.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05
PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC
4
3,000/- (Five Thousand only), in default of payment of
fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a
period of 02 months (two months).
7. All these sentences awarded to convict Kanwaljeet
shall run concurrently. Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C. Shall be
given to the convict. Copy of judgment and order on sentence
be supplied to the convict free of cost.
8. File be consigned to record room after necessary
compliance.
Announced in the open court (SANJAY KUMAR)
today i.e. 21.12.2010 ASJ-01 (NW),ROHINI
COURTS: DELHI.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05
PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC
5
THE COURT OF SHRI SANJAY KUMAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - I,
DISTRICT NORTH WEST, ROOM NO. 308,
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 135/09
FIR No. 546/05
PS :Hari Nagar
U/s. 452/307/506 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
KANWALJEET
S/O PREET PAL
R/O 23/2, 2ND FLOOR
TILAK NAGAR
NEW DELHI.
Date of Institution : 09.11.2005
Date of receipt of case in this court : 03.08.2009
Arguments heard On : 13.12.2010
Order Announced On : 16.12.2010
Order on Sentence : 21.12.2010
SHRI P.K. VERMA, APP FOR THE STATE
SHRI RAMBIR SINGH, COUNSEL FOR ACCUSED
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05
PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC
6
JUDGMENT
1. The facts as projected in the charge sheet are that on 12.09.05 DD No. 4 was received by ASI Rajender Singh at PS Hari Nagar and he along with Ct. Babu Lal went to the spot of crime i.e. H. No. BE 184, Gali No. 3, Ist Floor, Hari Nagar, Delhi. There he came to know that CATS vehicle had already removed the injured persons to DDU hospital. At the spot one person named Kanwaljeet was available who was handed over by the night petrolling staff to ASI Rajender Singh. In the meanwhile, I/C Police Post also came to the spot. All the police officials went to DDU hospital where injured persons namely Ram Kumar, Meera Devi, Avinash and Ashwini Kumar were found admitted. MLCs of the injured persons were collected. Injured Avinash was declared unfit for making statement where as injured Ashwini Kumar, Ram Kumar and Meera Devi were declared fit for statement. Statement of injured Ashwani Kumar was recorded by the IO and rukka was also prepared and sent for registration of FIR u/s 452/0307/506 IPC.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 7
2. Investigation Officer visited the spot of crime and prepared the site plan. Statements of witnesses were also recorded. The crime team and photographer were called at the spot and they lifted some finger prints. One broken scissor was found lying at the spot of crime having blood stains which were wrapped in a newspaper and seized in a cloth pullanda. The blood stains of injured persons namely Avinash, Ashwini Kumar, Meera Devi and Ram Kumar were also lifted and seized. Blood stains from the wall were also taken out and seized. Accused Kanwaljeet was arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded. Pant worn by accused having blood stains was also seized by preparing a pullanda. Clothes of injured persons were also seized having blood stains. All the seized case property items were deposited in the malkhana. During investigation final opinion regarding nature of injuries sustained by injured persons was collected and it was opined as grievous and dangerous. The X-ray plates and photographs were also collected by the investigation officer. Statements of all the witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused for trial of offence u/s 452/307/506 IPC.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 8
3. Ld. MM after compliance of section 207 Cr.PC committed the case to the court of Sessions.
4. My learned Predecessor Sh. Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal, Ld. ASJ vide order dated 21.03.2007 framed the charge against accused Kanwaljeet for trial of offence U/s 452/307/506 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Prosecution in support of its case examined the following injured / eye witnesses :- PW3 Ashwini Kumar, PW4 Smt. Meera Devi, PW5 Ram, Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma. Prosecution also examined the following doctors in support of its case :- PW9 Dr. Nishu Dhawan, CMO DDU Hospital, PW10 Dr. Samarjeet, CMO, DDU hospital and PW18 Dr. Amit Sethi, Radiologist. The following police witnesses have been examined by the prosecution: - PW1 HC Kuldeep Singh, PW2 Ct. Sunder Singh, PW7 HC Pawan Kumar, PW8 Ct. Karam Chand, PW12 HC Sher Singh, PW13 HC Babu Lal, PW14 Ct. Surinder, PW15 HC Vijay Kumar, PW16 SI Anil Kumar, State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 9 PW17 SI Rajender Singh and PW20 Ct. Surender Singh. The following official witnesses have also been examined by the prosecution: - PW11 Sh. Bhagwat Swaroop, Asstt. Ambulance Officer, DDU Hospital and PW 19 Ms. Anita Charri, Sr. Scientific Asstt. FSL, Rohini.
