Delhi District Court
State vs . Pawan Sharma on 31 October, 2022
State V. Pawan Sharma
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIJAY SHANKAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 05, (CENTRAL DISTRICT)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CNR No.DLCT010005222014
Sessions Case No.38/2021
FIR No.386/2014
PS: Paharganj
U/s 307/324/342 IPC
State Vs. Pawan Sharma
a) Date of commission of offence : 30/07/2014
b) Name of the complainant : Smt. Promila Manchanda
c) Name of accused and address : Pawan Sharma
S/o Late Sh. Tara Chand
R/o H.No.A42, Double
Storey, Motia Khan,
Paharganj, Delhi.
d) Offence complained of : u/s. 307/324/342 IPC
e) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
f) Final order : CONVICTED
Date of institution of the case : 14/10/2014
Date of committal : 05/01/2015
Date on which judgment was : 17/09/2022
reserved
Date of judgment : 31/10/2022
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31
18:36:30 +0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.1 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
1. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 30/07/2014, at about 10:50 PM at H.No.A42, Double Storey Flats, First Floor, Motia Khan, Paharganj, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station Paharganj, accused Pawan Sharma had wrongfully restrained the complainant Smt. Promila Manchanda and with intention to cause her death, the accused had caused grievous injury with knife on her neck with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances, if accused had caused her death, accused would have been guilty of murder. It is also the case of the prosecution that the accused had also voluntarily caused simple injury to the injured Vicky Manchanda on his left arm by knife.
CHARGESHEET
2. In the present case, on the complaint of the complainant Smt. Promila Manchanda, FIR bearing No.386/2014 Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:36:56 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.2 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma Police Station Paharganj U/s. 307/324/342 IPC was got registered by the Police of Police Station Paharganj. After registration of the FIR, the matter was investigated by the police and on completion of the investigation, the present chargesheet was submitted in the Court of Ld. MM on 14/10/2014 for trial of the accused Pawan Sharma.
COGNIZANCE
3. Cognizance for the offences, as mentioned in the chargesheet was taken by the Ld. MM vide order dated 14/10/2014.
COMMITTAL
4. Copies of the chargesheet were supplied to the accused Pawan Sharma in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, vide order dated 28/11/2014 passed by the Ld. ACMM, the present case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:37:05
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.3 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
CHARGE
5. Finding a primafacie case against the accused Pawan Sharma, charge for the offences u/s. 307/324/342 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION WITNESSES
6. Prosecution was then called upon to substantiate its case by examining its witnesses. The prosecution in support of its case had examined 20 witnesses. The prosecution had examined the following witnesses:
(i) PW1 HC Mahadev
(ii) PW2 HC Ashok Kumar
(iii) PW3 Dr. Kundan, CMO, Jeevan Mala Hospital, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
(iv) PW4 Ct. Sanjay
(v) PW5 HC Ram Rao
(vi) PW6 Ct. Deepak Singh
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31
18:37:30 +0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.4 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
(vii) PW7 HC Neeraj Kumar
(viii) PW8 Sh.Pawan Singh, Nodal Officer, Idea Cellular Ltd.
(ix) PW9 Mr. Mohd. Saleem
(x) PW10 Smt. Promila Manchanda
(xi) PW11 Dr. Vikas Bhise, Sr. Resident, Surgery Department, LHMC, New Delhi.
(xii) PW12 Sh. Amrinder Singh
(xiii) PW13 Sh. Vicky Manchanda
(xiv) PW14 Dr. Nikunj Bansal, Consultant Surgeon, Jeevan Mala Hospital, New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
(xv) PW15 HC Shiv Kumar (xvi) PW16 Sh. Rajeev Ranjan, Nodal Officer, Tata Tele Services, Ltd.
(xvii) PW17 Ms. Sunita Gupta, Senior Scientific Officer (Biology), FSL, Rohini, Delhi.
(xviii) PW18 Dr. Nitish Dev, Senior Resident, Department of Accident and Emergency, Lady Hardinge Medical College, Delhi.
Digitally signedby VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31
18:37:39 +0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.5 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
(xix) PW19 SI Mukesh Yadav
(xx) PW20 SI Vikas Malik
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY THE PROSECUTION
7. (i) FIR Ex.PW1/A
(ii) Endorsement on rukka Ex.PW1/B
(iii) Certificate u/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW1/C
(iv) DD No.76B Ex.PW1/D
(v) Entry at Sl.No.3297 in Register No.19 Ex.PW2/A
(vi) RC No.124/21 and acknowledgment slip Ex.PW2/B
(vii) MLC of the injured Promila Manchanda Ex.PW3/A
(viii) Seizure memo Ex.PW3/B
(ix) Arrest memo of the accused Ex.PW6/A
(x) Personal search memo of the accused Ex.PW6/B
(xi) Disclosure statement of the accused Ex.PW6/C
(xii) Statement of injured Promila Manchanda Ex.PW7/A
(xiii) MLC of injured Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW7/B Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:38:11 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.6 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma
(xiv) Endorsement Ex.PW7/C
(xv) Site plan MarkPW7/1 (xvi) Attested copy of customer application form of mobile No.9911642777 in the name of Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW8/A (xvii) Attested copy of election ID Card of Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW8/B (xviii) Attested Copy of the CDR Ex.PW8/C (xix) Certificate u/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW8/D (xx) Handwriting and signature of Dr. Harsh Kumar on MLC No.46828 Ex.PW11/A (xxi) Opinion regarding nature of injury on the MLC Ex.PW11/B (xxii) Acknowledgment of case acceptance Ex.PW15/A (xxiii) Attested copy of CDR of mobile No.9210448234 Ex.PW16/A (xxiv)Certificate U/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW16/B. (xxv)Forwarding letter Ex.PW16/C Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:38:28 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.7 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma (xxvi)Attested copy of Customer Application Form (CAF) of mobile No.9210448234 Ex.PW16/D (xxvii)Copy of election identity card of Smt. Sadhna Sharma Mark16A.
