Delhi District Court
State vs . 1). Rameshwar Chaudhary on 21 December, 2012
1
FIR No. 683/05
PS Sultanpuri
IN THE COURT OF SH MAHESH CHANDER GUPTA :
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - IV (OUTER DISTRICT) :
ROHINI : DELHI
SESSION CASE NO. : 57/2009
Unique ID No. : 02404R0652652007
STATE VS. 1). RAMESHWAR CHAUDHARY
S/O SH. SUKHDEV
R/O H.NO. B413, ADARSH
ENCLAVE, PREM NAGARIIII,
DELHI.
2). UPENDER DASS
S/O SH. KALESHWAR DASS
R/O H.NO. B444,
ENCLAVE, PREM NAGARIIII,
DELHI.
3). RAM BABU
S/O SH. RAMESHWAR
CHAUDHARY
R/O H.NO. B413, ADARSH
ENCLAVE, PREM NAGARIIII,
DELHI.
1 of 28
2
FIR No. 683/05
PS Sultanpuri
4). RAMBHU KUMAR
S/O SH. RAM RAJ RAM
R/O H.NO. B485, ADARSH
ENCLAVE, PREM NAGARIIII,
DELHI.
FIR No. : 683/05
Police Station : Sultanpuri
Under Sections : U/S 308/341/323/34 IPC
Date of committal to sessions court : 16/01/2007
Date on which orders were reserved: 18/12/2012
Date of which judgment announced: 21/12/2012
J U D G M E N T
1. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution as unfolded by the report u/s 173 Cr.P.C is as under: That on 30/04/2005 on receipt of information of a quarrel at PP Prem Nagar, PS Sultanpuri, DD No. 12 was recorded which was handed 2 of 28 3 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri over to HC Jagjeet Singh, who alongwith Constable Virender reached at the spot 40 Foota Road, Adarsh Enclave, Vacant Plot, Prem Nagar, Delhi, where it was found that both the parties have been injured in the quarrel and have been taken by PCR to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, on which HC Jagjeet Singh alongwith Constable Virender reached at Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, where on MLC No. 1236/05, Ashok Kumar injured was found admitted in the hospital, on his MLC the doctor had endorsed, alleged history of physical assault and the result Hurt (Chot) and was declared fit for statement. In the same hospital injured Anil Kumar and Kunal Singh were also found in the injured condition who were also got medically examined vide MLC No. 1938IA6528 and E31945/A6531. Statement of injured Ashok Kumar was recorded. From the statement of Ashok Kumar and from the inspection of the MLCs offences u/s 341/323/34 IPC were found to have been committed. Rukka was prepared and the case was got registered. Site plan was prepared at the instance of the complainant Ashok Kumar. Accused persons were arrested and their personal searches were conducted. The dandas were recovered at the instance of accused Ram Babu and Rameshwar Chaudhary which were taken into police possession and were deposited in the malkhana. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After the transfer of HC Jagjeet 3 of 28 4 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Singh further investigation was taken by ASI Krishan Kumar, who during the course of investigation obtained the opinion on the MLC of complainant Ashok Kumar which was opined to be 'dangerous', on the basis of which Section 308 IPC was also added.
Upon completion of the necessary further investigation challan was prepared for the offences u/s 341/323/308/34 IPC against accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu and was sent to the Court for trial.
2. Since the offence u/s 308 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Session, therefore, after compliance of the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions u/s 209 Cr.P.C.
3. Upon committal of the case to the court of Session, after hearing of charge prima facie a case u/s 341/323/308/34 IPC against the accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu was made out. Charge was framed accordingly which was read over and explained to the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4 of 28 5 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri
4. In support of its case prosecution has produced and examined eleven witnesses. PW1 Ashok Kumar Singh, PW2 ASI Krishan Kumar, PW3 Ct. Virender Singh, PW4 Anil Kumar Singh, PW5 Ct. Vimal Kumar, PW6 Kunal Singh, PW7 Dr. Manoj Dhingra, PW8 ASI Rajwanti, PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh, PW10 Ct. Sherpal and PW11 Dr. Brijesh Sethi.
