Delhi District Court
State vs Neeraj Kumar on 16 February, 2026
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SYED ZIHAN ALI WARSI:
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 04 :
NEW DELHI DISTRICT : PATIALA HOUSE COURTS : NEW
DELHI
SC 31/2019
STATE Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR
FIR No. 396/2018
PS: SAGARPUR
u/s. 307/506/324 IPC
DLND010007962019
STATE VS. NEERAJ KUMAR
SC No. : 31/2019
Date of offence : 03.10.2018
Date of filing of charge-sheet : 28.12.2018
Accused : Neeraj Kumar
S/o Sh. Kishan Pal
R/o RZ-16/230, J-Block,
West Sagarpur,
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 1 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:38:05
Warsi +0530
2
New Delhi.
Offence : 307/506 and 324 IPC
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Convicted
Date of committal : 09.01.2019
Date of arguments : 23.01.2026
Date of Judgment : 16.02.2026
JUDGMENT
1. Accused was committed for trial vide order dated 09.01.2019 by court of Ms. Manisha Tripathy, Ld. MM-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
2. On 11.01.2019, police report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. was put before Sh. Rakesh Syal, ASJ-04, PHC, New Delhi with a view to put accused on trial.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 2 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:38:27 Warsi +0530 3
3. Charge under Section 307/506 IPC was framed against accused Neeraj on 15.02.2019 and charge under Section 324 IPC was framed against accused Neeraj on 30.04.2019.
4. Brief facts on the basis of which charge sheet was filed in the present matter are as follows :-
In the intervening night of 03-04.10.2018 ASI Nand Kishore received a call from duty officer vide DD No. 44A. On receiving the said DD when he alongwith HC Mahender were going to the spot, on the other way, another call vide DD no. 45A was received from Shakuntala Hospital regarding admission of injured Amit. When they went to Shakuntala Hospital, they came to know that injured was referred to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and from there they came to know that injured was referred to DDU Hospital. When the police officials reached DDU Hospital, injured was unfit for statement. The father of the injured met them and IO ASI Nand Kishore recorded his statement. In the statement, the complainant Rajpal Singh stated that he residing at RZ-17/A/230, J-Block, Sagarpur (West), New Delhi. On 03.10.2018, at about 10.00 PM, his son Amit Kumar received a State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 3 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:38:38 +0530 4 phone call and his son was talking in a loud voice. Then, his son told him that their neighbour Neeraj was abusing him on the issue of parking and also threatened to kill him. On hearing this, the complainant and his son went to the gate of their house and saw that accused Neeraj was standing in the street and was saying that they have parked their vehicle wrongly. He challenged them to come out of their house so that he can teach them a lesson. Thereafter, the complainant and his son came out of their house. Accused Neeraj started fighting with Amit. When he tried to intervene, suddenly, Neeraj took out a knife from his pocket and repeatedly stabbed on the chest and stomach of Amit with the said knife and threatened that if he again parks his vehicle, he would kill him. Thereafter, Neeraj ran away from the spot. The complainant brought his son to Shakuntala Hospital, Sagar Pur. As per MLC, the following Injuries were found on the person of Amit Kumar:
(1) Clear lacerated wound 4cm below liphoid process with active bleeding, (2) Clear lacerated wound occipital region approx 8 cm, (3) Clear lacerated wound at left axillary 2/1 cm and (4) Clear lacerated wound at umbilical region 2/1 cm. The injuries State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 4 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:38:46 +0530 5 were opined to be grievous. On the basis of statement of complainant Rajpal Singh statement, FIR u/s 307/506 IPC was lodged.
4.1. It is also relevant that after they returned to the spot i.e. H No. 17/230, J Block, Sagarpur, where blood was lying and after just entering the house, one red color blood stained t-shirt having cuts on front side was lying. In the meantime IO received call of father of injured Amit i.e. Rajpal that he had also sustained injuries and want to get his medical examination. IO left for the hospital. Then he returned to the spot and seized the blood sample and pulanda of blood stained clothes of injured Amit Kumar and Rajpal, which were already duly sealed at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. Thereafter, IO prepared the rukka and got the FIR registered through him. During investigation on 04.10.2018, accused Neeraj was apprehended who lead the police officials to the second floor of H No. 16/230, and from the kitchen, he got recovered one buttondar knife, which he had kept in between utensils. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused Neeraj Kumar u/s 307/506 IPC.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 5 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:38:55
Warsi +0530
6
5. Charge on 15.02.2019 was framed against the accused Neeraj Kumar for offence u/s 506 IPC as he threatened the complainant Raj Pal Singh and his son Amit with injury to their person, while stating that he would teach them a lesson as well as charge for offence u/s 307 IPC as he repeatedly stabbed Amit on his chest and stomach with a knife, thereby causing dangerous injuries to him, with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if, he by that act, caused death of Amit, he would be guilty of murder. Charge on 30.04.2019 was framed against the accused Neeraj Kumar for offence u/s 324 IPC as he voluntarily caused hurt with a knife, an instrument for stabbing and cutting, on the left arm and hand of complainant Sh. Rajpal Singh.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
6. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined the following witnesses:
S. No. Name of PW Exhibit Nature of
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 6 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:39:05
Warsi +0530
7
document/article
1. PW-1 Ex.PW1/A, Statement complainant,
Sh. Raj Pal Singh Ex.PW1/ME-1, Baniyan, Pajama and Ex.PW1/ME-2, knife Ex.PW1/ME-3
2. PW-2 Ex.PW2/ME-1, T-shirt Sh. Amit Ex.PW2/ME-2, Short/half pant, Ex.PW2/D1 statement of Amit Kumar
3. PW-3 Ex.PW3/A SOC Report bearing Insp. Rakesh No. 1100/2018 Kumar
4. PW-4 Ex.PW4/A, Seizure Memos HC Mahender Ex.PW4/B, Arrest memo, Personal Singh Ex.PW4/C, search memo, Ex.PW4/D, Disclosure statement, Ex.PW4/E, sketch of buttondar Ex.PW4/F, knife, Ex.PW4/G, seizure memo of Ex.PW4/H, pullanda, Ex.PW4/I, parcel S1, Ex.PW4/P1, parcel S2, Ex.PW4/P2, parcel S3, Ex.PW4/P3,
5. PW-5 Ex.PW5/A-1 to Photographs and CD HC Amit Ex.PW5/A-14, Ex.PW5/A-15 State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 7 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:39:15 +0530 8
6. PW-6 Ex.PW6/A, MLC, Sh. Ashwini Ex.PW6/B Authority Letter Kumar Rai
7. PW-7 - -
Dr. Prem Arora
8. PW-8 Ex.PW8/A Discharge summary of Dr. Anurag Dadu patient Amit Kumar
9. PW-9 Ex.PW9/A MLC of injured Amit Dr. D.P. Dhami Kumar
10. PW-10 Ex.PW10/A, Endorsement, ASI Nand Kishore Ex.PW10/B, Site plan, Ex.PW10/C, Statement of injured Ex.PW10/D, Amit Kumar, Ex.PW10/E MLC of complainant Rajpal, Attested copy of DD No. 44A & 45A
11. PW-11 Ex.PW11/A, Detailed report of FSL Ms. Poonam Ex.PW11/B, (Biology), Sharma Ex.P-11/1, Allelic report, Ex.P-11/2 Liquid blood sample of injured Amit, liquid blood sample of injured Rajpal After recording statement of accused, the following defence State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 8 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:39:26 +0530 9 witness was examined.
1. DW-1 - -
Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar ADMITTED DOCUMENTS
7. On 09.01.2024, the accused has admitted following documents u/s 294 Cr.P.C.
a) The FIR as Ex.P1,
b) Certificate under S. 65-B as Ex.P2,
c) Copy RC no. 208/21/18 as Mark P3 and the
acknowledgment as Ex.P4.
7.1. In view of the submissions on admitted documents, the formal recording of the testimony of PW HC Bhagwan Shai and Ct. Satish is dispensed with.
8. PW-1 Rajpal deposed that on 03.10.2018 at about 10 pm, his son Amit received telephonic call from someone. His son was talking to that person in a loud noise. When he asked his son State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 9 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:39:37 Warsi +0530 10 as to whom he was talking, his son told him that it is accused Neeraj, who had called him. PW-1 further deposed that his son told him that accused Neeraj was abusing him on the pretext of parking and was threatening to kill him and had called him outside the house. PW-1 further deposed that accused Neeraj came at their gate and abused them. He knocked their gate and asked his son to come out from the house and threatened that he would see him. PW-1 further deposed that when his son opened the door of the house, he was also there. Accused Neeraj pulled his son Amit outside their house and scuffled with him. Accused took out a knife and caused knife injuries on the chest and abdomen of Amit repeatedly. PW-1 further deposed that when he tried to hold accused Neeraj and intervened into the matter, accused attacked upon him by the knife. He caused 3-4 injuries on his left hand by the knife which he had raised to save himself from his attack. PW-1 further deposed that accused raised the knife in the air and ran away. He threatened them and stated that if, they park their vehicle in the vacant plot, he would kill them.