(xxviii) FSL result of Biological and DNA examination Ex.PW17/A (xxix) Pointing out memo Ex.PW19/A (xxx) PCR Call forms Ex.PW19/B and Ex.PW19/C (xxxi) Reply of Vicky Manchanda to the notice u/s. 91 Cr.P.C. Ex.PW19/D (xxxii) Discharge summary of Ms. Promila Manchanda Ex.PW19/E Apart from aforesaid documentary evidence, the prosecution has also relied upon the Kurta and chunni of the injured Smt. Promila Manchanda Ex.A1 and Ex.P2 respectively. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:38:45
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.8 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
8. TESTIMONIES OF PROSECUTION WITNESSES.
(i) PW1, who is the Duty Officer, in his testimony had deposed regarding registration of FIR of the present case Ex.PW1/A, endorsement on the rukka Ex.PW1/B, certificate u/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW1/C and DD No.76B Ex.PW1/D. PW1 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(ii) PW2 in his testimony had deposed that on 01/08/2014, SI Mukesh deposited with him two sealed pullandas sealed with the seal of Jeevan Mala Hospital containing blood stained kurta, chunni and blood sample of victim Smt. Promila Manchanda along with its sample seal. He deposited the same vide entry at Serial No.3297 in register No.19 Ex.PW2/A. On 22/08/2014, on the instructions of SHO concerned, the sealed exhibits of this case were handed over to Ct. Shiv Kumar vide RC No.124/21 for depositing the same in FSL Rohini. After depositing the same, Ct. Shiv Kumar had handed over to him the Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:38:56 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.9 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma acknowledgement slip Ex.PW2/B and he made entry in this regard. Till the samples remained with him, no one tampered the same.
PW2 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(iii) PW3 in his testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014, injured Promila Manchanda was brought to the casualty of Jeevan Mala Hospital by HC Ram Rao with alleged history of physical assault, cut injury with sharp object as told by the injured. He had medically examined the said injured and found incised wound, left submandibular region 2x1 x 0.5 cm with active bleeder. The nature of the injury was grievous sharp incised. Thereafter, the injured was referred for surgery for further evolution and treatment and he prepared the MLC of the injured Ex.PW3/A. The blood stained clothes of the injured i.e. kurta and chunni were sealed with the seal of Jeevan Mala Hospital and 5 ml blood of injured was also taken out as sample and same was also sealed with the seal of Jeevan Mala Hospital. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:39:10
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.10 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
Thereafter, the same along with the above said sealed cloth parcel was handed over to the IO and IO seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/B. PW3 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(iv) PW4 in his testimony had deposed that on 01/08/2014, he joined the investigation of the present case with IO SI Mukesh. Thereafter, IO took out accused Pawan Sharma from the lockup of PS Paharganj and thereafter, he along with IO and accused left the PS and reached at Motia Khan, where accused disclosed that he had thrown the weapon of offence i.e. knife at Khatta. Thereafter, they made the search of Khatta, Motia Khan, at the instance of the accused to recover the weapon of offence but the same was not recovered. Thereafter, they took the accused to Dossier Cell, Kamla Market, where search slip of the accused was prepared. Thereafter, they brought the accused in Tis Hazari Court and produced him before the concerned Court and thereafter, the accused was handed over to the official of Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:39:21 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.11 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma lockup, Tis Hazari Courts. IO recorded his statement.
PW4 was not crossexamined by counsel for the accused despite opportunity.
(v) PW5 in his testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014 at about 11:1511:20 PM he received a call of quarrel at A42, Motia Khan, Paharganj and he immediately reached at the spot and found many public persons already gathered there and a lady was bleeding from her neck. Local police also reached at the spot and he immediately took the injured Smt. Promila Manchanda to Jeevan Mala Hospital and got her admitted vide MLC No.192/14, thereafter, he returned back to his base. Thereafter, the IO was intimated to the CPCR control room and IO SI Mukesh recorded his statement on 07/10/2014.