5. In brief the witnessography of the prosecution witnesses is as under: PW1 Ashok Kumar Singh, is the complainant and one of the injured who deposed regarding the incident and proved his statement made to the police Ext. PW1/A bearing his signature at PointA and also proved the case property, dandas Ext. P1 & Ext. P2.
PW2 ASI Krishan Kumar, who deposed that on 09.09.2005 investigation of the case was marked to him. During the course of investigation he obtained the MLC result which was opined as 'dangerous' hence, offence u/s 308 IPC was added. After completion of investigation he 5 of 28 6 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri prepared the chargesheet and filed it in the Court.
PW3 Constable Virender Singh, who deposed that he joined investigation on 23/04/2005 and deposed that at SGM Hospital HC Jagjeet recorded statement of Ashok Kumar (PW1) in his presence and prepared rukka and handed it over to him and he got the case registered and after the registration of the case handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to HC Jagjeet.
PW4 Anil Kumar Singh, is also one of the injured, who deposed regarding the incident.
PW5 Constable Vimal Kumar, is the DD Writer, who proved the copy of the DD No. 12 dated 30/04/2005 at 9:31 a.m., PP Prem Nagar, PS Sultan Puri Ext. PW5/A and deposed that the said DD was marked to HC Jagjeet Singh for necessary action.
PW6 Kunal Singh, is also one of the injured, who deposed regarding the incident and also proved case property, the dandas Ext. P1 & 6 of 28 7 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Ext. P2.
PW7 Dr. Manoj Dhingra, who proved the MLC of Ashok Kumar (PW1) Ext. PW7/A prepared by Dr. Sachin Bajaj bearing his signature at PointA, the XRay report of Ashok Kumar Ext. PW7/B prepared by Dr. Nagesh bearing his signature at PointA. PW8 ASI Rajwanti, is the Duty Officer, who proved the carbon copy of FIR Ext. PW8/A and her endorsement Ext. PW8/B on the original rukka.
PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh, is the Investigating Officer (IO), who deposed on the investigational aspects and deposed that he recorded the statement of complainant Ashok Kumar Ext. PW9/A attested by him at PointB and made his endorsement Ext. PW9/B signed by him at PointX and prepared rukka and got the case registered through Ct. Virender and proved the arrest memos of accused Rameshwar Chaudhary and Ram Babu Ext. PW9/C & Ext. PW9/D respectively and deposed that their personal searches were also conducted and proved the seizure memo of danda 7 of 28 8 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri recovered pursuant to the disclosure of accused Ram Babu Ext. PW9/B signed by him at PointX and proved the seizure memo of one danda recovered pursuant to the disclosure of accused Rameshwar Chaudhary Ext. PW9/F signed by him at PointX and proved the arrest memos of accused Upender Ext. PW9/G and that of accused Rambhu Ext. PW9/H respectively and proved the case property, dandas Ext. P1 & Ext. P2.
PW10 Ct. Sherpal, who joined investigation with IO HC Jagjeet Singh (PW9) and deposed on the investigational aspects and proved the memos and the case property as has been proved by PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh, IO.
PW11 Dr. Brijesh Sethi, who proved the MLC of Kunal (PW6) Ext. PW11/A and that of Anil Kumar Ext. PW11/B prepared by Dr. Vijay Sagar signed by him at PointsA. He also proved the MLC of Ashok Kumar (PW1) already Ext. PW7/A prepared by Dr. Raj Kumar signed by him at PointC. He deposed that the opinion regarding the nature of injury encircled at PointB on the MLC Ext. PW7/A is also in the handwriting of Dr. Raj Kumar and signed by him.
8 of 28 9 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses shall be dealt with in detail during the course of appreciation of the evidence.