6. As per statement of Ld. APP Sh. P.K. Verma prosecution evidence was closed on 14.07.2010.
7. Statement of accused Kanwaljeet U/s 313 Cr.PC was recorded. In his defence, accused led the evidence of DW1 Satwinder Singh.
8. I have heard the Ld. APP for the State and Sh. Rambir Singh, Counsel for the accused and have gone through the record.
9. The prosecution case rests upon the testimony of injured persons PW3 Ashwini Kumar, PW4 Meera Devi, PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma. While deposing in this case PW3 Ashwini Kumar has State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 10 deposed that injured Avinash is his younger brother who was working with him in the factory of Satwinder Singh, who is the brother of accused Kanwaljeet Singh. He has further deposed that accused developed friendship with his brother Avinash and started pressurizing Avinash to have unnatural sex with him but Avinash on the instructions of PW3 left the job from the factory of Satwinder Singh. PW3 Ashwini Kumar has also stated that despite leaving the job at the factory of Satwinder, accused Kanwaljeet started visiting his brother at their residence and he used to extend the threats of life to his brother. Accused accosted Avinash on 11.09.2005 and also extended threats to him and also threatened PW3 with dire consequences. PW3 Ashwini has further testified that on the night intervening 11/12.09.2005 at about 2.00 am while he alongwith his family members was sleeping, his mother cried suddenly and asked him to check as to who had entered their house and when he got up he saw accused Kanwaljeet having one arm of scissor in his hand. He caused injuries to his father Ram Kumar on his back and also inflicted injuries to his mother Meera Devi on upper part of her abdomen. Thereafter accused inflicted injuries on his brother Avinash on his chest.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 11 He has also testified that when he tried to apprehend him, accused attacked him also and he sustained injuries but he somehow managed to overpower the accused and made a PCR call. In the meantime CATS ambulance arrived at their house and removed all the injured to DDU hospital where his statement Ex. PW3/A was recorded by the IO.
10. During his cross examination by counsel for accused PW3 Ashwini Kumar was confronted with statement Ex.PW3/A to the aspect that his brother Avinash was also working in the electronic factory and that accused had forced his brother to have unnatural sex with him and that my brother would be taken by accused to Amritsar and he would kill him. He has further stated in the cross examination that accused took his brother to park and when he reached my house and found that Avinash was not there or that he went out in search of his brother. PW3 was also confronted with his statement on the point that CAT ambulance also arrived at the spot of crime. PW3 Ashwini Kumar has stated in cross examination by counsel for accused that he could not see the assailants as it was night time and that there was any dispute State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 12 between the accused and his brother. He has further admitted it as correct that accused was not the person who assaulted him and his family and that his signatures were taken by police on blank papers.
11. PW4 Smt. Meera Devi, who is the mother of PW3 has deposed that in the night of 11.09.05 when she was sleeping with her husband and both sons inside her bedroom, one person came and attacked all of them with scissors as a result of which he received injuries on his back.
12. She was declared hostile by Ld. APP and in her cross examination by the Ld. APP for the state that she denied having made statement mark MI to the police. She has denied the suggestion that on the date of incident she noticed that accused Kanwaljeet entered in her house and attacked her with scissor and on hearing her cries her husband and both the sons tried to apprehend him and accused Kanwaljeet attacked them also and the received injuries. She has further denied the suggestion that she had stated before the police that she alongwith her children and husband caught hold of accused or that made a call to PCR or that they were taken to the hospital. PW4 has also denied that accused attacked her State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 13 husband, her children and also inflicted injuries on her person with scissor. In her cross examination by counsel for accused she has admitted that she is not aware as to what was written by the police in her statement dated 12.9.2005.