PW5 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(vi) PW6 in his testimony had deposed the same facts as
deposed by PW7 in his testimony. Digitally signed
by VIJAY
SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:39:31
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.12 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
PW6 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(vii) PW7 in his testimony had deposed that in the intervening night of 3031/07/2014, duty officer assigned him DD No.76B Ex.PW1/D and thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Deepak left the PS and reached at the spot i.e. H.No. A42, First Floor, Double Storey, Motia Khan, Paharganj, where many public persons were already gathered. He came to know that the injured Promila has already been taken to Jeevan Mala Hospital by PCR van, however, an another injured Vicky was present at the spot. Thereafter, he sent injured Vicky to LHMC Hospital through Ct. Deepak and thereafter, he left for Jeevan Mala Hospital. After reaching Jeevan Mala Hospital, he collected MLC No.192/14 of injured Promila Ex.PW3/A and made inquiry from injured Promila, who was under treatment there and she was suffering from sharp edged wound below chin left side. He recorded statement of Promila Ex. PW7/A and the same was read over to the injured and he also obtained her signature on the same. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:39:42
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.13 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
Thereafter, he left Jeevan Mala Hospital and reached at LHMC Hospital and collected the MLC of Vicky Ex. PW7/B. Thereafter, he informed the senior officers regarding the above said facts and made his endorsement Ex. PW7/C on the above said statement of the complainant and he sent the same to PS through Ct. Deepak for getting the FIR recorded. Thereafter, he along with injured Vicky left for the spot and found SI Mukesh along with Ct. Deepak present at the spot as the investigation was assigned to SI Mukesh. SI Mukesh had prepared site plan MarkPW7/1 at the instance of Vicky and thereafter, made the search for accused persons but no clue was found. On the same day, he along with IO and Ct. Deepak reached at A42, Double Storey, Motia Khan where IO arrested the accused Pawan Sharma vide arrest memo Ex.PW6/A and personal search memo Ex.PW6/B. Thereafter, he interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW6/C. Thereafter, accused led them near Khatta, Motia Khan for the recovery of weapon but the weapon could not be recovered. Thereafter, they came back to PS and IO recorded his Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:39:51
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.14 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
statement.
PW7 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(viii) PW8 who is the Nodal Officer, in his testimony, had deposed that on 09/10/2014 at the request of IO, he provided attested copy of customer application form of mobile No. 9911642777 in the name of Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW8/A. He also provided the attested copy of election ID Card of customer Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW8/B and attested CDR Ex.PW8/C. He issued certificate u/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW8/D. PW8 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(ix) PW9 in his testimony, had deposed that on 30/07/2014, at about 10:00 PM, he was on night walk after taking dinner and was present in ABlock. He heard some loud noise at first floor of H.No. A42, Motia Khan, Paharganj, New Delhi. He went at the first floor, where he noticed that many public persons were already gathered there. One Vicky, who was Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:40:03 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.15 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma already known to him, met him there. Vicky had informed him that his mother was hostage by one Pawan Sharma. He went inside the house and saw that accused Pawan Sharma had apprehended mother of Vicky and had put a sharp edged knife on her neck. Mother of Vicky was crying and requesting the accused to leave her and also shouting 'Bachao Bachao'. Blood was also oozing out from the injury of neck. He alongwith public persons, had requested the accused to leave her, otherwise she would die. But accused had not paid any heed towards their request. Meanwhile, PCR reached there and some persons told that police had arrived. After that accused fled away from the spot after leaving behind injured/ mother of Vicky. Police came at the spot and took the injured, who was bleeding, to the hospital. Police inquired from him and recorded his statement.
PW9 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(x) PW10 who is the complainant/ injured, in her testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014 at about 8:15 PM her Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:40:13 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.16 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma son Vicky had informed her that accused Pawan Sharma @ Baba had called him on his mobile number and told him that he might come to collect his borrowed money as collection of donation of Mandir is received by him. Accused Pawan Sharma was already known to her son Vicky. Her son Vicky had given an amount of Rs.2,65,000/ to the accused Pawan Sharma about two years ago from the date of incident. Upon the aforementioned information, she told her son that she would accompany him. At about 10:00 PM, she alongwith her son Vicky reached at the house of the accused at A42, First Floor, Motia Khan where they saw accused alongwith his family members, who were counting money. They entered the house of the accused and sat on sofa and after sometime, accused had asked her son Vicky to take Rs.60,000/ and leave from there. Upon which, her son Vicky told the accused to return Rs.2,65,000/ as he was in need of such amount. Her son had also requested the accused to return the entire amount. Upon hearing the same, accused became angry and started abusing her son. Meanwhile, accused took an iron knife, which Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date: SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:40:23 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.17 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma was lying near him and asked "Le Vicky aaj mai tera hisab kar deta hun" and inflicted injuries upon the left arm of her son by said knife. When she alongwith her son was looking the inflicted injury of her son, meanwhile, accused caught hold her from back and put the said knife on her neck and dragged her inside the last room of his house. When her son Vicky tried to save her, accused caused injury on her neck by the said knife due to which, blood started oozing out from the injury and after seeing blood, her son stopped there and went outside the house and shouted for help and also called at 100 number. Her son had also called her elder son Manoj. Many neighbourers gathered there and they requested the accused to leave her but accused did not let off her. In the meantime, someone from the public told that police had arrived and as soon as accused heard about the police, he let her off. Police officials entered the house and took her to Jeevan Mala Hospital and she had not noticed as to where the accused had fled. Her statement Ex.PW7/A was recorded in the hospital. Her blood stained clothes i.e. Kurta Ex.A1 and Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:40:33 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.18 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma Chunni Ex.P2 were also seized.