6. Statements of accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C wherein they pleaded innocence and false implication. They opted to lead defence evidence and in their defence have examined one witness namely DW1 Algu Yadav.
DW1 - Algu Yadav in his examinationinchief has deposed that : "On 30/04/2005, I heard the shout outside my home and I saw that Ashok Singh who is residing in our locality was standing outside the home of Rameshwar Choudhary and abusing them, he also damaging loud speaker in front of house of Rameshwar Choudhary. Rameshwar Choudhary is my neighbour since last fifteen year. Ashok Singh is also residing in the same locality. Ashok Singh constructed a small temple in his house and put loudspeaker there. He used to play 'Bhajan' in loud volume. The people of the locality requested him number of times to play 'Bhajan' in low volume. But he refused to do the same. On 29/04/2005 people at locality went to the house of Ashok Singh with same request as the exams of children were going on. But he refused the same. The people of locality called the Police and he stopped to play 'Bhajan' on the intervention of the Police.
9 of 28 10 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri On 30/04/2005 at about 8:30 - 9:00 a.m. Ashok Singh came in front of the house of Rameshwar Choudhary and started abusing him. The people of the locality gathered there and requested him not to use filthy language in the meantime he thrown the stone on Rameshwar Choudhary, who receive injuries. In the meantime, Kunal, Anil, relatives of Ashok Singh also came at the spot with 'lathis' in their hand and started beating Rameshwar Choudhary. The people of the locality try to save Rameshwar Choudhary and during the same Ashok Singh fell down on the road and received some head injury. Someone called the Police. Police came at the spot and brought the all injured to the Hospital.
Ashok Singh is habitual litigant. There are several cases pending against him including FIR No. 243/10, PS - Aman Vihar u/s 308/323/34 IPC"
The testimony of the defence witnesses shall be dealt with in detail during the course of appreciation of the evidence.
7. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that PW1 - Ashok Kumar is a habitual litigant who is the complainant in the present case and in number of cases he is a complainant and in other cases he is an accused. He admitted in his statement that there was an objection from the locality in playing loudspeaker. He also stated that the accused persons also made a Police complaint against him when he did not stop to play loudspeaker on the request of people of locality. He further stated that all the accused persons
10 of 28 11 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri gave beatings to him with danda and sarias however no Saria was recovered during the investigation of the said case. He further admitted that he fell down during the altercation with accused persons. He stated that he got admitted himself in Vimal Hospital however no documentary proof is on the record which shows that he remained admitted in the Vimal Hospital. Moreover arrest memos, site plan and personal search of the accused persons bear the signature of the complainant which shows that he was never admitted in the hospital as stated by him. He admitted that the accused persons also lodged an FIR bearing no. 682/05 against him and thereafter he lodged the present case against them. He further admitted that he is involved in other criminal cases also. He admitted that the weapons of offence Ex. P1 and P2 were not recovered in his presence.
Ld. Counsel for the accused further submitted that PW4 Anil Kumar Singh who is the relative of the complainant Ashok Kumar, has stated in his examination that four persons were beating the complainant with iron rods and dandas. As stated earlier that no iron rod was recovered during the investigation of the present case. He stated that accused Rameshwar Chaudhary gave injury to complainant Ashok Kumar with iron rod however the complainant Ashok Kumar stated that Ram Babu hit him on his head 11 of 28 12 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri with danda. He stated that some public persons present at the spot tried to save him and complainant however, PW1 Ashok Kumar stated in his examination that no public person gathered at the spot at the time of incident. In his crossexamination PW4 admitted that he was working in factory and used to reside there. He further admitted that at the time of incident he was present in the factory. However, he further stated that he alongwith other injured taken to Police post and thereafter to hospital. He further deposed that he does not know whether any case was also registered against complainant Ashok Kumar or not however PW4 himself is an accused in cross FIR bearing no. 682/05.