13. Another injured PW5 Ram Kumar has deposed that his son Avinash used to work in the factory of accused Kanwaljeet and that accused developed friendship with his son and tried to commit sodomy and that on his instruction his son left the job. He has further deposed that on the night of 11/12.09.2005 at about 2.00 AM he has heard the noise of his wife and saw that his wife had caught hold of one person. He has also tried to catch him. In the meanwhile, both his sons also came there and tried to catch that person but that person attacked them and all of them received injuries. PW5 Ram Kumar has stated that due to darkness he cannot say as to who was the person who attacked them.
14. This witness was declared hostile by the Ld. APP for the state and in his cross examination PW5 stated that he does not remember the statement was recorded by police on 12.09.2005 or not. He has denied the suggestion that he had told the police that on 11.9.2005 he alongwith his wife and State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 14 both children were sleeping in the bedroom or that at about 2.00 PM his wife asked his son Ashwini that someone has entered their house or that after sometime when his wife started crime, he noticed that accused had attacked his wife with scissors or that he alongwith his both sons tried to apprehend the accused but they were also injured by the accused. He has further denied the suggestion that accused has attacked him, his wife and his children with scissor with the intension to kill them. During his cross examination by counsel for accused he has admitted that he did not receive any intimation regarding accused trying to commit sodomy with a son and that he could not see the assailants due to darkness.
15. PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma, another injured of this case while appearing in witness box has testified that he used to work in the factory of accused Kanwaljeet and from nature of accused he could make out that accused wanted to develop relations with PW6 an don this he left the job. He has further deposed that on the night of 11/12.09.2005 at about 2.00 AM someone attacked him and he received injuries on State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 15 his chest. He has further deposed that the assailant hit his mother, father and his brother. PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma has stated that due to darkness he could not identify the assailant.
16. This witness was declared hostile by the Ld. APP for the state and in his cross examination PW6 stated that he does not remember the statement was recorded by police on 14.09.2005 or not. He has denied the suggestion that he had told the police that on 11.9.2005 accused met him outside his house and asked him to accompany him and commit sodomy or that his brother Ashwani came there and scolded accused or that accused left from there extending threats to him and his brother. He has further denied the suggestion that on the night of 11/12.09.2005 accused came to their house and inflicted injuries with scissor to him, his brother, mother and father or that accused had hit them with scissor with intention to kill him. During his cross examination by counsel for accused he has admitted that accused never tried to develop relation with him.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 16
17. PW1 HC Kuldeep Singh has stated that on 12.09.05 he was posted as duty officer at PS Hari Nagar and on that day at about 6.00 AM he received a rukka on the basis of which FIR of this case copy of which is Ex.PW1/A was registered. PW2 Ct. Sunder Singh has proved copy of DD No.4 Ex.PW2/A which was written by him as DD writer at PS Hari Nagar on the night intervening 11/12.9.2005. PW7 HC Pawan Kumar has proved the entries made by him in register no.19 on 14.9.2005 while being posted as MHC(M) PS Hari Nagar. Photocopies of the said entries are Ex.PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B.
18. PW8 Ct. Karam Chand has stated that on 12.9.2005 he was on petrolling duty with Ct. Surender and at about 2.15 AM when they reached BE Block, H.No.184 Hari Nagar, Delhi they saw CATS Vehicle and PCR Vehicle parked there. He has further stated that accused was also present there and they both over powered the accused. When ASI Rajender Singh came at the spot accused was handed over to him in his presence ASI Rajender Singh prepared site plan and lifted blood. Earth control was also lifted. Crime team was called at the spot. Blood stained pant of accused and weapon State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 17 of offence were taken into possession. In his cross examination by counsel for accused he has denied that he did not make any departure entry at the PS as he had not gone for petrolling or that entire writing work was done by sitting in PS or that scissor has been planted on the accused or that the position of the accused has not been shown in the site plan as he was lifted from his house and has been falsely implicated in this case.