PW-1 further deposed that after receiving injury his son Amit became unconscious. He took his son Amit to Shakuntala State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 10 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:39:45 +0530 11 Hospital in a private vehicle and after first aid, he was referred to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and then to DDU Hospital. PW-1 further deposed that police reached the hospital and recored his statement Ex.PW1/A. He was given treatment at Mata chanan Devi hospital. He handed over his blood stained clothes to the doctor. He identified his clothes i.e. his baniyan and pyjama as Ex.PW1/ME1 and Ex.PW1/ME2. He also identified the knife with which accused caused injury to his son and him as Ex.PW1/ME3.
8.1. PW1 during his cross examination deposed that accused has residing in his neighbourhood for around 15 years.
He did not know who owns the vacant plot wherein he had parked his car. There were three vehicles parked in the plot on that day, one belonged to us, one to Neeraj and one was belonging to someone else. His car was parked besides the car of Neeraj. It is correct that my car was not parked behind the car of Neeraj. The incident had happened on account of parking the car and not on account of parking of motorcycle. At the time of incident, none of our neighbours was present. The entire incident State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 11 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:39:53 +0530 12 after opening the gate was over within 2-3 minutes. He raised alarm but by that time accused had fled. He did not call the police and rather, he immediately rushed his son to the hospital. For the first time, he disclosed about the involvement of accused in this case to the police in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital on 03.10.2018. He had met the police on their first visit to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. His statement was recorded in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital on his second visit. He had stated to the police that he had also received injuries on his hand when accused had attacked him. Confronted with statement Ex.PW1/A where it was not so recorded. He denied the suggestion that he had informed the police on 05.10.2018 through telephone that he had also received injuries in the incident.
8.2. Amit was taken to hospital in his car and they were accompanied by 6 or 7 boys of the locality. He did not inform the police that 6 or 7 boys of the locality had accompanied us. Amit was wearing a half shirt and half pant/Kaccha. The clothes of Amit were seized in the hospital. He had seen the knife at the time when the accused had attacked him and when he had fled State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 12 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:40:00
Warsi +0530
13
while waving that knife. The knife was around 6 inches in length.
He did not know whether prior to that day, there had been any quarrel between Neeraj and Amit and therefore, he could not admit or deny that two days prior to the incident there had been a quarrel between Neeraj and Amit. He denied all the suggestions given by Ld. defence counsel.
9. PW-2 Amit deposed that on 03.10.2018, accused called him on his mobile phone and asked him as to where he had parked his vehicle. When he told the accused that he had parked his vehicle on the vacant plot, accused Neeraj asked him to remove his vehicle from there. A dispute took place between him and accused Neeraj on phone. PW-2 further deposed that accused asked him to come downstairs. He alongwith his father came downstairs. When they opened the gate of their house, accused Neeraj was standing outside their house. He abused them. PW-2 further deposed that accused started scuffling with him. His father intervened into the matter. Accused took out a knife and attacked upon his chest and on abdomen repeatedly. He sustained injuries on his chest and abdomen and blood started oozing out State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 13 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:07 +0530 14 from his injuries. He fell down and became unconscious. On gaining consciousness, he came to know that he was taken to Shakuntala Nursing Home, then to Mata Chanan Devi and then to DDU Hospital. PW-2 identified his t-shirt and short / half pant which he was wearing at the time of incident as Ex.PW2/ME1 and Ex.PW2/ME2. He could not identify the knife by which accused caused injury to him.
9.1. Ld. Addl. PP was permitted to put one leading question with regard to identification of the knife to PW2. During examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, accused deposed that he could not identify the knife as the accused had stabbed him with a knife in a spur of moment and there was no time to observe the knife. It may be that the injury was caused to him by the knife produced by the MHCM.
9.2. PW2 during his cross examination deposed that he knew Neeraj since his childhood. Prior to that day, he did not have any quarrel with Neeraj. Prior to that day, there had been no quarrel regarding parking. He did not exactly remember but on that day it is possible that his vehicle and Neeraj's vehicle were State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 14 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:15 +0530 15 parked in front of or behind each other's vehicle. He denied the suggestion that he had stated to the police that the dispute was regarding parking of a motorcycle. He denied the suggestion that he had stated to the police that Neeraj had called him and asked him to move his car as he had to take his motorcycle out. Confronted with portion A to A of statement u/s.161 Cr.PC Ex.PW2/D1 where it is so recorded. He did not know how many vehicles were parked in the vacant plot on the day of incident. The incident had happened at the gate of his house and he was not able to step out. His statement was recorded by the police in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He did not remember the date on which his statement was recorded. He did not know how he reached the hospital. After he had received the injuries, he did not know what happened thereafter. His father had not received injuries till the time he was in senses. Confronted with portion B to B of statement u/s.161 Cr.PC Ex.PW2/D1 where it is so recorded.
10. PW3 Inspector Rakesh Kumar deposed that on 04.10.2018 he was posted as crime team Incharge at Dwarka State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 15 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:22 +0530 16 South West District. On that day at about 2:30 AM he received a call from control room upon which he alongwith AS1 Kulbhusan (Fingerprint expert) and HC Amit (photographer) reached at the spot i.e. RZ 17/230 J Block. West Sagarpur. In the street, blood was lying in front of said house. One red colour blood stained T- shirt was lying inside the house just after entry the house. He inspected the spot. Photographer clicked the scene of crime. Fingerprint expert tried to lift the chance print but same could not be lifted. ASI Nand kishor from PS Sagarpur alongwith other staff was already presented at spot before his reaching. He also directed him to lift the Exhibit from the spot which has been mentioned by him in his SOC report. The SOC report bearing No. 1100/2018 Ex. PW3/A bearing his signature at point A. 10.1 PW3 during his cross examination deposed that after receiving information in the control room, he was directed on wireless set from control room. He did not remember whether he had disclosed about his going to spot alongwith ASI Kulbhushan and HC Amit on 04.10.2018. His statement was recorded by IO/ASI Nand Kishore in Dwarka, Sector-9 on the State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 16 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:30 +0530 17 same day i.e. on 04.10.2018. When they were at the spot, one person in civil dress was present there but he was not confirm whether he was police official or some public person. The said person was not interrogated in front of him. At the spot, the house inside which one bloodstained T-shirt was lying, had been disclosed by IO of belonging to injured. He did not meet any family member of the injured at the spot at that particular time. He alongwith other police officials stayed there for about half an hour. He suggested the IO to collect the blood sample and the IO collected the same in his presence. He denied all suggestions given by Ld. defence counsel.
11. PW4 HC Mahendra Singh deposed that on the intervening night 03-04.10.2018 he was posted at PS Sagarpur and was on emergency duty from 8:00 PM to 8:00 AM with ASI Nand Kishor. At about 11:25 PM ASI Nand Kishor received a call from duty officer vide DD No. 44A and while they were going to the spot, on the way another call vide DD No. 45A was received from Shakuntala Hospital West Sagarpur regarding admission of injured Amit. They reached at Shakuntala Hospital State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 17 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:38 +0530 18 and there came to know that injured has already been shifted to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and when they reached there, they came to know that he was referred to DDU Hospital. They reached DDU Hospital and at the time injured Amit was found under treatment there. IO tried to record his statement but Doctor declared him unfit for giving his statement. In the Hospital father of injured met them and the IO ASI Nand Kishor recorded his statement. They returned to the spot. In the street in-front of H. No. 17/230 J block, Sagarpur blood was lying and after just entering the said house one red colour blood stained T-shirts having cuts on front side was lying. Crime team was also called by the IO. Crime team inspected the spot. Photographer took the photograph of the spot. IO had lifted the exhibits from the spot and same were seized and sealed with the seal of NK and seized vide seizure memo ExPW4/A bearing his signature at point A. Blood stain T-shirt was also seized after converting into pullanda and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B bearing his signature at point A. In the meantime IO received phone call of Rajpal father of injured that he had also sustained injuries and want to get his medical examination and at that time he was at State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 18 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:40:53 +0530 19 Mata Chanan Hospital. IO leaving him at the spot went to hospital. IO returned to the spot from hospital and he seized the blood sample and pullanda of the blood stained cloths of injured Amit Kumar as well as of injured Rajpal singh which were already duly sealed at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and the same were seized separately vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D bearing his signature at point A respectively. Thereafter, IO prepared a Rukka and handed over to him for registration of FIR. He went to PS and after getting the case registered he returned to the spot and handed over copy of FIR alongwith original rukka to IO/ASI Nand Kishor. On 04.10.2018 accused Neeraj was apprehended from J block West Sagarpur. He was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW4/E and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW4/F bearing his signature at point A respectively. IO also recorded his disclosure statement which is Ex.PW4/G bearing his signature at point A and in pursuance of the disclosure statement accused led them to second floor of H. No. 16/230 and from the kitchen he got recovered one buttondar knife from which he had kept in between the utensils. IO prepared the sketch of it which is State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 19 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:41:01 +0530 20 Ex.PW4/H bearing his signature at point A and converted into pullanda which was duly sealed with the seal of NK and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/1 bearing his signature at point A. After that they returned to the PS. IO recorded his statement. He identified the case property shown to him. MHC(M) produced the case property. MHC(M) has produced the case property i.e. 5 sealed parcels bearing details of FSL no.2018/20-11711 and bio no. 3109/2018. Out of 5 parcels i.e. S1, S2 and S3 parcels are duly sealed with the seal of "P Sh. FSL Delhi" and two parcels i.e. S4 and S9 are duly sealed with the seal of court i.e. "RS". Parcel S1 was opened which contains one blood stain gauze and witness identifies the same as lifted from the spot and the same Ex.PW-4/P1. Parcel S2 was opened, which contains one blood stain earth material and witness identifies the same as lifted from the spot and the same Ex.PW-4/P2. Parcel S3 was opened which contains earth control and witness identifies the same as lifted from the spot and the same Ex.PW-4/P3. Parcel S4 was also opened which contains blood stain T-shirt and witness identifies the same as seized from the spot and the said T-shirt was already Ex.PW/2/ME-1. Parcel S9 was opened which contains knife and State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 20 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:41:11 +0530 21 witness correctly identifies the same as got recovered by the accused from the kitchen of second floor of his house and the said/knife was already Ex.PW-1/ME-1.