Ld. Counsel for the accused further submitted that PW6 Kunal Singh is also the relative of complainant Ashok Kumar who deposed that when he heard the noise he alongwith his Jija Anil Kumar came outside the house and saw that accused persons were giving beating to Ashok Kumar. However, PW4 Anil Kumar deposed that at the time of incident he was present in his factory. He further stated that after incident he alongwith Anil Kumar and Ashok Kumar were shifted to hospital however PW4 stated that they went to Police post and thereafter went to hospital. He stated in his crossexamination that his relative Anil Kumar (PW4) was unemployed at 12 of 28 13 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri the time of incident however PW4 stated that he was working in factory at the time of incident even he admitted that he was not present at the spot and was present in the factory. He further admitted that there was a dispute regarding playing of loudspeaker and some altercation took place with accused persons two days prior to incident and Police was also called however, PW1 Ashok Kumar deposed that no altercation took place.
Ld. Counsel further submitted that from the deposition of above witnesses it is clear that there are contradictions in their statements which go to the root of the matter and they are relatives and with a view to take revenge from the accused persons they implicated them in the present case.
Ld. Counsel for the accused further submitted that PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh has stated that he prepared site plan at the instance of Ashok Kumar however, as per statement of Ashok Kumar he was admitted in hospital. PW9 further stated that the arrest memo and personal search memo were also prepared in presence of complainant Ashok Kumar which falsifies the testimony of PW1 - Ashok Kumar that he remained admitted in the Vimal Hospital. PW9 further stated that accused Ram Babu got recovered the danda but during his crossexamination has stated that no independent witness was joined at the time of their arrest and seizure of dandas despite 13 of 28 14 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri the fact that the area is residential.
Ld. Counsel for accused further submitted that there is no evidence against the accused persons and they have been falsely implicated in the present case and prayed for their acquittal on the charges levelled against them.
8. While the Ld. Addl. PP for the State, on the other hand, submitted that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses are cogent and consistent and the contradictions and discrepancies as pointed out are minor and not the material one's and do not affect the credibility of the witnesses and the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
9. I have heard the Ld. Addl. PP for the state and Ld. Counsel for the accused and have also carefully perused the entire record.
10. The charge for the offences u/s 341/308/34 IPC against the accused persons namely Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu, is that on 30/04/2005 at about 8:45 a.m. at 40 Foota Road, 14 of 28 15 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Adarsh Enclave, Vacant Plot, Prem NagarIII, Delhi, they all in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained Ashok Kumar, Kunal Singh and Anil Singh and thereafter caused injuries on their persons, with dandas, legs and fist blows with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if by their said act Ashok Kumar, Kunal Singh and Anil Singh would have died they would have been guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
11. It is to be mentioned that as a matter of prudence, in order to avoid any little alteration in the spirit and essence of the depositions of the material witnesses, during the process of appreciation of evidence at some places their part of depositions have been reproduced, in the interest of justice.
INFORMATION OF CRIME
12. PW5 Constable Vimal Kumar in his examination in chief has deposed that on 30/04/2005, he was posted at PP Prem Nagar, PS - Sultan Puri as Constable and was working as DD Writer from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. At about 9:31 a.m., he received a wireless message from omega 50 15 of 28 16 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri regarding scuffle at a vacant plot, 40 Futta Road near Railway crossing Prem Nagar - III. On the basis of this information he recorded DD no. 12 dated 30/04/2005, PP - Prem Nagar and the same was marked to HC Jagjeet Singh for necessary action and the said DD was sent to him through Constable Surender. Copy of DD NO. 12 is Ex. PW15/A. In the circumstances, it is clearly indicated that the information regarding scuffle was received by the Police at about 9:31 a.m. on 30/04/2005.