19. PW9 Dr. Nishu Dhawan, has proved the signatures of Dr. Dinesh, JR (Surgery) and Dr. Parteek, SR (Surgery) on MLC of injured Avinash which is Ex. PW9/A. PW10 Dr. Samarjeet has proved the MLC of injured Avinash which was prepared by him and the same is Ex. PW9/A. PW10 has further proved the MLC of injured Ashwani which is Ex. PW10/A and has also identified the signatures of Dr. Swati Aggarwal on MLC of injured Ram Kumar Ex. PW10/B and of Smt. Meera Devi Ex. PW10/C. He has also proved the opinion given by Dr. Prateek on MLCs Ex. PW10/B and Ex. PW10/C. During cross examination by counsel for accused he has denied that injuries sustained by injured persons are possible by falling on sharp objects while scaling on iron grills.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 18
20. PW11 Bhagwat Swaroop is the Asstt. Ambulance Officer and he has stated that on 12.09.05 when he was posted on the CATS Ambulance of DDU Hospital, he removed four injured persons to DDU hospital. PW12 HC Sher Singh has deposed that he deposited 08 pullands in FSL Rohini after the same were handed over to him by IO ASI Rajinder Singh, MHC (M).
21. PW13 HC Babu Lal has deposed that on 12.09.05 he was posted at PS Hari Nagar and on that day on receipt of DD No. 4 Pp Hari Nagar, he along with ASI Rajinder reached the spot where accused was found apprehended by Ct. Surinder and Ct. Karam Chand. There they came to know that injured persons have already been removed to DDU hospital by CATS Ambulance and he along with ASI Rajinder reached DDU hospital and obtained MLCs of injured persons. PW13 has then testified that thereafter IO recorded statement of injured Ashwani Ex. PW3/A. After registration of the FIR PW13 handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to IO. He has further deposed that before preparation of rukka injured Ashwani, Avinash, Ram Kumar and Meera Devi handed over their blood State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 19 stained clothes to ASI Rajinder Singh and same were sealed by the IO and were taken into possession. Exhibits were collected and seized by IO. During cross examination by counsel for accused PW13 has denied the suggestion that statements of the witnesses were fabricated in the PS itself or that nothing was seized in his presence or that accused was not arrested in his presence or that he did not make any disclosure statement or that his signatures were obtained on blank papers and same were converted into memos. He has also denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigation as deposed by him.
22. Ct. Surinder initially deposed as PW14 but his examination in chief could not be completed. Later on this witness was examined as PW20 by the prosecution. Hence his evidence is read as PW20 and not as PW14. While deposing as PW20 he corroborated the version put forth by PW8 Ct. Karam Chand. As PW 20 Ct. Surinder has deposed that in the month of September, 2005 while being on petrolling duty, he along with Ct. Karam Chand PW8 reached the spot and saw accused grappling with three persons in the room and he was State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 20 also having scissor in hand. He has also deposed that IO reached the at the same time and arrested accused. Crime team was also called at the spot and took the photographs of the scene of crime. He has further deposed that exhibits were seized by the IO, disclosure statement of accused was recorded and his personal search was also taken. During cross examination by counsel for accused, PW16 has denied the suggestion that scissor has been planted on the accused or that nothing was recovered from the spot or that he had signed the memos while sitting in the police station or that he had not gone to the spot of crime or that accused has been falsely implicated in this case.