11.1. PW4 during his cross-examination deposed that as per DD no. 44A, a call at about 11:25 PM was received by DO and the same was marked to ASI Nand Kishore. The departure was already made in the call by the DO. The departure used to be entered as per the call received in the PS. There was a difference of about 15 minutes when DD no. 45A was received and the same was also informed by DO. He could not say whether the DD no. 45A was based on information of/by any individual about any incident. He also said that IO Nand Kishore may be aware about it. He along with ASI Nand Kishore reached at Shakuntala Hospital around 11:40-11:50 PM. He stated that in Shakuntala Hospital, they got no information about injured/complainant or any incident pertaining to the present case. He could not say who informed about the shifting of patient from Shakuntala Hospital to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital in Shakuntala Hospital. He also said that, IO must be knowing about the particulars detailed by State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 21 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:41:21 Warsi +0530 22 him and information received by him. He was following the instructions of IO only. He did not remember the time when they reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. They immediately went to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital from Shakuntala Hospital when they came to know about the shifting of the injured. In Mata Chanan Devi Hospital they came to know that injured was shifted to DDU Hospital. No MLC was received from Mata Chanan Devi Hospital about the shifting of the injured. He did not remember by what time, he reached DDU Hospital from Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. No MLC was received in DDU Hospital. He did not remember upto what duration they stayed at DDU Hospital. It was night at that time. He did not remember as to whether the statement of father of the injured was taken in his presence or not. He also said that statement was recorded in his presence. He had not signed on the said statement. He personally had not met the injured in DDU Hospital. They returned to the spot but he did not remember the exact time. When he reached the spot, SHO, PS Sagarpur and Crime Team came there. He could not admit or deny the suggestion as to whether at the arrival of Crime Team, he was not present at the spot. IO had State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 22 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:41:30 +0530 23 called the photographer. He denied the other suggestion given by the Ld. defence counsel.
12. PW5 HC Amit deposed that on 04.10.2018 he was posted as photographer in the district. On that day he was on duty (on 03.10.2018) from 08:00 AM to 08:00 AM (next day). On 04.10.2018 at 02:30 AM he received a call and joined SI Rakesh in the office to go Sagarpur, New Delhi. They went in their govt.
vehicle and reached at the spot at about 03:00 AM. He saw that in front of H. No. RZ-17/230, J-Block, West Sagarpur blood was lying and a red colour T-shirt with soaking of blood was also lying there. He took photograph of the same from different angle. After developing of those photographs on A-4 size paper, he handed over the same to the IO. He did not remember, if he had given those photographs in CD also. He has brought the coloured print outs of 14 digital photographs of the scene of incident dated 04.10.2018 along with CD of the same. The said photographs Ex.PW-5/A-1 to Ex.PW-5/A-14 and CD Ex.PW- 5/A-15. It is also relevant to mention here that, the photographs objected by the defence as they are not part of the record or State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 23 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:41:40 +0530 24 authenticated by IO.
12.1. PW5 during his cross-examination admitted that he has taken the photographs Ex.PWQ-5/A-1 to Ex.PW-5/A-14 from his computer system. He need not to take permission to take out the print outs from the system as the system is maintained in his office. The incharge of the system is In-Charge Crime Team. He stated that he has taken permission from the Incharge to take the print outs from the system for the purpose of presenting it in the Hon'ble Court. He admitted that he has no written direction by any authority or by the court to take the print outs from system kept in his office and submitted before the court.
12.2. PW6 Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai deposed that he has been authorized by the Medical Superintendent Dr. A.C. Shukla to appear on behalf of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar as he has left the services of the hospital and his present whereabout are not known. He has seen the MLC No. 9621/18 dated 03.10.2018 of Amit Kumar S/o Sh. Rajpal Singh, aged about 39 years. As per State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 24 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:41:53 +0530 25 MLC on that day at 11:25 PM Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar had examined the injured Amit Kumar with alleged history of stab injury. He can identify the signature and handwriting of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar as per record brought by him. The said MLC Ex. PW-6/A bearing the signature of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar at point A. The authority letter Ex.PW-6/B. 12.3. PW6 during his cross-examination deposed that he is working in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital since 2006 as Admin Supervisor and Legal Coordinator. Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar had joined the hospital in September 2018 and left the hospital in January 2019. All the doctors who joined the hospital put signature in his presence and he can identify the signature and handwriting of all the doctors. The MLC Ex.PW-6/A was not prepared in his presence. He denied the suggestion that he could not identify the signature and handwriting of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar and he was instructed by the medical superintendent to give statement in this regard.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 25 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed Syed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Warsi Zishan Ali Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.16 19:42:03 +0530 26
13. PW7 Dr. Prem Arora deposed that in the year 2018, he was posted at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janakpuri, Delhi as a Senior Consultant. Dr. Anurag Dadu, MS Consultant (Surgery) was in his team. He has seen MLC of injured Amit Kumar dated 03.10.2018 already Ex.PW6/A. Opinion regarding nature of injury has been given by Dr. Anurag Dadu on the basis of hospital record sheet and as per his opinion, nature of injury sustained by injured was grievous. The MLC bears signature of Dr. Anurag Dadu at point 'A'. He has seen Dr. Anurag Dadu writing and signing documents during the course of his duty.
14. PW8 Dr. Anurag Dadu deposed that as per MLC, on 03.10.2018, at around 11:25 pm, one patient by the name of Amit Kumar was brought to the hospital with the alleged history of stab injury. On local examination, following injuries were found:
(i) CLW approx 4 cm below liphoid process i.e. active bleeding.
(ii) CLW at critical region approx 8 cm.
(iii) CLW at Left Axiliary region approx 2/1 cm.
(iv) CLW at umbilical region approx 2/1 cm.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 26 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:42:15 +0530 27 14.1. The MLC was already Ex.PW6/A and the nature of injury as per the MLC is grievous. The MLC bears his signature at Point A. After the emergency ward, the patient was referred to surgical department for surgery. He and Dr. Prem Arora (already examined as PW-7) performed the operation / procedure Exploratory Laprotomy with repair of multiple intentional perforation with peritoneal lavage with left side intercostals tube drainage on 04.10.2018. The patient was discharged from the hospital on 06.10.2018. The discharge summary of the patient Amit Kumar duty signed by Dr. Prem Arora at Point A Ex.PW8/A. 14.2. PW8 during his cross-examination admitted that he could not tell who had written at Point X on the MLC, Ex.PW6/A, that the injury was caused by knife (stab injury). He could not tell who had brought the patient to the hospital and as to whether any police official had accompanied him as he was posted as Surgical Department and not in the emergency. At the time when the patient was brought for surgery, he was conscious State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 27 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:42:24 Warsi +0530 28 and oriented. The nature of injuries as per the MLC were caused with some sharp pointed object. He could not tell whether the said injuries were caused by the knife or not, as knife was never produced before him.
15. PW9 Dr. D.P. Dhami deposed that on 03.01.2018, one patient namely Amit Kumar was admitted in Emergency ward of Shakuntala Hospital with the alleged history of multiple stab wounds. He was conscious and oriented when he was admitted in the hospital. Since, he had suffered multiple stab wounds, after giving first aid, he was referred to higher center for further investigation and management. As per the MLC of injured, the opinion is dangerous. The MLC Ex.PW9/A bearing his signature at point A. 15.1. PW9 during his cross-examination deposed that at the time when patient Amit Kumar was brought to the hospital, he had seen the injuries suffered by him. It was four in number.