PW10 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(xi) PW11 who is the doctor, in his testimony had deposed that Dr. Harsh had left the services of the hospital and he worked with him in the surgery department and he can identify the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Harsh Kumar. He identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Harsh Kumar on Ex.PW7/B and handwriting and signatures of Dr. Harsh Kumar Ex.PW11/A. Dr. Harsh Kumar gave treatment to the patient and also gave opinion regarding the nature of injury on MLC Ex.PW7/B. The nature of injury was given by him as "Simple"
vide Ex.PW11/B. PW11 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(xii) PW12 in his testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014 at about 9:3010:00 PM, he was returning from his work and going towards his house. When he reached infront of Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:40:41 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.19 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma H.No.A42, Motiya Khan, Paharganj, Delhi, he heard some noise. He also noticed that many public persons were gathered at the first floor of the said house. He also went there and saw that accused Pawan had caught hold the mother of Vicky from her neck and had put some sharp object upon her neck. Blood was oozing out from the neck injury of mother of Vicky. The accused Pawan, Vicky and his mother were already known to him, being the residents of same locality. The public persons were requesting the accused to leave the mother of Vicky but he had not paid any heed towards the request. Meanwhile, someone told that police had arrived, then accused Pawan left the mother of Vicky and then fled away. Police reached there and thereafter, he left for his home. IO recorded his statement.
PW12 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(xiii) PW13 who is the injured, in his testimony had deposed that accused Pawan Sharma was known to him since his childhood as accused was residing in the same locality. Prior to Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:41:01 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.20 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma 2014, he had given a loan of Rs.2,65,000/ to the accused. On 30/07/2014 at about 8:008:30 PM, he received a missed call from the mobile phone of the accused and then, he called back him upon which, accused told him that collection of donation of temple had been received and he called him at his home to collect the borrowed money. Accused had given the time in between 9:30 PM to 10:00 PM and he informed the same to his mother Promila Manchanda. Her mother told him that she would accompany him to collect the money from the house of the accused. Thereafter, he alongwith his mother reached at the house of the accused at about 9:309:45 PM where he noticed that accused alongwith his family members were counting the money. They entered the house of the accused and they were asked to sit and after waiting sometime, accused had given cash of Rs.60,000/ to him. Upon which, he had asked the accused that he was in need of entire amount but accused told him that "itney paise lene hai to le warna yahan se ja" however, he again requested him to make full payment but accused got furious and Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:41:11 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.21 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma took a knife and told him "le aaj tera hisb kar deta hu" and after that he attacked with knife and when he tried to save himself, the knife landed on his left arm just below the shoulder. His mother shouted for help. In the meanwhile, accused caught hold his mother and dragged her inside the last room of his house. He tried to save his mother but the accused put the said knife on the neck of his mother with force due to which blood started oozing out from the neck injury. After seeing blood of his mother, he raised alarm and shouted for help and he called his brother and also made a PCR call. After hearing the noise, neighbourers gathered there and people were shouting, however, accused did not let his mother go. Public persons shouted that police had arrived upon which, accused after pushing his mother, fled away from the spot. Police reached there. He was shifted to LHMC Hospital and his mother was shifted to Jeewan Mala Hospital. He was medically treated and police recorded his statement. Accused and his family members were priest of Hanuman Mandir, Connaught Place. His mobile number was 9911642777, Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:41:21 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.22 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma however, he did not remember the mobile number of the accused as on that date. However, it was of Tata Company.
PW13 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused.
(xiv) PW14 in his testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014, one patient Promila Manchanda was examined in the Hospital vide MLC Ex.PW3/A by Dr. Kundan Kumar.
Lateron, on the basis of MLC and medical treatment paper of the patient, he had opined the nature of injury as grievous. The patient had sustained sharp incised wound in left submandibular region of approx. 2 X 1 X 0.5 cm with active bleeding present. The patient needed immediate attention to the bleeding otherwise it could have become life threatening to the patient because face and neck are highly vascular areas and all active bleeding can become dangerous, if not treated timely and also it can lead to permanent disfingurement of face.
PW14 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:41:30
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.23 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
(xv) PW15 in his testimony had deposed that on
22/08/2014, as per directions of the IO, he had taken the sealed exhibits from Malkhana vide RC No.124/21 Ex.PW2/B for depositing the same with FSL, Rohini and he deposited the same with FSL, Rohini and received acknowledgment of case acceptance Ex.PW15/A and handed over the same to MHC (M).
PW15 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. (xvi) PW16 in his testimony had deposed that on 09/10/2014, he had given the attested copy of requisite CDR Ex.PW16/A and attested copy of CAF of mobile phone No. 9210448234 Ex.PW16/D to the IO alongwith certificate u/s. 65B Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW16/B and forwarding letter Ex.PW16/C. At the time of obtaining said mobile number, the subscriber Smt. Sadhna Sharma had provided photocopy of her election identity card Mark16/A. PW16 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:41:42
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.24 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
(xvii) PW17 in her testimony had deposed that on
22/08/2014, two sealed parcels were received in FSL office vide letter No.1865/SHO Paharganj dated 08/08/2014 and the examination of the same was marked to her. She opened the both parcels and conducted biological and DNA examination and prepared her report Ex.PW17/A and after examination remnants of exhibits were resealed with the seal of "SG FSL Delhi".