23. PW15 HC Vijay Kumar has deposed that on the date of incident he was posted as photographer in the Mobile Crime Team, West District and on that day he took photographs of the spot as per the directions of the IO. He also proved the 09 photos taken by him as well as 09 negatives of those photographs. PW16 SI Anil Kumar has proved that on the day of incident he inspected the scene of crime and prepared his report which is Ex. PW16/A. State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 21
24. PW17 SI Rajender Singh has deposed that on 12.09.05 he was posted as ASI at PS Hari Nagar and on that day on receiving DD no. 4, Ex. PW2/A he reached the spot along with Ct. Babu Ram and found that injured had been removed to DDU hospital by CATS Ambulance and at the spot Ct. Surender and Ct. Karam Chand produced accused to him. Thereafter IO reached the hospital and collected MLC of Meera Devi, Ram Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Avinash and recorded statement of injured Ex. PW3/A. Thereafter rukka Ex. PW 17/A was prepared by him and same was sent for registration of FIR. He has further deposed that mobile crime team was called at the spot and the scene of crime was photographed. PW17 also prepared the site plan and crime team handed over report of scene of crime Ex. PW16/A to him. He has also testified that he seized the scissor vide memo Ex. PW8/D which was lying at the spot and blood which was scattered on the floor was also lifted with the help of cotton and turned into pullanda which was seized vide memo Ex. PW8/A. Earth control was also lifted vide memo Ex. PW8/B. Blood stained clothes of accused were also seized vide memo Ex. PW8/C. State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 22 Accused was arrested vide memo Ex. PW13/D and his personal search was taken vide memo Ex. PW13/E. Disclosure statement of accused Ex. PW13/F was also recorded. Blood stained clothes of injured persons were also seized by IO vide memo Ex. PW3/B, Ex. PW13/B and Ex. PW13/C. Case property was deposited with MHC (M).
25. PW17 SI Rajender Singh has also deposed that on 14.09.05 doctor declared injured Avinash fit for statement and he on the same day recorded statement of injured Avinash and seized his blood stained clothes vide memo Ex. PW13/A. In his cross examination by counsel for accused, PW17 has stated that till the time he remained in the hospital, no public person or eye witness of the incident was present there. He denied the suggestion of counsel for accused he did not visit the emergency ward or that no writing work was done by him or that he did not ask any public person to join the investigation or that there is unexplained delay in sending the exhibits to FSL or that accused was never arrested by him and no disclosure statement was made by accused or that nothing was recovered from the accused or the alleged State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 23 recovery of scissor is planted one or that accused has been falsely implicated in this case or that statements made by injured persons have been fabricated by him. He has also denied the suggestion that alleged blood stained clothes of accused have been planted or that signatures of accused were obtained on several blank papers and later on converted into memos.
26. PW18 Dr. Amit Sethi has proved his report Ex. PW18/A given by him in respect of injured Ram Kumar, Ex. PW18/B in respect of injured Ashwani Kumar and PW18/C in respect of injured Avinash Kumar. PW19 Ms. Anita Charri, Sr. Scientific Asstt., FSL, Rohini has proved the biological report Ex. PW19/A and serological report Ex. PW19/B prepared by her.
27. Accused in his defence has also examined one witness namely Satvinder Singh as DW1. While appearing as defence witness DW1 Satvinder Singh has deposed that injured Ram Kumar, Ashwini Kumar and Avinash Kumar were employed in his factory. He has further deposed that injured Avinash took advance of Rs.10000/- and did not return the same despite several request and left the factory without State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 24 making any payment. He has then testified that with a view to withhold the said payment, accused who is his brother, has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. He has further stated that on 11.09.2005 at about 11.00 AM two persons came in civil dress to the house of accused and took him away and later on he came to know that he has been implicated in this case.