MEDICAL EVIDENCE
13. PW7 Dr. Manoj Dhingra has proved the MLC of Ashok Kumar (PW1) Ext. PW7/A prepared by Dr. Sachin Bajaj bearing his signature at PointA, the XRay report of Ashok Kumar Ext. PW7/B prepared by Dr. Nagesh bearing his signature at PointA. PW11 Dr. Brijesh Sethi has proved the MLC of Kunal (PW6) Ext. PW11/A and that of Anil Kumar Ext. PW11/B prepared by Dr. Vijay Sagar signed by him at PointsA. He also proved the MLC of Ashok Kumar 16 of 28 17 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri (PW1) already Ext. PW7/A prepared by Dr. Raj Kumar signed by him at PointC. He deposed that the opinion regarding the nature of injury encircled at PointB on the MLC Ext. PW7/A is also in the handwriting of Dr. Raj Kumar and signed by him.
In the circumstances, the injuries suffered by Ashok Kumar (PW1) and Kunal (PW6) stands proved on the record.
14. Now let the testimony of the prosecution witnesses be perused and analysed.
PW1 Ashok Kumar Singh, the complainant in his examination inchief has deposed that on 30/04/2005 in the morning at about 8:45 a.m. he was in the process to go to his office when he reached in front of the house of accused Rameshwar Chaudhary he at the top of his voice exhorted that he (PW1) should not be spared and then accused Ram Babu took a danda from the chabutra of Rameshwar Chaudhary's house and hit on his head. Accused Upender Ram (be read as Upender Dass), Rameshwar Chaudhary, Shambhu (be read as Rambhu) also started beating him with dandas and sarias. He raised alarm to save himself. His relatives Anil Singh and Kunal came there 17 of 28 18 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri to save him. He fell down. Anil Singh and Kunal were also given beatings by accused persons. They also received injuries. He was shifted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital. His statement was also recorded by the police Ext. PW1/A. During his crossexamination PW1 Ashok Kumar has negated the suggestion that the present case is a counter blast against the accused persons as FIR No. 682/05, PS Sultanpuri was lodged by the accused against him. He has also deposed that he cannot say whether any other person from the locality was there when he was given beatings. The spot is a residential area and some shops are also in that vicinity. No public person from the locality joined the investigation. Anil Singh and Kunal were not aware that the accused persons were having any grudge against him. Anil is residing with him for the last six years. He negated the suggestion that Anil and Kunal gave beatings to accused persons and voluntarily deposed that Anil and Kunal were also beaten by the accused persons but a false crosscase was got lodged by the accused persons against them. He made complaints to the Senior Officers against the false case lodged against him at the instance of the accused persons.
18 of 28 19 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri From the aforesaid narration of PW1 Ashok Kumar it is clearly indicated that a case vide FIR No. 682/05, PS Sultanpuri was lodged by the accused persons against him (the present case is vide FIR No. 683/05, PS Sultanpuri). It clearly indicates that on the date of the registration of the present case vide FIR No. 683/05, at PS Sultanpuri by PW1 Ashok Kumar, the complainant the accused had already got registered a case against PW1 Ashok Kumar, Anil Kumar and Kunal vide FIR No. 682/05, PS Sultanpuri. In the circumstances, though the suggestion regarding the present case being a counter blast against the accused persons of their having registered FIR No. 682/05, PS Sultanpuri has been denied by PW1 Ashok Kumar but in the circumstances, it appears to have substance that the present case is a fall out of the case got registered by the accused persons against PW1 Ashok Kumar and Anil Kumar and Kunal, who are PW4 and PW6 respectively in the present case. Moreover, PW6 Kunal Singh in his crossexamination has admitted it to be correct that on the same day an FIR was lodged against Ashok (PW1). To the same effect has also been deposed by PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh IO in his crossexamination. "It is correct that a cross case was registered on the complaint of Rameshwar Choudhary".
Further, the testimony of PW1 Ashok Kumar Singh is not 19 of 28 20 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri corroborated by PW4 Anil Kumar and PW6 Kunal Singh in material particulars.
PW4 Anil Kumar in his crossexamination has deposed that he is serving with manufacturers of varshal of 'chulha' at Prem Nagar and usually proceed from his house to factory at about 8.30 a.m., however, the work starts in the factory at 9.00 a.m. He goes to his working place on foot and voluntarily deposed he resides in the factory itself. He has been provided room for factory itself.