PW17 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. (xviii) PW18 in his testimony had deposed that he had worked with Dr. Devi Singh, who left the services of the hospital and his whereabouts are not known to the hospital and he acquainted with the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Devi Singh. MLC Ex.PW7/B is in the handwriting of Dr. Devi Singh, who had examined the patient in the hospital with the alleged history of assault and was having incised wound on the left arm and abrasions over left side of neck. After primary treatment, the patient was referred to surgery department. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:42:01
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.25 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
PW18 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. (xix) PW19 who is the Investigating Officer, in his testimony had deposed that on 31/07/2014, after registration of FIR, the investigation of the present case was entrusted to him. He had received the copy of FIR and original rukka through Ct. Deepak and thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Deepak went to LHMC Hospital where HC Neeraj alongwith injured Vicky Manchanda met them. He had received MLC Ex.PW7/B of injured from HC Neeraj. Thereafter, they alongwith complainant Vicky Manchanda reached at the spot i.e. H.No. A42, First Floor, Double Storey Flats, Motia Khan, Delhi where he had prepared site plan Ex.PW7/A at the instance of Vicky Manchanda. They had searched accused Pawan Sharma but he could not be arrested. He had recorded supplementary statement of injured Vicky Manchanda. During investigation, public witness namely Mohd. Saleem and Amrinder met him and he had inquired from them and recorded their statement u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, in the Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:42:10 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.26 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma evening hours of 31/07/2014 HC Neeraj visited the house of accused Pawan Sharma where accused was found present. He had interrogated him, who confessed his involvement in the present case. Accordingly, he had arrested him vide arrest memo Ex.PW6/A and conducted his personal search vide personal search memo Ex.PW6/B. He had also recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW6/C and accused had also pointed the place of incident. Accordingly, he had prepared pointing out memo Ex.PW19/A. He had also tried to search the weapon of offence but the accused could not get recovered the same. Accused was medically examined and lodged in lockup. On 01/08/2014, he alongwith his staff and accused went in the search of weapon of offence but the same could not be traced. Thereafter, the accused was produced before the Court and sent to J/C by the concerned Court. On the same day i.e. 01/08/2014, he had visited Jeevan Mala Hospital where medical treatment of injured Mrs. Promila Manchanda was being done. Dr. Kundan had given sealed parcels stated to be containing blood stained clothes and blood sample of Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:42:26 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.27 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma injured Mrs. Promila Manchanda alongwith sample seal of the hospital. He had seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/B and thereafter, he returned back to the Police Station and deposited all the exhibits in Malkhana. On 22/08/2014, the exhibits were sent to FSL, Rohini through HC Shiv Kumar vide RC Ex.PW2/B and acknowledgment of the case acceptance Ex.PW15/A. During the investigation, he had collected PCR call forms Ex.PW19/B and Ex.PW19/C. The said calls were made by Mr. Manoj, who is the brother of the injured Vicky. During investigation, injured Vicky stated that on 30/07/2014, at about 8:00 PM, he had received four missed calls from mobile number of the accused and thereafter, he made a call to accused at about 9:00 PM. He had also collected relevant CDRs of mobile phone which was being used by Vicky and the accused. The mobile phone which was being used by the accused Pawan Sharma was in the name of his sisterinlaw Mrs. Sadhna Sharma. He had collected final opinion on the MLC of Mrs. Promila Manchanda and Vicky Manchanda which were opined as grievous and simple Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:43:44 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.28 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma respectively vide MLCs Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW11/B. He had served notice u/s. 91 Cr.P.C. to Vicky Manchanda for providing documentary proof of loan amount and he had also received reply from Vicky Manchanda Ex.PW19/D. During the aforesaid investigation, he had recorded the statements of the witnesses, collected relevant documents including discharge summary of Mrs. Promila Manchanda Ex.PW19/E and thereafter, filed the chargesheet before the concerned Court for judicial verdict.
PW19 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. (xx) PW20 in his testimony had deposed that after filing of initial chargesheet by IO SI Mukesh Yadav, FSL result of the exhibits was received in the Police Station and he had filed FSL result Ex.PW17/A by way of supplementary chargesheet before the concerned Court.
PW20 was crossexamined by counsel for the accused. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:43:55
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.29 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED U/S 313 CR.P.C.
9. Separate statement of the accused Pawan Sharma was recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he denied the allegations against him and rebutted the prosecution evidence against him and claimed that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It was also stated that he does not want to lead evidence in his defence. It was also stated by the accused that Vicky Manchanda had taken a loan of Rs.3 Lakh from him for extension of his business and to avoid the repayment of the said loan, Vicky and Promila had concocted a false story and falsely implicated him in the present case.
FINAL ARGUMENTS
10. This Court heard the final arguments advanced by Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused and carefully perused the entire record including the testimonies on record.
During the course of final arguments, it was submitted Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:44:16 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.30 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that the prosecution witnesses have duly supported the case of the prosecution and from the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the documentary evidence relied upon by the prosecution, the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and the accused be convicted for the offences as mentioned in the charge. On the other hand, during the course of final arguments, it was submitted by counsel for the accused that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no incriminating evidence on record against the accused and the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and the accused be acquitted in the present case.
In order to bring home conviction the prosecution has to show on record an unbroken chain of events leading to commission of actual offence. Further, it is the duty of the prosecution to prove its case in such a manner so as to bring it outside the pale of any reasonable doubt. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:44:26
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.31 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
It was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra.", {AIR 1984 SC 1622} that following condition must be fulfilled for successful prosecution of the accused: (1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. (2) The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say. they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty, (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved, and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused".