28. In his cross examination by Ld. APP for the State, he has deposed that on 25.06.05 injured Avinash took a sum of Rs. 10000/- and he was drawing salary of Rs. 2200/- per month. He has deposed that accused is his brother and he did not give any written complaint to any senior officers of police regarding false implication of accused in the present case. DW1 has further deposed that on 12.09.05 when he had gone to his factory he got a call that accused Kanwaljeet was arrested by the police of PP Hari Nagar. He has denied the suggestion of Ld. APP for the State that accused was never lifted by the police and falsely implicated in this case or that accused is involved in criminal activities or that he never paid any advance to Avinash or that injured falsely implicated the accused, who is his brother, due to the transaction.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 25
29. I have heard the Ld. APP for the state and counsel for accused and perused the record. No doubt that there are three injured eye witnesses PW4 Smt. Maya Devi, PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kr. Sharma who were declared as hostile witnesses and PW3 Ashwini Kumar during his cross examination was confronted with his statement recorded by police Ex. PW3/A and also denied the identity of the accused. In these circumstances, the law is well settled by our apex court in the case of Khujji @ Surendra Tiwari, Appellant V. State of M. P., Respondent, AIR 1991 Supreme Court 1853. The testimony of hostile witnesses cannot be washed off or treated effaced entirely. In the above stated judgment, it has observed as under :-
..........that the evidence of the prosecution witness cannot be rejected in toto merely because the prosecution chose to treat him as hostile and cross examined him. The evidence of such witnesses cannot be treated as effaced or washed off the record altogether but the same can be accepted to the extent their version is found to be dependable on a careful scrutiny thereof."..........
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 26
30. Now in the instant case applying the principles discussed here in above, PW3 Ashwini Kumar when appeared in the witness box on 11.09.07 supported the prosecution case in respect of entire incident. He along with his brother Avinash were working in the factory of DW1 Satvinder Singh, who is the real brother of accused Kanwaljeet Singh. Both PW3 Ashwini Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma worked in the month of June, 2005. The motive emerges out to be that accused Kanwaljeet Singh developed friendship with PW6 Avinash and wanted to indulge with him in unnatural sex and then this situation forced PW3 Ashwini Kumar and PW6 Avinash. In this regard PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash corroborated these facts. The withdrawal of PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma and resistance to the accused lead to culmination of this incident on the intervening night of 11/12.09.05.
31. PW3 Ashwini Kumar categorically stated how the incident occurred and earlier to it how accused used to extend threats to his brother PW6 Avinash. However, in the cross examination some clarifications were sought and PW3 was State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 27 confronted with his statement Ex. PW3/A but these confrontations are not falling in the category of major improvements. These facts stated by PW3 while appearing in witness box are the amplifications of the circumstances. In statement Ex. PW3/A he has stated the fact regarding the attempt of developing unnatural relations by accused with his brother PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma. He has also specifically stated about the threats extended by accused. In the examination in chief, PW3 categorically stated the incident of the intervening night dt. 11/12.09.05 which occurred at around 2.00 am when all his family members were sleeping. He has named the accused specifically and he was armed with one arm of scissor. He further narrated how the accused caused injuries to him, his father Sh. Ram Kumar PW5, mother Smt. Maya Devi PW4 and brother PW6 and they were removed by PCR. During investigation PW15 photographer HC Vijay Kumar proved the negatives of photographs Ex PW15/A1 to A9 and its positives Ex. PW15/B1 to B9. These photographs further supports and corroborate the testimony of PW3.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 28
32. The identity of the accused is specifically established by PW3 Ashwini Kumar on 11.09.07 when his examination in chief was recorded. The cross examination was deferred on the request of counsel for accused and it was recorded after about 07 months i.e. on 28.04.08. In the cross examination although he deposed that accused was not the person who assaulted them but it does not effect the prosecution case in any manner. Further more PW4 Smt. Maya Devi is also silent on the identity of accused. Similarly PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kumar Sharma are also silent on the identity of accused but they corroborate the prosecution case in respect of the incident and injuries received by them. PW3 Ashwini Kumar established the identity of the accused in examination-in-chief. The identity of the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of testimony of PW8 Ct. Karam Chand who along with PW20 Ct. Surender apprehended the accused on the mid night of incident at about 2.15 am. Both these witnesses corroborated the identity of accused Kanwaljeet Singh being the assailant. Both these witnesses were subjected to detailed cross examination but they remained cogent and coherent.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 29 The prosecution beyond reasonable doubt established the identity of the accused being the assailant on the basis of PW3 Ashwini Kumar, PW8 Ct. Karam Chand and PW20 Ct. Surender. Apart from this, these witnesses, PW11 also supports the prosecution case who removed the injured in the ambulance in injured condition.