The opinion given by him on MLC was after perusing the injuries sustained by the patient. It is correct that he has not State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 28 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:42:34 +0530 29 mentioned the kind of injuries sustained by the patient upon MLC, Ex.PW9/A. He did not remember as to whether the patient was brought by some policemen to the hospital or not. He said his father Mr. Rajpal brought the patient to the hospital. Since the facilities in the hospital were not proper to treat the patient as per the injuries suffered, hence the patient was referred for better treatment to higher center. He denied the suggestion that the patient's father Rajpal insisted him to refer the patient to another hospital. He opined the nature of injury as dangerous as all stab injuries are dangerous in nature. He denied the suggestion that all stab injuries are not dangerous in nature rather the depth of injury and place at body decides the nature of injury. The patient as well his father informed that the injury has been sustained by a knife. It is correct that the name of weapon of offence has not been mentioned by him in Ex.PW9/A. Since he was not confirmed about the weapon of offence, hence he did not mention the same in Ex.PW9/A. He denied the suggestion that the opinion about the nature of injury has been suggested by the father of the patient and he had not personally examined injuries sustained by patient. He denied the suggestion that due to such State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 29 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:42:47 +0530 30 reason, he did not mention how many injuries were sustained by the patient and on which part of the body of the patient.
16. PW10 ASI Nand Kishore deposed that in the year 2018, he was posted at PS Sagarpur as ASI. In the intervening night of 03/04.10.2018, he was on emergency duty from 08:00 pm to 08:00 am. On receipt of DD No. 44A, he alongwith Ct.
Mahender reached Shakuntala Hospital where he obtained the MLC of injured Amit Kumar S/o Rajpal. Injured was not found in the hospital. He came to know that injured Amit Kumar had been shifted to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He alongwith Ct. Mahender reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where also he obtained MLC of injured from the hospital, whereupon nature of injury was opined as grievous. However, injured was not found there and he was reported to have been shifted in DDU Hospital. Thereafter, they reached DDU hospital. Injured was found under treatment there. Injured was stated to be unfit for statement. Sh. Rajpal Singh (father of injured) met him in the hospital. He narrated the entire facts of the incident. He recorded his statement, Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Mahender State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 30 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:43:03 +0530 31 came to the spot i.e. RZ-17/A/230, J-Block, West Sagarpur, Delhi where in front of the house. Blood was found lying there. He called crime team officials at the spot. One blood-stained t- shirt was also found lying there. Crime team officials inspected the spot and clicked the photographs. Blood was also lying inside the house. He lifted earth control as well as blood-stained earth control from the spot vide memo, Ex.PW4/A, bearing his signature at Point B. He also seized the blood-stained t-shirt vide memo, Ex.PW4/B, bearing his signature at Point B. During those proceedings, complainant Rajpal Singh informed telephonically that he had also sustained injury in the said incident and he was taking treatment in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He left Ct. Mahender at the spot and reached Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where he obtained the MLC of Rajpal Singh. In the hospital, concerned doctor gave two blood samples and two separate parcels containing clothes of Rajpal Singh and his injured son Amit Kumar. He seized the same vide memo, Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D, bearing his signatures at Point B. Thereafter, he came back to the spot. He made his endorsement, Ex.PW10/A, bearing his signature at Point A and gave the same to Ct. Mahender. He State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 31 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:43:16 +0530 32 went to PS and got the present FIR registered. Complainant Rajpal came to the spot and shown the place of incident. He prepared site plan at his instance, Ex.PW10/B, bearing his signature at Point A. After registration of the FIR, Ct. Mahender came back to the spot and gave the copy of FIR and tehrir to him. He arrested accused Neeraj Kumar (correctly identified accused Neeraj) on the same day from his house vide memo, Ex.PW4/E, bearing signature of accused at Point B and his signature at Point C. He conducted his personal search vide memo, Ex.PW4/F. During interrogation, he had admitted his involvement and disclosed that he had thrown the weapon of offence i.e. knife on the way after committing the incident and he could get recovered the same. He recorded his disclosure statement, Ex.PW4/G. Thereafter, on sustained interrogation, he further disclosed that he had concealed the knife in his house and can get recovered the same. Thereafter, at his instance, one knife was recovered from the kitchen situated at the second floor of his house. He prepared the sketch of the said knife, Ex.PW4/H. He seized the same vide memo, Ex.PW4/I. On 05.10.2018, he recorded the statement of injured Amit Kumar and the same State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 32 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:43:25 Warsi +0530 33 Ex.PW10/C. He obtained the nature of injury sustained by complainant Rajpal and his son Amit Kumar. MLC of injured Amit Kumar of Shakuntala Hospital is Ex.PW9/A. MLC of injured Amit Kumar of Mata Chanan Devi Hospital is already Ex.PW6/A and his discharge summary is Ex.PW8/A. MLC of complainant Rajpal is Ex.PW10/D. He sent the exhibits to the FSL vide road certificate. Attested copy of DD No. 44A and 45A are collectively Ex.PW10/E. 16.1. Further, PW10 deposed that on conclusion of the investigation, he found sufficient evidence against accused Neeraj Kumar and filed charge-sheet against him accordingly for the offences punishable u/s 307/506 IPC. By that time, FSL result was awaited. He identify the case property, shown to him as MHC(M) produced parcel No. S4 bearing particulars of the FSL and sealed with the court seal. Seal was removed. On opening the parcel, one blood-stained t-shirt was taken out and shown to him and he identifies the same as seized from the spot vide memo, Ex.PW4/B. The t-shirt is Ex.PW2/ME-1. MHC(M) produced parcel No. S9 bearing particulars of the FSL and sealed State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 33 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:43:34 +0530 34 with the court seal. Seal was removed. On opening the parcel, one knife was taken out and shown to the witness who identifies the same as recovered at the instance of the accused vide memo Ex.PW4/I. The knife is Ex.PW1/ME-1. (the Court made the observation: in the testimony of PW-1, knife is exhibited as Ex.PW1/ME-3, however, in the testimony of PW-4, same is exhibited as Ex.PW1/ME-1).
16.2. PW10 during his cross examination deposed that he received information of the present incident at about 11:30 pm on 03.10.2018. This information was intimated through duty officer, however, he did not remember his name. He did not know whether any call on 100 number was made by accused Neeraj regarding the incident. He did not make any DD entry of departure from PS to attend the call regarding the said incident.
He also said that, he had already left the PS to attend some another call. He was appointed IO in this case on oral direction of SHO at the same time when the information from DO was received. The information received at that point of time was about some quarrel taken place at RZ-17, West Sagarpur, New State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 34 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:43:46 +0530 35 Delhi. He did not go to the spot just after receipt of aforesaid DD as he received another DD No. 45A in respect of the MLC in the Shakuntala Hospital. This call was also received by DO and informed to him. He was about 11:45 pm. It is correct that till 11:45 pm, he had information about some quarrel and there was no further information regarding the incident. He reached Shakuntala Hospital at about 11:00 pm alongwith Ct. Mahender. He also said about 12:00 midnight. He did not meet any person related with either of the victims or resident of the place of incident. He inquired the doctor present in Shakuntala hospital, whose name he did not remember, about the victim or his associates. He informed that the family members of the victim had brought the patient to the hospital, however, he did not disclose as for what reason the victim was taken by family members to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He collected MLC at Shakuntala hospital. He did not record the statement of the resident doctor there. At around 12:30 am on 04.10.2018, he reached Mata Chanan Devi Hospital alongwith Ct. Mahender. He did not find victim or his relatives even in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He did not record statement of any doctor as to know State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 35 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:43:53 +0530 36 the reasons of not getting admitted or taking treatment at the hospital. He reached DDU hospital at around 01:00 am on 04.10.2018. He did not prepare any document in DDU hospital.
Till that time also, he did not have any specific information about the incident. In DDU hospital, he asked about the victim wherein one person namely Rajpal approached him and disclosed that he is father of the victim namely Amit. Since victim was unfit for statement, he could not record his statement on that day. He could not say whether as per the MLC of Shakuntala Hospital and Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, the victim was fit for statement. No other public witness of the present case was present in the hospital when he recorded the statement of Rajpal. He recorded his statement at around 1 am on 04.10.2018. No MLC was prepared at DDU Hospital. He did not record the statement of the concerned doctor as to why no MLC was prepared. He did not do any other investigation at DDU hospital and he straightaway came to the spot after recording the statement of father of victim at DDU Hospital. He denied the suggestions of the defence and no material contradiction were brought on record by the defence in his further cross examination.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 36 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan by Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:44:04 Warsi +0530 37
17. PW11 Ms. Poonam Sharma deposed that on 18.12.2018, she was working as Assistant Director (Biology) FSL, Rohini, Delhi. On that day, nine sealed parcel out of which five parcels S1 to S4 and S9 were sealed with the seal of NK and four parcels Mark S5 to S8 were sealed with the seal of MCDH.