INGREDIENTS OF OFFENCES
11. In the present case, charge for the offence u/s. Digitally signed
by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date: 2022.10.31 18:44:35 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.32 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma 307/324/342 IPC was framed against the accused.
Section 307 IPC has prescribed the punishment for attempt to murder. The essential Ingredients for the offence under section 307 IPC are as under:
(i) that the death of a human being was attempted;
(ii) that such death was attempted to be caused by, or in consequence of the act of the accused; and
(iii) that such act was done with the intention of causing death; or that it was done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as:
(a) the accused knew to be likely to cause death; or
(b) was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or that the accused attempted to cause death by doing an act known to him to be so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause (a) death, or (b) such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, the accused having no excuse for incurring the risk of causing such death or injury.
Section 324 IPC has prescribed the punishment for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. The essential Ingredients for the offence under section 324 IPC are as under: Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:44:45 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.33 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma
(i) That the accused voluntarily caused hurt to another person;
(ii) That such a hurt was in exception to cases provided under Section 334 IPC;
(iii) That such hurt was caused
(a) 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
(b) by means of fire or any heated substance; or
(c) by means of any poison or any corrosive substance; or
(d) by means of any explosive substance; or
(e) by means of any substance which is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or receive into the blood; or
(f) by means of any animal.
Section 342 IPC has prescribed the punishment for wrongful confinement. The offence of wrongful confinement has been defined in Section 340 IPC. The essential Ingredients for the offence under section 342 IPC are as under:
(i) Wrongful restraint of a person; Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:44:53 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.34 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma
(ii) Such restraint must prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits.
12. FINDINGS
(i) Testimonies of injured persons : The sanctity of testimony of injured witness has been elaborated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Abdul Sayeed Vs. State of MP." {(2010) 10 SCC 259} and it was held that: "26. 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.......
28. The law on the point can be summarised to the effect that the testimony of the injured witness Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:45:00 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.35 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma is accorded a special status in law. This is as a consequence of the fact that the injury to the witness is an inbuilt guarantee of his presence at the scene of the crime and because the witness will not want to let his actual assailant go unpunished merely to falsely implicate a third party for the commission of the offence. Thus, 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 therein".
PW10 is the complainant/ injured and PW13 is also the injured in the present case. PW10 and PW13 in their testimonies categorically, elaborately and graphically described as to how the offence was committed by the accused at the relevant time, date and place. Complainant/PW10 in her testimony had duly proved on record the complaint Ex. PW7/A, on the basis of which, the present case FIR was got registered. The complainant/injured/PW10 in her complaint Ex. PW7/A has specifically mentioned the name of the accused as assailant. The name of the accused has also been specifically mentioned in the FIR Ex.PW1/A. The contents of Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW7/A have Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:45:08 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.36 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma been duly proved and corroborated by PW10, PW13 and other concerned prosecution witnesses.
PW10 in her testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014, the accused wrongfully confined her in his house and also caused grievous injury to her as well as injury to her son i.e. PW13 by knife. PW10 in her testimony had specifically deposed that the accused took the knife which was lying near him and inflicted injuries upon the left arm of her son by the said knife. PW10 had also deposed that accused had caught hold her from back and put the said knife on her neck and dragged her inside the last room of his house and when her son Vicky tried to save her, the accused caused injury on her neck by the said knife and blood started oozing out from the injury. PW13 in his testimony had deposed the same facts as deposed by PW10.
PW13 in his testimony had deposed that on 30/07/2014, the accused had wrongfully confined his mother in his house and the accused had also caused the injury to him and his mother by knife.Digitally signed
by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:45:31
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.37 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
As per discharge summary Ex. PW19/E of the complainant/PW10, the complainant was stated to be admitted in the hospital on 31/07/2014 and she was discharged from the hospital on 02/08/2014.
The testimonies of PW10, PW13 and other prosecution witnesses are corroborated with the medical documents of PW10 and PW13.
There is nothing on the record to disbelieve the testimonies/versions of PW10 and PW13. In the cross examination of PW10 and PW13, no material contradictions/inconsistency has been surfaced or pointed out except some minor ones which are but natural.
(ii) Identity of accused: PW4, PW6, PW7, PW9, PW10, PW12, PW13 and PW19 during the course of their testimonies had duly identified the accused Pawan Sharma. Accused/counsel had not put any question in the crossexamination of the PW4, PW6, PW7, Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:45:40
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.38 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
PW9, PW10, PW12, PW13 and PW19 to dispute the identity of the accused. Hence, identity of the accused is duly established by the prosecution.
(iii) Testimonies of independent/ public witnesses: PW9 and PW12 are the eye witnesses of the incident.
PW9 in his testimony had deposed that on the date of incident, the accused had apprehended the mother of Vicky and had put a sharp edged knife on her neck and blood was oozing out from the injury of her neck. PW12 in his testimony had deposed that on the date of incident, he saw that the accused had caught hold the mother of the Vicky from her neck and had put some sharp object upon her neck and blood was oozing out from the neck injury of mother of Vicky. PW9 and PW12 duly supported the case of prosecution and corroborated the testimonies of injured i.e. PW10 and PW13 and other prosecution witnesses. There is nothing in the crossexamination of PW9 and PW12 to show that the aforesaid witnesses were interested witnesses.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31
18:46:05
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.39 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
There is nothing on the record to disbelieve the testimonies/versions of the aforesaid public witnesses. In the crossexamination of the aforesaid public witnesses, no material contradictions/inconsistency has been surfaced or pointed out except some minor ones which are but natural.