33. The prosecution has established the injuries received by injured PW3 Ashwini Kumar, PW4 Smt. Maya Devi, PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash Kumar. On the basis of testimony of PW9 Dr. Nishu Dhawan proved the MLC of injured Avinash Ex. PW9/A. PW10 Dr. Samarjeet has proved the MLCs of injured PW3 Ashwini Kumar Ex. PW10/A, PW4 Smt. Meera Devi Ex. PW 10/B and PW 5 Ram Kumar Ex. PW10/C. The prosecution on the basis of testimony of these witnesses established that injured PW6 Avinash received grievous injuries while injured PW5 Ram Kumar received dangerous injuries. PW4 Smt. Meera Devi and PW3 Ashwini received simple injuries. All the injuries are caused by stabbing. The weapon used by accused for inflicting injury is a broken scissor which was recovered from the scene of crime.
State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 30 This fact is established by the prosecution on the basis of testimony of PW8 Ct. Karam Chand who proved the recovery of broken scissor from the spot and it was also measured, sketch of which is Ex. PW8/D. The scissor was identified as Ex. P3. PW20 Ct. Surender further corroborated these facts. Apart from these two witnesses, PW13 Babu Lal also proved the recovery of blood stained scissor from the spot. He also identified scissor Ex. P3.
34. PW17 SI Rajender Kumar also supported and corroborated the recovery of weapon of offence and also identified the same i.e. Ex. P3. Further the prosecution established the blood samples lifted from the spot and sent the same to FSL. PW 19 Ms. Anita Chhari proved the FSL reports prepared by her Ex. PW19/A and PW19/B which established that the blood on the clothes which were worn by injured on the date of incident matches with the human blood lifted by the IO from the scene of crime and send the same for examination and analysis. PW8 Ct. Karam Chand also proved the blood stained clothes worn by accused Kanwaljeet which were sent to FSL Rohini. PW17 SI Rajender Kumar State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 31 corroborated the version of PW8 on the aspect of blood stained clothes. He also proved the blood stained blouse, peticot and saree of injured PW4 Smt. Maya Devi. PW3 Ashwini proved the seizure of clothes stained with blood Ex. P1 i.e half pant and Ex. P2 i.e. baniyan which was sent for examination at FSL. Ex. P4 blood stained clothes of accused were proved by PW17 SI Rajender Singh. He also proved PW7 Pawan Kumar, MHC(M) proved the deposit of all the case property and thereafter it was sent for examination and analysis at FSL and all the samples remained intact.
35. On the basis of above discussion and observation, the prosecution has established that on the intervening night of 11/12.09.05 accused Kanwaljeet committed house trespass having been made preparation to commit offence and thereby caused injuries to PW3 Ashwini, PW4 Smt. Maya Devi, PW5 Ram Kumar and PW6 Avinash with sharp edged object i.e. arm of scissor. Prosecution has been able to establish its case that accused had the knowledge and intention that the nature of injuries cause on the part of bodies of injured persons shall be dangerous and it may cause death in the ordinary course of State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC 32 nature. The prosecution has also established beyond reasonable doubt that accused extended threats of life to PW3 Ashwini and PW6 Avinash and hence prosecution has succeeded in bringing home the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for offence u/s 452/307/506 IPC. Accordingly accused Kanwaljeet Singh stands convicted for offences u/s 452/307/506 IPC.
Announced in the open court (SANJAY KUMAR) today i.e. 16.12.2010 ASJ-01 (NW),ROHINI COURTS: DELHI State Vs. Kanwaljeet // FIR No. 546/05 PS : Hari Nagar // u/s 452/307/506 IPC