Seals were intact and tallied with the forwarding letter. She examined the aforesaid exhibit and gave her detailed report is Ex.PW11/A bearing her signature at point A. The report of allelic is Ex. PW11/B bearing her signature at point A. She can identify the case property if shown to her. One sealed parcel Mark S1 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container, it is found to contain gauze cloth piece having brown stains. Witness identified the gauze piece to be blood gauze piece examined by her. Same is already Exhibited as Ex. PW-4/P1. One sealed parcel Mark S2 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container, State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 37 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:44:15 +0530 38 it is found to contain earth material. Witness identified the earth material as blood stained earth material to be examined by her. Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW4/P2. One sealed parcel Mark S3 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container, it is found to contain earth material. Witness identified the earth material as earth control to be examined by her. Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW4/P3. One sealed parcel Mark S4 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one blood stained t- shirt. Witness identified the aforesaid t-shirt to be of injured Amit as per forwarding letter and the same to be examined by her. Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW2/ME-1. One sealed parcel Mark S5 sealed with the seal of P.Sh. FSL DELHI is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain dark brown foul smelling liquid in a tube. Witness identified the liquid blood sample of injured Amit to be the same which was examined by her. Same is now exhibited as Ex. P- 11/1. One sealed parcel Mark S6 sealed with the seal of Court is State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 38 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:44:27
Warsi +0530
39
produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one blood stained short/ half pant. Witness identified the half pant to be of injured Amit and same was examined by her. Same is exhibited as Ex.PW2/ME2. One sealed parcel Mark S7 sealed with the seal of P.Sh. FSL DELHI is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain dark brown foul smelling liquid in a tube.
Witness identified the liquid blood sample of injured Rajpal to be the same which was examined by her. Same is exhibited as Ex.P- 11/2. One sealed parcel Mark S8 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one baniyan and pazama. Witness identified the baniyan and pazama to be of injured Rajpal and same were examined by her. Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW1/ME1 and PW 1/ ME2 respectively. One sealed parcel Mark S9 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain one knife. Witness identified the same as Exhibited PW1/ME3 to be same which was examined by her.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 39 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:44:47 +0530 40 17.1. PW11 during her cross examination deposed that it is correct that DNA profile could not be generated from Ex. S2, S3, S6 and S9 i.e. knife (voluntarily due to degradation/ inhibition DNA profile could not be generated). She had opened all the samples on 03.09.2018. Voluntarily again said it was bio/DNA No. however, the exhibits were opened on 15.01.2019.
He had put the bio no. i.e. 3109/18 on 15.01.2019 on the tags affixed on the exhibits.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
18. After completion of prosecution evidence, all incriminating material as appearing in the evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He pleaded innocence and stated that complainant has falsely implicated him in the present case. He had not stabbed, Amit, rather he had gone to save him as he was involved in scuffle with his drivers who were drunk at that time. There is no recovery on his instance. The witnesses are in enmity with him as they are neighbours and Amit is also involved in running private taxi like him. There is a business State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 40 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Date:
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:45:00 Warsi +0530 41 rivalry and before this incident, he had already been involved with him twice earlier for which there was compromise in the police station. And the quarrel happened between Amit and his drivers. He was arrested due to previous enmity.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
19. DW1 Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar deposed that he knew the accused for the last about more than 20 years as he was also in the business of taxi driving. He used to go to the accused to take car on rent whenever needed. In the same respect, on 03.10.2018, at about 09:00-09:30 pm, he had gone to the accused place to take his Swift Dzire car on rent. When he reached at the accused house, there was some scuffle going on at the plot where the cars of accused Neeraj were parked. He called Neeraj who also, after hearing the noise, came down from his house. He tried to disperse the quarrel going on in between 4-5 persons present there. After 2-3 minutes, all the persons went from the spot and he talked to Neeraj. Neeraj also suffered some injury in his hand during the course of dispersing of this scuffle. Neeraj told that State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 41 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:45:24 Warsi +0530 42 the scuffle was going between the drivers of Amit who is neighbor of Neeraj and who is also in the business of running taxi for schools. The drivers used to drink in the parking lot and on this issue previously also there are nuisance in the area. Since the car of Neeraj was parked behind the car of said Amit and all persons fled away from the spot, he returned back without taking the car. He also went to the PS when he came to know that Neeraj has been called in the PS on the allegation of his being involved in the said offence and he was falsely implicated in this case. However, the police did not take his statement. He had come to depose about the truth what he saw at the spot.
19.1. In the cross examination, it has came that, he had not brought any proof to show that he has a business of taxi. He did not remember the registration number of the said taxi car. He had no documentary proof showing that he had taken taxi of Neeraj 3-4 times prior to the incident. Neighbors had also reached at the spot. He could not tell the name of the persons who were present at the spot. He did not have any knowledge as to how many taxis Amit was having at the time of incident. He was not told by State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 42 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:45:36 Warsi +0530 43 anyone that drivers used to drink in the parking lot and on this issue previously also there was nuisance in the area. He did not remember as to how many times he had gone to the house of Neeraj in day time and how many times he had gone in night time. On 04.10.2018, at about 4/5:00 pm, he had gone to PS Sagarpur. He did not remember the name of the police official to whom he met and had told about the innocence of accused Neeraj. He had not gone to any senior police officials or any other authority to tell that accused Neeraj was falsely implicated in this case. He had not made any written complaint to any authority for the same. It is correct that he was not a summoned witness. He had come to the court on the asking of accused.
ARGUMENTS
20. Ld. Addl. PP for the State submits that injured witnesses PW1 Rajpal and PW2 Amit remained consistent in their testimony and their MLCs, as proved by other expert / doctor evidence, has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Neeraj was the aggressor, he called Amit and called State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 43 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:45:47 Warsi +0530 44 victim from the house and attacked with knife, in a pre planned manner, multiple times on vital parts like chest and stomach and also caused injuries to the father of Amit i.e. Rajpal. The defence was not able to cast any doubt on the prosecution story and the accused is liable for conviction and punishment under Section 307, 324 and 506 IPC.
21. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel for the accused submits that the mode and manner of the offence is not established by the prosecution. And there was no mensrea to commit the offence charged against the accused which is evident from the rukka itself wherein the complainant PW-1 stated that "dobara gadi khadi ki to jaan se maar dunga" meaning thereby even as per prosecution's case there was no intention to cause death on the part of the accused. This submission is subject to, if in worst scenario the prosecution case be believed, however, his original submission is that the accused has not committed the offence.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 44 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed by Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Date:
Ali Warsi 2026.02.16 19:46:00 +0530 45
22. He also submits that the prosecution failed to prove its case as spot is disputed, the recovery of blood stained t-shirt of victim is planted, weapon of offence not proved, no independent witness to support the place of crime as well as version of the complainant, the vehicle is which victim was allegedly taken to the hospital has not been seized nor any witness has been examined to support the version of prosecution, no fingerprint of the accused on the alleged weapon of offence has been found and no corroboration of disclosure statement of accused with any piece of evidence and the victim was fit for statement at the time of admission in the hospital / prepared of MLC, however, his statement has been recorded with delay of one day. Lastly, Ld. Counsel has submitted that the case in the worst case is not u/s 307 IPC but is the case u/s 325 IPC if the case of the prosecution be believed in toto.
23. It is also submitted that the accused is falsely implicated due to previous rivalry while he was injured by other drivers. He has also relied upon the following judgments:-
1. Sarju Prasad Vs. State of Bihar MANU/SC/0342/1964 State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 45 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:46:33 Warsi +0530 46
2. Jai Narain Mishra and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar MANU/SC/0122/1971
3. Jagdish Murav Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
MANU/SC/8439/2006 Heard the arguments and perused the records.
APPRECIATION AND ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE (Evidence has to be examined whether the alleged facts are proved, disproved or not proved on the anvil the principle of beyond reasonable doubt) APPRECIATION AND FINDING FOR SECTION 307 AND 506 IPC.
24. To determine whether the act of accused falls within the ambit of Section 307 IPC, it is relevant to reproduce Section 307 IPC which reads as:-
"Section 307 Attempt to murder.
Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 46 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:46:43 +0530 47 with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by life-convicts.-- 2[When any person offending under this section is under sentence of 2[imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.]"
24.1. Thus, essential consideration to be proved by the prosecution for Sec 307 IPC are:-
i. The nature of that act; ii. The intention or knowledge of the person; iii. The circumstances under which the act is done; iv. It by that act death is caused he would be guilty of murder.
25. For attracting Section 307 IPC the importance is of the intention or knowledge and not the consequences of the actual act done for the purpose of carrying out the intention. The court has to consider whether the act, irrespective of its result, State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 47 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:47:01 +0530 48 was done with the intention or knowledge that such act death is caused he would be guilty of murder.
26. Intention and knowledge may also be gathered from weapon of offence used, nature of injuries and other attending circumstances of the incident.
27. Now the present case and the evidence on record has to be appreciated in the light of aforesaid principles i.e. whether the prosecution has successfully proved the essential ingredients of Section 307 IPC against accused Neeraj or not.