(iv) Medical witnesses: PW3, PW11, PW14 and PW18 are medical witnesses in the present case.
PW3 is the medical witness, who examined the complainant/ injured/ PW10 and deposed that he medically examined the injured and found incised wound, left submandibular region 2 X 1 X 0.5 cm with active bleeder and nature of injury were grievous sharp incised. PW3 in his testimony has duly proved on the record the MLC of PW10 Ex.PW3/A and seizure memo of clothes and blood sample Ex.PW3/B. PW11 is also the medical witness, who deposed that Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:46:14 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.40 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma Dr. Harsh has left the services of hospital and he can identify the handwriting and signature of Dr. Harsh Kumar. PW11 in his testimony has proved on record the MLC of injured/ PW13 and deposed that nature of injury was opined as simple vide Ex.PW11/B. PW14 is also the medical witness, who deposed that on 30/07/2014, PW10 was examined in the hospital vide MLC Ex.PW3/A by Dr. Kundan Kumar and on the basis of MLC and medical treatment paper of the patient, he opined the nature of injury as grievous and patient had sustained sharp incised wound in left submandibular region of approx. 2 X 1 X 0.5 cm with active bleeding present. He further deposed that the patient needed immediate attention to the bleeding otherwise, it could have become life threatening to the patient because face and neck are highly vascular areas and all active bleeding can become dangerous, if not treated timely, also it can lead to permanent disdisfigurement of face.
PW18 is also the medical witness, who deposed that Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:46:22 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.41 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma Dr. Devi Singh has left the services of hospital and he is acquainted with the handwriting and signature of Dr. Devi Singh. PW18 in his testimony has proved on record the MLC of PW13 Ex.PW7/B. MLCs and other medical documents of PW10 and PW13 have been duly proved on record by the aforesaid medical witnesses. There is nothing on the record to disbelieve the testimonies/versions/opinion of the aforesaid medical witnesses. In the crossexamination of the aforesaid medical witnesses, no material contradictions/inconsistency has been surfaced or pointed out.
(v) Forensic witness:
PW17 is the forensic witness, who conducted
biological and DNA examination of exhibits and she proved on record the FSL report Ex.PW17/A. In the crossexamination of PW17, the counsel for the accused has not put any question to the credibility of the FSL Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:46:30 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.42 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma result Ex. PW17/A. Even otherwise, the FSL result is per se admissible u/s 293 Cr.P.C.
(vi) Testimonies of police witnesses: In the present case, PW1, PW2, PW4, PW5, PW6, PW7, PW15, PW19 and PW20 are the police officials. From the testimonies of the aforesaid police witnesses, it is evident that investigation conducted including the documents prepared in the present case during the course of investigation have been substantially proved by the police witnesses.
PW19 is the IO in the present case, who deposed regarding investigation conducted by him and he duly proved on record the documents relating to the investigation conducted by him.
(vii) Contentions of counsel for the accused: It is the contention of counsel for the accused that the prosecution has not proved on record any document to show that Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:46:45 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.43 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma the injured i.e. PW13 had to receive the amount of Rs.2,65,000/ from the accused. The accused in his statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. had deposed that Vicky Manchanda had taken a loan of Rs.3 Lakh from him for extension of his business and to avoid the repayment of the said loan, Vicky and Promila had concocted a false story and falsely implicated him in the present case. In the present case, the accused has also not placed on record any document to show that he has given the loan of Rs.3 Lakh to PW13. Even otherwise, the matter of fact is that the accused had caused the grievous injury to PW10 and simple injury to PW13 by knife and wrongfully confined PW10 in the room of his house.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that the MLC of complainant/ PW10 was got prepared by the private hospital and MLC of the PW13 was got prepared by the Government hospital and opinion on the MLC of complainant was obtained incollusion with the doctors and police. The aforesaid contention of counsel for the accused has no force as no evidence Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:46:53 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.44 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma has been lead by the accused to show that the opinion on the MLC of the complainant was obtained incollusion with the doctors and police. Even otherwise, it is immaterial whether the opinion on the MLCs was given by Government hospital or by private hospital. Hence, the contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that PW9 is the hearsay witness and not an eyewitness of the incident. On perusal of testimony of PW9, it is apparent that PW9 was the eyewitness of the incident. Hence, the contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that no weapon of offence i.e. knife was recovered from the possession of the accused despite police remand. Nonrecovery of weapon of offence i.e. knife is not fatal to the case of the prosecution as complainant/injured/PW10 and injured PW13 in their testimonies specifically deposed that the accused had caused the injury to them by knife. PW9 and PW12, who were the public/ Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:47:29 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.45 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma eye witnesses duly supported the version of the PW10 and PW13. Hence, the contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that the accused had not caused any injury to PW10 and PW13 and PW10 and PW13 caused self injuries to themselves and falsely implicated the accused in the present case. Complainant/ injured/PW10 and injured PW13 in their testimonies specifically deposed that the accused had caused the injury to them by knife. PW9 and PW12, who were the public/eye witnesses duly supported the version of the PW10 and PW13. There is nothing in the testimonies of PW10, PW13, PW9, PW12 and medical witnesses to show that PW10 and PW13 had caused self injuries. Even, PW3 in his crossexamination has denied the suggestion that the injury was self inflicted injury. Hence, contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:47:41 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.46 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma as per testimony of PW13, the amount of Rs.60,000/ was given by the accused but the said amount was not seized by the IO and no witness has been cited to show that the aforesaid amount was received by PW13 from accused. As per case of the prosecution, the accused had taken a loan of Rs.2,65,000/ from PW13. As per accused, the accused had given a loan of Rs.3 Lakh to PW13. In the present case, neither PW13 nor accused had filed any documentary evidence in this regard. Nonseizure of aforesaid amount is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. Hence, contention of counsel for the accused in this regard is not tenable.