From the aforesaid part of crossexamination of PW4 Anil Kumar it is clearly indicated that PW4 Anil Kumar Singh was residing in the factory itself and was not residing with PW1 Ashok Kumar as he has claimed during his crossexamination that Anil is residing with him for the last six years. In the circumstances, the part of the deposition of PW1 Anil Kumar that on his raising alarm to save him his relative Anil Singh and Kunal came there to save him. When PW4 Anil is living in the factory itself then how it is possible for him to be present at the place of incidence.
PW6 Sh. Kunal Singh in his examinationinchief has deposed 20 of 28 21 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri that : "PCR van reached at the spot and we all the three injured i.e myself Ashok Kumar, Anil Kumar were shifted to SGM Hospital."
This part of the testimony of PW6 Sh. Kunal Singh is not corroborated either by PW1 Ashok Kumar or by PW4 Anil Kumar Singh.
PW1 Ashok Kumar in his examination in chief has deposed that : "I was shifted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital."
While PW4 Anil Kumar in his crossexamination has deposed that "After the incident I went to my factory where I remained for few minutes and then went to the Police Post."
It creates doubt and suspicion and the testimonies of the said prosecution witnesses do not inspire confidence.
PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh in his examinationinchief has deposed that he came to know that injured of both the parties were shifted to SGM 21 of 28 22 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Hospital by PCR. Undisputably, no MLCs of the accused persons have been placed on the record by the prosecution. No plausible explanation has been placed by the prosecution as to why the MLCs of the accused persons have been withheld when as per PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh, he came to know after reaching at 40 foota Road, Adarash Enclave, Near Railway Fatak, Prem NagarIII that injured of both the parties were shifted to SGM Hospital by PCR.
PW1 Ashok Kumar in his examinationinchief has deposed that he was given beatings with dandas and sarias. PW4 Anil Kumar in his examinationinchief has deposed that Ashok Kumar was given injuries with iron rod by Rameshwar. While the testimony of PW6 Kunal Singh is totally silent about the use and giving of injuries by iron rod/saria by the accused persons. Even if for the sake of arguments it is taken that the iron rod/saria was also used in the giving of beatings why the same have not been recovered, produced and proved on the record. No explanation has been placed by the prosecution in this regard.
PW1 Ashok Kumar in his examinationinchief has deposed that 22 of 28 23 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri on 30/04/2005 in the morning at about 8:45 a.m. he was in the process to go to his office. His testimony is not corroborated by PW6 Kunal Singh, who during his crossexamination has deposed that on the day of incident Ashok Kumar had left to the office probably at about 8:30 a.m. PW6 Kunal Singh during his crossexamination has also deposed that there were no fixed duty hours for Ashok Kumar being Manager in the company but he used to go at 8.30 a.m. and used to return at 5.00 p.m. On the day of incident Ashok Kumar was not on leave. His relative Anil Kumar was employed at the time of incident. He, Ashok Kumar, his elder brother and Anil Kumar used to reside in the house of Ashok Kumar at the relevant time. PW 6 Kunal Singh is the best person who was living in the house of Ashok Kumar to know at what time he is leaving. In the circumstances, the testimony of PW1 Ashok Kumar remained uncorroborated and the story appears to have been cooked up by PW1 Ashok Kumar in order to counter the case registered by the accused persons against him vide FIR No. 682/05, PS Sultanpuri.
PW6 Kunal Singh during his crossexamination has admitted it to be correct that there is a temple in the house of his relative Ashok Kumar.
23 of 28 24 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri He negated the suggestion that there was a loud speaker at that time. He admitted it to be correct that two days prior to the incident a verbal altercation has taken place between the accused and injured at which time police also came.
During his crossexamination PW1 Ashok Kumar has deposed that Anil Singh (PW4) and Kunal (PW6) were not aware that the accused persons were having any grudge against him.