28. The important witness of the prosecution case is injured / complainant PW1 Sh. Raj Pal and injured PW2 Amit. PW1 Sh. Raj Pal, in his testimony has identified the accused and deposed that on 03.10.2018 at about 10:00 pm his son Amit received a telephone call and was talking to that person in a loud voice and when he asked him who was calling him then his son Amit told him that accused Neeraj who is their neighbour had called him. Amit also told him that accused Neeraj was abusing State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 48 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:47:10 Warsi +0530 49 him on the pretext of parking and was threatening to kill him and calling him outside the house. Then accused Neeraj knocked at their gate and asked his son to come out from the house and further threatened that he would see him. His son Amit opened the door of the house while he (PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh) was also there, accused Neeraj pulled his son Amit outside of their house and scuffled with him and took out knife and repeatedly caused knife injuries on the chest and abdomen of Amit. When he (PW1 Raj Pal Singh) tried to hold the hand of accused Neeraj and intervened in to the matter, then accused Neeraj attacked upon him with the knife and he raised his left hand in order to save himself from the attack of the accused and accused Neeraj caused three / four injuries on his left hand by the knife. Then accused raised the knife in the air and ran away while threatened them by stating that if they parked their vehicle in the vacant plot he would kill them. As Amit became unconscious after receiving the injuries, he took his son Amit to Shakuntala Hospital in a private vehicle from there after first aid to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, there to DDU Hospital where his son was medically examined and he also examined in the hospital. And police State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 49 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:47:20 +0530 50 reached the hospital and recorded his statement. It is also stated by him that in DDU hospital, one machine was not working so he again took Amit to Mata Chanan Devi hospital where Amit was given treatment and he was also given treatment at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. His clothes were stained with the blood as he was wearing vest and trouser at the time of incident. The clothes were taken by the doctor concerned.
29. On perusal of Ex.PW1/A i.e. the statement of PW1 Rajpal Singh his testimony in the court has duly corroborated his statement i.e. Ex.PW1/A recorded on 04.10.2018. Further he has identified Ex.PW1/ME-1, Ex.PW1/ME-2 and Ex.PW1/ME-3 which are baniyan, pajama and knife respectively.
30. Injured witness PW2 Amit Kumar, son of PW1 Rajpal has corroborated and thereby further strengthened the testimony of his father PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh who identified accused Neeraj and deposed that accused Neeraj called him on his mobile phone as his vehicle was parked in a vacant plot near his house and accused Neeraj asked him to remove his vehicle State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 50 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:47:30 Warsi +0530 51 from there and dispute between him and Neeraj took place on phone. Then accused Neeraj asked him to come down stairs and he alongwith his father went downstairs and opened the gate of their house where accused Neeraj was standing outside and abused them, started scuffling with him and when his father intervened then accused Neeraj took out a knife and attacked upon his chest and abdomen repeatedly. He sustained injuries on his chest and abdomen and blood started oozing out from his injuries he fell down and became unconscious. It is also deposed by him that Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where he gained his consciousness police recorded his statement. Further he has identified Ex.PW2/ME-1 and Ex.PW2/ME-2 which are t-shirt and short / half pant respectively.
31. The deposition of PW1 Rajpal Singh and PW2 Amit Kumar is further strengthened by the MLC Ex.PW6/A of PW1 Amit Kumar which is proved by the testimonies of Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai, office supervisor - cum - legal coordinator, Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, who identified signature of Dr. Sumit Vidhya Sagar and PW7 Dr. Prem Arora, posted at BLK MAX State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 51 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:47:39 +0530 52 Super Specialty hospital, Pusa Road, Delhi who identified signature of Dr. Anurag Dadu on MLC and PW8 Dr. Anurag Dadu, Sr. Consultant, Mata Chanan Devi Hospital who in his testimony has corroborated the injuries caused to injured PW1 Amit as shown in his MLC Ex.PW6/A. The relevant portion of the testimony of PW8 Dr. Anurag Dadu is as:-
"As per MLC, on 03.10.2018, at around 11:25 pm, one patient by the name of Amit Kumar was brought to the hospital with the alleged history of stab injury. On local examination, following injuries were found:
(i) CLW approx 4 cm below liphoid process i.e. active bleeding.
(ii) CLW at critical region approx 8 cm.
(iii) CLW at Left Axiliary region approx 2/1 cm.
(iv) CLW at umbilical region approx 2/1 cm.
32. The MLC is already Ex.PW6/A and the nature of injury as per the MLC is grievous. The MLC bears his signature at point A. The defence was not able to impeach these testimonies in cross examination.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 52 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:47:49 +0530 53
33. In the testimony of PW9 Dr. D.P. Dhami, Director (Medical) Shakuntala Hospital, it is deposed that on 03.10.2013 one patient Amit Kumar was admitted in Emergency Ward of Shakuntala Hospital with the alleged history of multiple stab wounds and as per the MLC of injured the opinion is dangerous and the MLC Ex.PW9/A is proved by PW9. In cross examination the testimony remained unshaken.
34. By the deposition of PW4 Mahender Singh he corroborated the fact that he was on emergency duty and DD No. 44 (A) and DD No. 45 (A) are calls from duty officer and Shakuntala Hospital respectively. He has further corroborated that in the hospital the father of injured met them and the IO ASI Nand Kishore recorded his statement and IO had lifted the exhibits from spot and IO received phone call of Rajpal father of injured that he has also sustained injuries. He proved seizure memo of exhibits from the spot i.e. Ex.PW4/A and seizure memo of blood stained t-shirt Ex.PW4/B, seizure memo of blood stained clothes of injured Amit Kumar Ex.PW4/C, blood stained clothes of injured Rajpal Singh Ex.PW4/D, arrest memo of State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 53 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:47:58 Warsi +0530 54 Neeraj Ex.PW4/E, search memo of accused Neeraj Ex.PW4/A, disclosure statement of accused Neeraj Ex.PW4/G, sketch of buttondar knife Ex.PW4/H as prepared by IO, Ex.PW4/P1, P2, P3 i.e. one blood stain gauze, one blood stain earth and material i.e. earth control respectively. Further, IO PW10 ASI Nand Kishore has proved his endorsement on Ex.PW10/A i.e. endorsement on rukka, Ex.PW10/B site plan / spot map, Ex.PW10/D MLC of complainant Rajpal and Ex.PW10/E (colly) attested copy of DD No. 44A and DD No. 45A and his testimony remained irrebutable in cross examination.
35. The prosecution case is mainly based on eye witness in case of direct evidence, and the deposition of police witnesses who were a part of the investigation is only ancillary to the eye witness description given by the victims. The outcome of the trial essentially hinges upon the eye witness account of the injured / complainant i.e. PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh and his injured son PW2 Amit Kumar. The complainant injured, PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh in his testimony has described the mode and manner how accused Neeraj has caused injury to his son by stabbing multiple times i.e. State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 54 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:48:13 +0530 55 repeatedly with knife on the chest and stomach of his son PW2 Amit Kumar and the same is corroborated by PW2 Amit Kumar and an injured witness has great weightage and special status in law. As injury to the witness is an inbuilt guarantee of his presence at the scene and the injured person will not falsely implicate any innocent person and let go the actual culprit unpunished.
36. This position of injured witness can be understood from the following judgments:-
36.1. In Shivalingappa Kallayanappa V State of Karnataka, 1994 Supp (3) SCC 235 it was held that the deposition of the injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies, for the reason that his presence on the scene stands established in case it is proved that he suffered the injury during the said incident.
36.2. In State of MP V Mansingh, (2003) 10 SCC 414, the State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 55 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:48:36 +0530 56 Supreme Court observed that the evidence of injured witnesses have greater evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly. Minor discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of otherwise acceptable evidence.
36.3. In Abdul Sayeed V State of MP, (2010) 10 SCC 259, the Supreme Court held that the question of the weight to be attached to the evidence of a witness that was himself injured in the course of the occurrence has been extensively discussed by this Court. Where a witness to the occurrence has himself been injured in the incident, the testimony of such a witness is generally considered to be very reliable, as he is a witness that comes with a builtin guarantee of his presence at the scene of the crime and is unlikely to spare his actual assailant(s) in order to falsely implicate someone. Convincing evidence is required to discredit an injured witness.
36.4. In State of Uttar Pradesh V Naresh, (2011) 4 SCC 324, evidentiary value to be attached to the statement of an State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 56 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:48:50 Warsi +0530 57 injured witness was expressed in the following words:-
"The evidence of an injured witness must be given due weightage being a stamped witness, thus, his presence cannot be doubted. His statement is generally considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence and this lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence. Thus, the testimony of an injured witness is accorded a special status in law. The witness would not like or want to let his actual assailant go unpunished merely to implicate a third person falsely for the commission of the offence."
