Delhi District Court
State vs . Gurpreet Singh Etc. on 25 September, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEVENDER NAIN
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: WEST05, DELHI
FIR No. 132/1997
Case ID: R0065351997
State Vs. Gurpreet Singh etc.
PS Tilak Nagar
U/s 326/34 IPC
Date of Institution of case : 24.05.1997
Date of Judgment : 25.09.2013
JUDGMENT:
a) Date of offence : 23.02.1997 b) Offence complained of : U/s 326/34 IPC c) Name of Accused, his :1) Manjit Singh, parentage & residence S/o Gian Singh (expired) FIR No. 132/97 1 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar 2) Gurpreet Singh, S/o Khempal Singh, R/o Plot No. 255, Chand Nagar, Delhi. d) Plea of Accused : Plead not guilty e) Final order : Acquitted BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION:
Case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
1. That on 23.02.97 at about 10.55 am in front of Lal Building School, Chand Nagar, Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Tilak Nagar both accused in furtherance of their common intention voluntarily caused dangerous injuries with the help of Kirpan to complainant Rajesh Chander and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 326/34 IPC.
2. Court took cognizance of the abovesaid offences and the charge against accused persons was framed on 16.10.98 and a prima facie case was made out against the accused persons and charge was accordingly framed against them for offence u/s 326/34 IPC to which FIR No. 132/97 2 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. To prove its case, prosecution has examined 06 witnesses.
4. PW1 is Const. Rajender Paswan who deposed that on 23.02.97 he was posted at PS Tilak Nagar as DHG and on that day Duty Officer handed over him DD entry to hand over the same to HC Ramdhan and PW1 went near Lal Building at Chand Nagar and handed over DD entry to HC Ramdhan and PW1 alongwith IO went to DDU Hospital and injured was also with them and IO prepared rukka and handed over the same to PW1 who went to PS and got the case registered and came back to spot and handed over rukka and copy of FIR to IO.
5. PW2 is HC Daya Ram who deposed that on 23.02.97 he was posted at PS Tilak Nagar and on that day he was on Election Duty at Lal Building School, Chand Nagar alongwith Inspector Aarti Dhingra and HC Ramesh and at about 10.50 am he heard the noises of "bachao FIR No. 132/97 3 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar bachao" and he alongwith Inspector and HC Ramesh reached there and they saw one sardar having kirpan in his hand whose name was revealed on enquiry as Gurpreet Singh and one candidate of Congress namely Manjeet Singh Kalsi was with him and other persons were also present in the crowd. PW2 further deposed that Gurpreet had stabbed one person as told by the public as well as the injured and accused Gurpreet was apprehended and HC Rajinder arrived from the PS and they handed over accused Gupreet alongwith kirpan to him. PW2 further deposed that injured Rajesh was taken to private hospital and again said DDU Hospital in a private vehicle and IO measured the knife / kirpan and prepared the sketch of the same and sealed the same in a pulinda with his seal and prepared papers in the presence of PW2 but he do not remember whether he signed on it or not.
At the time of cross examination, PW2 deposed that this incident took place about 15 yards away from the place of their posting and there were about 20 people already gathered at the spot and he had seen the stabbing incident as he was posted near the gate. PW2 further deposed that around 100 people were present at the school and FIR No. 132/97 4 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar voluntarily said at the spot only 20 people were present.
6. PW3 is Nand Kishore who deposed that he was the friend of one Raju who was supporting Dayanand Chandela in the assembly election and PW3 came to know that he had injured and was taken to the hospital and PW3 went to the hospital to see him and police arrived at the hospital and recorded his statement and he do not know anything more about this case and he do not know the accused persons.
At the time of cross examination by Ld. APP for the State PW3 denied the suggestion that he stated to IO that on that day at about 10.15 am when they reached at Lal Building School, i.e., one of the booth and when they reached in front of the gate, there both the accused persons Manjeet Singh and Gurpreet Singh stated to Rajesh as to why he was present there and when Rajesh objected, both the accused persons assaulted Rajesh. PW3 further denied the suggestion that he stated to IO that Manjeet Singh twisted the hand of Rajesh or that accused Gurpreet took out a kirpan and assaulted Rajesh with kirpan and caused injuries at his abdomen. PW3 further denied the suggestion that in his presence FIR No. 132/97 5 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar the police officials present over the duty alongwith public persons managed to apprehend accused Gurpreet whereas Manjeet managed to run away or that police also managed to recover the kirpan and the statement mark A1 read over to the witness however he denied the contents of the statement being made by him and the statement is read over the witness and witness denied any such statement (confronted with portion A to A where the name of accused and role played by accused in the commission of offence has been specifically mentioned).
7. PW4 is Trilok who deposed that in the year 1997 the election for corporation was being held and he was one of the supporter of Dr. Dayanand Chandela who was contesting corporation election as an independent candidate for the post of counseller and injured Rajesh Kumar @ Raju was one of the close friend of Dr. Dayanand Chandela and while the election was being held PW4 was present at a government school and Rajesh Kumar who is also one of his friend was with him alongwith many other supporters of Dr. Daya Nand Chandela and both the accused were also present there and witness has pointed out towards FIR No. 132/97 6 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar accused Manjeet Singh and submits that he was one of the contestant in those election. PW4 further deposed that while he alongwith Rajesh and other supporters were present at the gate of school, the supporters of other party, i.e., of BJP and Congress came there and started raising slogans and upon this his friend requested them for not raising such slogan in election booth and upon this, a quarrel took place and during quarrel, both the accused persons assaulted Rajesh and caused injuries on the abdomen of Rajesh with a kirpan and after causing injuries to Rajesh, both the accused persons ran away from the spot. PW4 further deposed that they took Rajesh to DDU hospital where he was medically examined.