From above it is clearly indicated that it is not the accused persons who were having the grudge against PW1 Ashok Kumar but it was PW1 Ashok Kumar who was harbouring a grudge against the accused persons when the accused persons had objected, on his playing loud speaker at high volume in the temple in his house. This inference is also been corroborated by DW1 Algu Yadav who during his examinationinchief has deposed that Ashok Kumar constructed a small temple in his house and put loud speaker there. He used to play Bhajan at loud volume. The people of the locality requested him number of time to play the bhajan in low volume but he refused to play the same. On 29/04/2005 the people of the locality 24 of 28 25 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri visited Ashok Kumar with same request that the exams of the children were going on but he refused the same.
There is nothing in the crossexamination of DW1 Algu Yadav so as to impeach his creditworthiness. Moreover, DW1 Algu Yadav in his examination in chief has specifically deposed that Ashok Singh is a habitual litigant. Several cases are pending against him including FIR No. 243/10, PS Aman Vihar, u/s 308/323/34 IPC. This said part of the testimony has not been challenged during his crossexamination.
The testimony of DW1 - Algu Yadav is clear, cogent, natural, trustworthy and inspires confidence. In the witness box, he has withstood the rigors of crossexamination and his testimony is consistent throughout.
PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh in his examinationinchief has deposed that on 30/04/2005 he was posted at PP Prem Nagar, PS Sultanpuri and on that day on receiving DD No. 12 PP Prem Nagar he alongwith Constable Sherpal reached at 40 Foota Road, Adarsh Enclave, Near Railway Fatak, Prem NagarIII and there he came to know that injured of both the parties were shifted to SGM Hospital by PCR. Thereafter, he alongwith Constabler 25 of 28 26 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Sherpal reached at SGM Hospital. There injured Ashok Kumar was found admitted vide MLC No. 1236/05. He obtained his MLC and doctor declared him fit for statement. There at the hospital itself Anil Kumar and Kunal Singh met him in injured condition and he got both of them medically examined after preparing their naksha majrubi.
From the aforesaid narration of PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh it is clearly indicated that on reaching at the place of incident at 40 Foota Road Adarsh Enclave, Near Railway Fatak, Prem NagarIII, he came to know that injured of both the parties were shifted to SGM Hospital by PCR. His testimony is totally silent what happened to the injured of the other side (the accused persons). Undisputably, no PCR officials who shifted the injured of the other side/accused persons have been produced and examined by the prosecution. If the persons of the other side were injured and were brought to the hospital by PCR where they had gone? Whether any such inquiry was made in this regard by PW9 HC Jagjeet Singh. It all creates doubt and suspicion in the prosecution case and the present case against the accused persons appears to have been registered at the instance of PW1 Ashok Kumar in order to counter the case registered by the accused persons vide 26 of 28 27 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri FIR No. 682/05 PS - Sultan Puri.
15. In view of above discussion, I am of the considered opinion as far as the involvement of accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu in the commission of the offences u/s 341/323/308/34 IPC is concerned, the same is not sufficiently established by the cogent and reliable evidence and in the ultimate analysis the prosecution has miserably failed to bring the guilt home to the accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu beyond shadows of all reasonable doubts and there is a room for hypothesis, consistent with that of innocence of accused. I, therefore, acquit accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu for the offences u/s 341/323/308/34 IPC after giving them the benefit of doubt. Accused Rameshwar Chaudhary, Ram Babu, Upender Dass and Rambhu are on bail. However, u/s 437 A Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of the said accused persons shall remain in force for six months and they to appear before the Hon'ble Higher Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of any petition filed against this judgment.
Announced in the open Court today (MAHESH CHANDER GUPTA) on 21st day of December, 2012 Addl. Sessions Judge- IV/Outer Distt.
27 of 28 28 FIR No. 683/05 PS Sultanpuri Rohini/Delhi 28 of 28