37. Now, reverting back to the case in hand the injured witnesses has consistently supported the allegation that accused Neeraj has caused injuries to them and that too on the vital part of PW2 Amit Kumar and he has also threatened them to kill them while running away and the injuries are caused by sharp edged weapon i.e. knife. This court of the view that as the injured witness has special status in law. Until and unless there are major contradictions and discrepancies in their testimonies they have to State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 57 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:48:59 +0530 58 be relied on. Also in the present case no major contradiction or discrepancies were brought on record by the defence so that there testimonies can be discarded. There are only small variations in statement of PW2, Amit regarding parking of motorcycle or car or not stating by PW1 Rajpal Singh in Ex.PW1/A of injuries to his hand. Thus, this court finds it difficult to agree with Ld. Counsel for accused that due to material contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses the prosecution case has no legs to stand on. In the opinion of this court, it is not possible for a truthful witness to remember exact time and sequence of events as due to long passage of time the memory fades and due to court atmosphere and cross-examination an environment of pressure is created and it is natural that the witness will get anxious. And, minor variations in the testimony of witnesses is immaterial as in the present case the witnesses has remained consistent with regard to the occurrence of incident, their presence at the incident and the injuries has further corroborated / strengthened the occurrence of incident and their presence as well as witnessing the incident.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 58 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:49:15 +0530 59
38. It is settled position of law that minor variations and contradictions cannot lead to disbelieve a witness as held in :-
Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat (1983) 3 SCC 217 it was held as follows:
"5. ... We do not consider it appropriate or permissible to enter upon a reappraisal or reappreciation of the evidence in the context of the minor discrepancies painstakingly highlighted by the learned counsel for the appellant. Overmuch importance cannot be attached to minor discrepancies. The reasons are obvious:
(1) By and large a witness cannot be expected to possess a photographic memory and to recall the details of an incident. It is not as if a video tape is replayed on the mental screen.
(2) Ordinarily it so happens that a witness is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element of surprise. The mental faculties therefore cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb the details.
(3) The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. An object or movement might emboss its image on one person's mind, whereas it might go unnoticed on the part of another.
(4) By and large people cannot accurately recall a conversation and reproduce the very words used by them or heard by them. They can only recall the State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 59 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:49:29 Warsi +0530 60 main purport of the conversation. It is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a human tape-recorder. (5) In regard to exact time of an incident, or the time duration of an occurrence, usually, people make their estimates by guess work on the spur of the moment at the time of interrogation. And one cannot expect people to make very precise or reliable estimates in such matters. Again, it depends on the time-sense of individuals which varies from person to person.
(6) Ordinarily a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately the sequence of events which takes place in rapid succession or in a short time span. A witness is liable to get confused, or mixed up when interrogated later on.
(7) A witness, though wholly truthful, is liable to be overawed by the court atmosphere and the piercing cross-examination made by the counsel and out of nervousness mix up facts, get confused regarding sequence of events, or fill up details from imagination on the spur of the moment. The subconscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates on account of the fear of looking foolish or being disbelieved though the witness is giving a truthful and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him--perhaps it is a sort of a psychological defence mechanism activated on the spur of the moment."
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 60 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:49:37 +0530 61
39. This court is not able to agree with the submission of Ld. defence counsel as no public person was included in the investigation and the accused is falsely implicated. It is relevant to consider here that quality of evidence is important than the quantity of evidence for proving or disapproving the fact and appreciation of evidence is on the principle which make the court to believe in the existence or non-existence of a fact that is proved or not proved or disproved. The test is for the trustworthiness and credibility of evidence is very well explained in the observation of Hon'ble Supreme court in Kuna @ Sanjaya Behera Vs. State of Odisha, 2017 SCC Online Supreme Court 1336 that the conviction can be based on the testimony of single eye witness if he or she passes the test of reliability and that is not the number of witnesses but the quality of evidence that is important.
40. The defence of the accused that he has been implicated on the basis of previous enmity and the quarrel has took place between injured PW2 Amit Kumar and his drivers. As no witness is produced to show to the identity of the drivers State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 61 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals 2026.02.16 Warsi 19:50:19 +0530 62 and only DW1 Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar was produced in evidence and the testimony of DW1 Basant Kumar Tanwar does not inspire the confidence as he narrated the incident that when he reached at the accused house the scuffle was going on between 4 to 5 persons and he called the accused who came down from his house and dispersed the quarrel and Neeraj also suffered some injuries in his hand during the course of dispersing this scuffle and Neeraj told him that the scuffle was going between the drivers of the Amit who are also in the business of running of taxi in the schools and he also stated that the car of Neeraj was parked behind the car of Amit. At the same time he also stated that he went to the PS when he came to know that Neeraj has been called in the PS on the allegation of his being involved in the said offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. But the witness has not brought any proof to show he is in business of taxi or he had taken taxi of Neeraj prior to the incident and he was not able to tell the name of the persons who were present at the spot. Thus the testimony of DW1 Basant Kumar Tanwar is not sufficient to support the defence of the accused or discredit the prosecution witnesses. It is also against State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 62 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:50:31 Warsi +0530 63 the prudence that why a person will implicate his Saviour and let the real culprit go away. It is profitable to rely on Matibar Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015) 16 Supreme Court Cases 168:
"14. That brings us to the question whether there is any room for our interference with the conviction of Matibar Singh, appellant, as recorded by the High Court in the impugned judgment. We must, at the outset, say that the High Court's judgment, which has been read out at length before us, has dealt with the evidence adduced at the trial as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with commendable clarity. We have, therefore, no hesitation in affirming the reasoning and the conclusions arrived at by the High Court. The fact that there was previous enmity between the complainant's party and the rival group of which the accused happen to be members or sympathisers is a factor that need to be taken as adverse to the prosecution. Enmity is a double-edged weapon. It was because of the said enmity that the victim was assaulted while he was on his way to attend the function. The existence of such enmity lends support to the prosecution case rather than demolish the same.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 63 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:51:25 Warsi +0530 64 The trial court was obviously in error in taking a contrary view which the High Court has rightly corrected by the impugned judgment. So also, the High Court was, in our opinion, perfectly justified in holding that the deposition of the victim and the eyewitnesses examined at the trial had not been shaken in cross- examinations to render it unsafe for the Court to rest an order of conviction against the accused persons.
15. The High Court has, in our opinion, correctly held that the sequence of events leading to the incident as also the version given by the witnesses was free from any infirmities, hence, fully reliable. The fact that there was not even a suggestion either to the victim of the assault or to the doctors examined at the trial that the stab injuries sustained at the back were self-inflicted clearly shows that the version of the complainant could not be rejected just because the so-called independent witnesses had not been examined. It is in any case difficult for us to accept that the victim when assaulted in broad daylight would have allowed the real offender to go scot-free to falsely implicate some innocent persons."
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 64 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:51:34 +0530 65 Thus, in the opinion of this court the defence has failed to establish previous enmity even if it is believed that there was previous enmity then in the light of aforesaid discussion, the same will go against the defence and in favour of prosecution.
41. In the present case, the evidence of PW1 Rajpal Singh and PW2 Amit Kumar is direct, cogent and credible. And the manner in which accused Neeraj has called on phone of PW2 Amit and called him out of his house and repeatedly attacked him with the knife, on vital parts, which was already kept by him establishes that in pre planned manner with the motive to cause life threatening injuries with dangerous weapon he has caused injuries to the victim PW2 Amit. It is held in the case of Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1956 SC 460:
"But it has repeatedly been pointed out by this Court that where the positive evidence against the accused is clear, cogent and reliable, the question of motive is of no importance."
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 65 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan by Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:51:44 +0530 66
42. The submission of Ld. defence counsel that no fingerprint of the accused on the alleged weapon offence is found is also not sustainable as the weapon was recovered at the instance of accused from his home amongst the utensils and the recovery was made from a place which is in the knowledge of accused and in the light of the cogent, credible and consistent statement of witnesses and when the recovery of weapon i.e. knife is proved this court is not in agreement with the submission of defence. Further, recovery of weapon used in the offence is more credible then the finger print as finger prints can be wiped away but the weapon used in the offence and its recovery on the instance of accused is more credible. It is prudent to rely on Manoj Kumar Soni Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) 17 Supreme Court Cases 401:
"Section 27 of the Evidence Act made by the accused himself seems to be well-established. The decision of the Privy Council in Pulukuri Kotayya. King Emperor holds the field even today wherein it was held that the provided information must be directly relevant to the discovered fact, including details about the physical object, its place of origin, and the accused person's State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 66 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:51:53 +0530 67 awareness of these aspects. The Privy Council observed: (SCC OnLine PC) "... The difficulty, however great, of proving that a fact discovered on information supplied by the accused is a relevant fact can afford no justification for reading into Section 27 something which is not there, and admitting in evidence a confession barred by Section 26. Except in cases in which the possession, or concealment, of an object constitutes the gist of the offence charged, it can seldom happen that information relating to the discovery of a fact forms the foundation of the prosecution case. It is only one link in the chain of proof, and the other links must be forged in manner allowed by law."
