Delhi District Court
State vs . Raj Kumar And Ors. on 26 November, 2011
State vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
IN THE COURT OF SHRI AJAY KUMAR KUHAR
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE02:SOUTH EAST
SAKET COURT: NEW DELHI
IN RE: Sessions Case No. 39/11
ID No. 02403R0156042009
FIR No. 54/08
PS: Ambedkar Nagar
U/s 308/323/34 IPC
State Vs. 1. Raj Kumar
S/o Parsadi
R/o 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir,
New Delhi.
2. Vikrant
S/o Raj Kumar
R/o 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir,
New Delhi.
3. Sunny
S/o Raj Kumar
R/o 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir,
New Delhi.
4. Nirmala
W/o Raj Kumar
R/o 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir,
New Delhi.
Date of institution : 07.07.2011
Date when arguments were heard : 26.11.2011
SC No.39/11 1/5
State vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
Date of Judgment : 26.11.2011
JUDGMENT
Accused have been put to trial for the offence under section 308 IPC and 323 IPC read with section 34 IPC with the allegations that on 06.02.2008 at 6.30 pm at H. No. 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir, New Delhi they had beaten the complainant Smt Meenu Chaudhary, Pranav Chaudhary and Riya Chaudhary and in the said incident accused Raj Kumar had hit Pranav Chaudhary with a hammer on his head thus causing him grievous injuries. The prosecution case was that on receipt of DD No. 22A regarding a quarrel in DDA Flats Madangir HC Billu Singh had reached H. No. 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir, New Delhi where he came to know that the injured persons have been taken by the PCR van to the hospital. HC Billu Singh then went to the Trauma Center, AIIMS Hospital and collected the MLC of Meenu Chaudhary, Riya Chaudhary and Pranav Chaudhary. Pranav Chaudhary was found unfit for the statement, therefore, he recorded the statement of Meenu Chaudhary and thereafter sent the rukka (Ex. PW1/A) for registration of the FIR for the offence under section 308/325/323/34 IPC. This led to the registration of the FIR vide Ex. PW6/A. The investigation was thereafter assigned to SI Dharampal who prepared the site plan and arrested accused Raj Kumar and Vikrant on 07.02.2008 and also recovered the hammer at the instance of accused Raj Kumar from the first floor of the residential house and seized it SC No.39/11 2/5 State vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
vide memo Ex. PW1/F. He arrested accused Sunny and Nirmala on 24.02.2008. The opinion as to the nature of injuries of Meenu Chaudhary, Riya Chaudhary and P.D Chaudhay was obtained and after completing the investigation charge sheet was filed.
2. Accused persons were charged for the offence under section under 308 IPC read with section 34 IPC and 323 IPC read with section 34 IPC. Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. The prosecution had examined seven witnesses to prove its case.
PW1 is HC Billu Singh who has deposed that on receipt of DD No. 22A and 23A on 06.02.2008 he had visited H. No. 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir, New Delhi. He came to know that the injured have been taken to AIIMS Hospital, thereafter he went there and recorded the statement of Meenu Chaudhary and prepared the rukka. This witness also remained with the Investigating Officer SI Dharamapal during the investigation.
PW2 is ASI Om Prakash who was on duty as Incharge PCR, South Zone. On receipt of a call he had reached H. No. 24/736, DDA Flats, Madangir, New Delhi and from there he had taken three injured persons to Trauma Center, AIIMS Hospital.
PW3 is Ct. Shoveer. He had accompanied HC Billu Singh during the investigation and he also joined the investigation with SI Dharampal.
PW4 is Dr. Prakhar Singh who has deposed that the MLC of the injured Meenu Chaudhary and P.D. Chaudhary were prepared by Dr. Abhishek SC No.39/11 3/5 State vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
and Dr. Gaurav Kumar respectively vide Ex. PW4/A and Ex. PW4/B respectively. He has also deposed that the MLC of injured Riya Chaudhary was prepared by Dr. Sanskriti Priya vide Ex. PW4/C. However, in the cross examination he has admitted that he was not conversant with the handwriting of the doctors who had prepared the MLC as they had already left the services of the hospital before he joined.
PW5 is Dr Venu Madhav who deposed that the Xray reports Ex. PW5/A and Ex. PW5/B were prepared by Dr Sandeep Dua. He admitted that there was no fracture in any of these Xray reports.
PW6 is HC Prahlad Singh Tokas. He was the Duty Officer who registered the FIR vide Ex. PW6/A. PW7 is ASI Veer Singh who recorded DD No. 22A and DD No. 23A at 6.35 pm and 6.53 pm vide Ex. PW7/A and Ex. PW7/B respectively.
4. In the statement of these seven witnesses no evidence has come as to what was the cause of the incident and how the injured Meenu Chaudhary, P.D. Chaudhary and Riya Chaudhary had received injuries. Since these three witnesses were not traceable, therefore, they could not be produced before the court. In the absence of their statement the required incriminating evidence could not come on the record. Therefore, the recording of statement of accused under section 313 Cr. P.C was dispensed with.
SC No.39/11 4/5
5 The prosecution case is that Meenu Chaudhary was residing at H. No. 24/736, IIIrd floor, DDA Flats, Madangir on rent. Raj Kumar (accused) was the landlord. There was some dispute between the landlord (accused) and the complainant. On 06.02.2008 at around 7 pm injured Pranav Chaudhary and Riya Chaudhary were taking up the fridge, which was lying infront of the door of the landlord, when the accused came and started beating Pranav Chaudhary and complainant Meenu Chaudhary. In the said incident accused Raj Kumar hit Pranav Chaudhary with hammer. An intimation regarding the incident was sent to the police and the injured persons were thereafter taken to Trauma Center, AIIMS Hospital where HC Billu Singh came and recorded the statement of the complainant.
6 Now these facts have not been proved on record because the complainant and the injured persons have not been examined. Therefore, the genesis of the incident and how the injured persons have received the injuries could not be brought in the form of evidence before the court. Hence, all the accused persons stands acquitted of the charge under section 308 IPC read with section IPC and 323 IPC read with section 34 IPC. They are on bail. Their bail bonds stands canceled and surety stands discharged. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court (AJAY KUMAR KUHAR)
th
Dated:26 November, 2011 Addl. Sessions Judge02: South East
Saket Court: New Delhi
SC No.39/11 5/5