At the time of cross examination by Ld. APP for the State PW4 deposed that he stated to IO that both the accused persons came at in front of the gate of the school, i.e., over the booth and started raising slogans and when Rajesh requested accused persons for not raising slogans, both the accused persons started assaulting Rajesh and accused Manjeet Singh twisted the hand of Rajesh and accused Manpreet took out a kirpan and struck kirpan over the abdomen of Rajesh. PW4 further FIR No. 132/97 7 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar deposed that he cannot say if accused Gurpreet was apprehended on the spot.
8. PW5 is Sh. Deshraj, Record Clerk, DDU Hospital who brought the relevant MLC of injured and identified the signatures of of Dr. Rajesh Gupta who had examined the injured.
9. PW6 is HC Rajender Singh who deposed that on 23.02.97 he was posted at PS Tilak Nagar and on that day at about 11.10 am HC Rajender received DD No. 9A and PW6 alongwith him went to Lal Building School, Chand Nagar where Inspector R.P. Dhingra, HC Daya Ram, HC Ramesh alongwith other staff were present and HC Daya Ram had caught hold of a Sikh person namely, Gurpreet Singh and HC Ramesh produced a kripan to HC Rajender and informed that the Sikh person namely, Gurpreet Singh had injured a person who had been shifted to hospital. PW6 further deposed that a homeguard Const. Rajender brought DD No. 11A at the spot and handed over the same to HC Rajender and HC Rajender handed over to PW6 the accused FIR No. 132/97 8 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar Gurpreet and the kirpan and went to the DDU hospital alongwith the homeguard Const. Rajender. PW6 further deposed that after sometime, HC Rajender came at the spot and HC Rajender prepared site plan and sketch of the kirpan and homeguard Const. Rajender came at the spot and handed over original rukka and copy of FIR to HC Rajender. HC Rajender interrogated and arrested the accused and conducted his personal search and IO HC Rajender took into possession the kirpan vide memo Ex.PW6/B. PW6 further deposed that he is unable to identify the accused Gurpreet due to lapse of long time.
During cross examination PW6 deposed that more than 500 to 700 persons were there of different parties and special police officials were also deputed to control the said election. PW6 admitted that no incident had taken place in his presence and no recovery was effected in his presence and he had not seen the accused inflicting the injury on the complainant.
10. On 26.04.13, statement of accused was recorded and all the incriminating evidence was put to the accused u/s 313 CrPC in which he FIR No. 132/97 9 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar denied all the allegations made against him in which accused choose not to lead any defence evidence.
11. At the time of final arguments, it is submitted by Ld. APP for the State that his case is proved beyond reasonable doubts and all the contents of the section are completed and proved beyond reasonable doubt under which the present charge is framed. In reply to this, it is submitted on behalf of the accused that complainant was never examined in the present case. Counsel for accused also pointed out some contradictions in the statements of other PWs.
12. I have given thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions made on behalf of both the sides and perused the judicial file very carefully. PW2 is HC Daya Ram who deposed that he heard the noise and saw the crowd outside the gate and also heard the noise of "bachao bachao" and he saw one sardar having kirpan in his hand. At the time of cross examination he deposed that he went to the spot of occurrence when he heard the noise of "bachao bachao". PW3 is Nand FIR No. 132/97 10 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar Kishore who turned hostile and was duly cross examined by the Ld. APP for the State. PW4 is Trilok who was allowed to refresh his memory and even after refreshing the memory he was resiling from his earlier statement and was duly cross examined by the Ld. APP for the State. However, his cross examination by the accused was deferred on the request of Ld. Defence Counsel on the ground that he had to attend another court. PW5 also did not prove anything substantial. PW6 also did not prove the incident.
13. Perusal of evidence reveals that PW4 Trilok was allowed to refresh his memory who was again resiling from his earlier statement and was cross examined by the Ld. APP for the State. However, at the time of cross examination he admitted certain things but the Ld. Defence Counsel never got the opportunity to cross examine PW Trilok. Process sent to PW Trilok for the date of hearing for 21.02.12 returned back unserved, perusal of which shows that PW Trilok left the address without intimating this court regarding his fresh address. Moreover, perusal of report shows that the family members of PW Trilok were not FIR No. 132/97 11 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar of cooperating nature and did not provide the fresh address of PW Trilok which creates serious doubts over the version of Trilok at the time of examination as well as regarding his behaviour pertaining to the evidence and also pertaining to the present case. Moreover, in the present case, complainant was never examined. Prosecution fails to examine him even after availing of a long period and ample effective opportunities. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the present case and after perusal of judicial file very carefully, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution fails to lead sufficient evidence to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. Accordingly, Accused is acquitted. Bail Bond stands cancelled and Surety be discharged. Original documents, if any, be returned to the rightful person against receiving and after cancellation of endorsement, if any. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in the Open Court (DEVENDER NAIN) on 25th day of September, 2013 MM(WEST06):DELHI FIR No. 132/97 12 of 12 PS Tilak Nagar