43. As far as the submission of Ld. defence counsel with regard to case is of Section 325 IPC and not of Section 307 IPC this court is not in agreement with him as in the light of the testimonies of the witnesses the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the injuries were inflicted by knife multiple times on the vital part of PW2 Amit Kumar and looking to the State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 67 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:52:03 Warsi +0530 68 part of body, nature of weapon as well as repeated blows on vital part and nature of injuries being grievous this court is of the opinion that the assault was committed with the intention and knowledge that the act if will lead to death of PW2 Amit Kumar it will amount to murder and as the death is not caused the offence of attempt to murder punishable u/s 307 IPC is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution and the case laws relied by Ld. Counsel for defence is not attracted to the present case as the facts and circumstances of the present case is different.
44. It is also relevant to consider the section 506 IPC which is reproduced as follows:
"506. Punishment for criminal intimidation.--Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.--and if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or 1 [imprisonment State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 68 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan Warsi Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:52:14 +0530 69 for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both."
45. Thus looking to Section 506 IPC and applying the same to the case at hand after attacking PW2 Amit and PW1 Raj Pal Singh, accused Neeraj raised the knife in the air and ran away and threatened them by stating that if they parked their vehicle in the vacant plot he will kill them. As discussed in forgoing paras of these judgment the testimony of PW1 and PW2 were found cogent, consistent and credible. And the act of the accused is in the form of aggravated criminal intimation as he has caused threat to cause death by his willful communication to the victim as sense of genuine fear that they will be killed. And by the said act an offence u/s 506 IPC against the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
APPRECIATION AND FINDING QUA SECTION 324 IPC State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 69 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:52:24 +0530 70
46. It is stated by PW1 Rajpal Singh in his testimony that when he tried to hold the hand of accused Neeraj and intervened into the matter accused Neeraj attacked him by the knife and when raised his left hand in order to save himself from the attack of the accused then accused Neeraj caused three-four injuries on his left hand by the knife. He has also identified the knife i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-3 and also identified his blood stained baniyan and blood stained pajama i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-1 and PW1/ME-2 respectively. His testimony has been further corroborated by PW4 HC Mahender Singh, who has also identified the knife i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-1. And also corroborated by PW10 ASI Nand Kishore and the same is further corroborated by PW11 Ms. Poonam Sharma who has identified and examined Ex.PW1/ME-1 i.e. baniyan and Ex.PW1/ME-2 i.e. pajama of injured Rajpal. However, the MLC of complainant Rajpal i.e. Ex.PW10/D was exhibited via PW10 ASI Nand Kishore but no doctor / concerned authority person has proved the same and for the purpose of section 324 IPC as it provides punishment for voluntarily causing hurt using dangerous weapon for means such State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 70 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally signed Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Ali Warsi Zishan Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Warsi 2026.02.16 19:52:34 +0530 71 as cutting, stabbing etc. It is essential to reproduce section 324 IPC which is reproduced as follows:-
"324. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
--Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both."
47. It is also relevant to mention here that, an accused could only be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC if he had caused injuries by using certain specified weapons, in the instant case, in case of non proving of medical report as per law, the nature of injuries suffered by the complainant, this court State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 71 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:52:43 Warsi +0530 72 is of the view that the accused cannot be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC.
48. It can also not be ignored that when the evidence is cogent, consistent and credible as the defence has failed to impeach the credibility of the witness then the evidence can be relied on. The prosecution has successfully proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had indeed beaten the PW2 Sh. Rajpal Singh complainant due to which the complainant had sustained injuries/hurt as made out out from the ocular testimony of the PW2 Sh. Rajpal Singh. It would be trite here to mention that production of an injury report for the offence under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing the case for the offence under Section 323 IPC.
49. Even though the accused is not charged with the offence punishable us 323 IPC, section 222(2) Cr.P.C lays down that when a person is charged with an offence but the facts proved constitute a minor offence then he can be convicted of the minor offence despite the fact that he may not have been charged State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 72 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16 19:52:53 Warsi +0530 73 with that offence. It is also settled proposition of law that mere omission to frame charge or error or irregularly in framing charge would not vitiate the entire trial provided no prejudice was caused to the accused, as the accused was aware about the nature of accusations against him and was afforded opportunity to defend him. In the present case, accused was initially charged with the offence for causing voluntary hurt by using dangerous weapon. However, while the prosecution failed to establish the necessary ingredients of section 324 IPC, it however, succeeded in proving his guilt for voluntary causing hurt which is punishable u/s 323 IPC. It is settled law that s. 323 IPC is the minor offence as compared to s. 324 IPC within the ambit of s.
222 CrP.C. Accordingly, prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused for voluntarily causing hurt to PW2 Sh. Rajpal Singh punishable u/s 323 IPC.
50. For accused Neeraj as discussed in forgoing paras of this judgment, the essential ingredients to make out a case of an attempt to commit murder of PW2 Amit punishable u/s 307 IPC and hurt to PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh punishable u/s 323 IPC is State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 73 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:53:03
Warsi +0530
74
proved beyond reasonable doubt as well as offence u/s 506 IPC for threatening to cause death to PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh and PW2 Sh. Amit is also proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The accused namely Neeraj is convicted for the offence u/s 307/323/506 IPC. Digitally Syed signed by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
2026.02.16 ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT Warsi 19:53:14 +0530 on 16th February 2026 (SYED ZISHAN ALI WARSI) Addl. Sessions Judge-04 Patiala House Courts New Delhi/16.02.2026 State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 74 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals 75
(i) Chart for witnesses examined Prosecution Name of witness Description witness No.
1. Sh. Rajpal Singh Complainant / injured eye witness
2. Sh. Amit Injured eye witness
3. Rakesh Kumar Inspector, participated in investigation
4. Mahender Singh Head Constable, participated in investigation
5. Amit Head Constable, participated in investigation
6. Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai Proved MLC of Amit Kumar, Authority Letter.
7. Dr. Prem Arora
8. Dr. Anurag Dadu Discharge summary of patient Amit Kumar
9. Dr. D.P. Dhami MLC of injured Amit Kumar
10. Nand Kishore ASI, investigating officer
11. Ms. Poonam Detailed report of FSL (Biology) Defence witness Name of witness Description No.
1. Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar Eye witness, friend of accused Neeraj State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 75 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 19:53:28 Warsi +0530
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by No.
1. Ex.PW1/A, statement of complainant PW1, Sh. Rajpal Singh
2. Ex.PW2/D1, statement of Amit Kumar PW2, Amit Kumar
3. Ex.PW3/A, SOC report bearing No. 1100/2018 PW3, Inspector Rakesh Kumar
4. Ex.PW4/A, seizure memo, PW4, HC Mahender Singh Ex.PW4/B, seizure memo, Ex.PW4/C, seizure memo, Ex.PW4/D, seizure memo, Ex.PW4/E, arrest memo, Ex.PW4/F, personal search memo, Ex.PW4/G, disclosure statement, Ex.PW4/H, sketch of buttondar knife, Ex.PW4/I, seizure memo of pullanda,
5. Ex.PW5/A-1 to Ex.PW5/A-14, photographs, PW5, HC Amit Ex.PW5/A-15, CD,
6. Ex.PW6/A, MLC of Amit, PW6, Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai Ex.PW6/B, Authority Letter,
7. ---- PW7, Dr. Prem Arora
8. Ex.PW8/A, Discharge summary of patient Amit PW8, Dr. Anurag Dadu Kumar
9. Ex.PW9/A, MLC of injured Amit Kumar, PW9, Dr. D.P. Dhami
10. Ex.PW10/A, endorsement, PW10, ASI Nand Kishore Ex.PW10/B, site plan, Ex.PW10/C, statement of injured Amit Kumar, Ex.PW10/D, MLC of complainant Rajpal, Ex.PW10/E, attested copy of DD No. 44A and 45A,
11. Ex.PW11/A, detailed report of FSL (Biology), PW11, Ex.PW11/B, Allelic report, Ms. Poonam Sharma Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by No.
1. -- DW1, Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 76 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi Ali Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Warsi 2026.02.16 19:53:39 +0530
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by No.
1. Ex.PW1/ME-1, baniyan, PW1, Sh. Rajpal Singh Ex.PW1/ME-2, pajama, Ex.PW1/ME-3, knife
2. Ex.PW2/ME-1, T-shirt, PW2, Amit Kumar Ex.PW2/ME-2, short/half pant,
3. ---- PW3, Inspector Rakesh Kumar
4. Ex.PW4/P1, parcel S1, PW4, HC Mahender Singh Ex.PW4/P2, parcel S2, Ex.PW4/P3, parcel S3,
5. Ex.PW5/A-1 to Ex.PW5/A-14, photographs, PW5, HC Amit Ex.PW5/A-15, CD,
6. ---- PW6, Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai
7. ---- PW7, Dr. Prem Arora
8. ---- PW8, Dr. Anurag Dadu
9. ---- PW9, Dr. D.P. Dhami
10. ---- PW10, ASI Nand Kishore
11. Ex.PW11/1, liquid blood sample of injured PW11, Amit, Ms. Poonam Sharma Ex.PW11/2, liquid blood sample of injured Rajpal Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by No.
1. -- DW1, Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 77 of 77 ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan by Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16 Warsi 19:53:57 +0530