It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that PW12 is completely hostile and has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is also the contention of counsel for the accused that PW12 had not gone inside the house of the accused. PW12 is the eyewitness of the incident. There is nothing in the testimony of PW12 to show that he has turned hostile. PW12 has duly supported the case of the prosecution and version of Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:47:51 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.47 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma PW10 and PW13. PW12 in his crossexamination had deposed that he was present just at the door of the house and he could see inside the house by standing at the door. In the cross examination of PW12, no material inconsistency has been surfaced except some minor ones which are but natural. Hence, the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the accused are not tenable.
It is the contention of counsel for the accused that there are material contradictions and inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. It was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Sunil Kumar Sambhudayal Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra.", { (2010) 13 SCC 657} that: "While appreciating the evidence, the court has to take into consideration whether the contradictions/omissions had been of such magnitude that they may materially affect the trial. Minor contradictions, inconsistencies, embellishments or improvements on trivial matters without effecting the core of the prosecution case should not be made a ground to reject the evidence in its entirety. The Trial Court, after going through the entire evidence, must form an opinion about the credibility of the witnesses and the appellate Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:48:00 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.48 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma Court in normal course would not be justified in reviewing the same again without justifiable reasons."
In the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, no material contradictions and inconsistency has been surfaced except some minor ones which are but natural. Hence, the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the accused are not tenable.
13. Presence of the accused at his house at the relevant time and date is not disputed. Hence, the presence of the accused at the spot at the relevant time, date and place has been duly proved on record by the prosecution.
Counsel for the accused in the crossexamination of PW10 has put the suggestion that PW10 and PW13 inflicted injuries on themselves to falsely implicate the accused in the present case. On the other hand, counsel for the accused in the crossexamination of PW13 has put the suggestion that PW10 had fallen of her own and due to which, she sustained injuries. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Date:
SHANKAR 2022.10.31
18:48:09
+0530
FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.49 of 52
State V. Pawan Sharma
The aforesaid suggestions put by counsel for the accused were contradictory with each other.
The testimonies of PW10 and PW13 have been corroborated with the testimonies of public, medical, forensic and police witnesses as well as medical, forensic and other documents relied upon by the prosecution.
As per accused, PW13 had taken loan of Rs.3 Lakh from the accused. The accused in support of his contentions has not placed/proved on record any documentary evidence. The accused in support of his contention has also failed to prove the fact as to why he called PW13 at his house on the date of incident.
As per PW10 and PW13, the accused firstly caused the injury by knife to PW13 and thereafter to PW10, which shows the intention of the accused to cause the injuries. The accused had caused the grievous injury by knife to PW10 on her vital part i.e. neck, which shows the knowledge and intention of the accused to cause the injury or death of PW10. In the present Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR VIJAY Date: SHANKAR 2022.10.31 18:48:18 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.50 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma case, the nature of injuries sustained by the injured persons, mode & manner of assault, weapon of offence, intention and knowledge are relevant factors. The aforesaid factors have been duly proved on record by the prosecution.
In the present case, no defence evidence had been lead by the accused in support of his defence and to rebut and contradict the case of the prosecution.
All the above mentioned essential ingredients of the offences u/s. 307/324/342 IPC have been duly proved on record from the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence relied upon by the prosecution.
14. CONCLUSION Applying priori and posteriori reasonings, this court is held that at the relevant time, date and place, as mentioned above, accused Pawan Sharma had wrongfully restrained the complainant Smt. Promila Manchanda and with intention to cause her death, the accused had caused grievous injury with Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 18:48:27 +0530 FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.51 of 52 State V. Pawan Sharma knife on her vital part i.e. neck with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances, if accused had caused her death, accused would have been guilty of murder. It is also held that the accused Pawan Sharma had also voluntarily caused simple injury to the injured Vicky Manchanda on his left arm by knife.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been successful to prove its case against the accused Pawan Sharma beyond reasonable doubt for the offences under section 307/324/342 IPC. This Court is held that the accused Pawan Sharma has committed the offences punishable under section 307/324/342 IPC. Accordingly, accused Pawan Sharma is convicted for the offences under section 307/324/342 IPC. Digitally signed by VIJAY SHANKAR
VIJAY Announced in the open Court SHANKAR Date:
2022.10.31 on 31/10/2022 18:48:38 +0530 (VIJAY SHANKAR) ASJ05 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi FIR No. 386/2014 PS Paharganj Page No.52 of 52