Delhi District Court
Nitin vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) on 10 March, 2011
IN THE COURT OF PRAVEEN KUMAR, ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS JUDGE: DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI.
Criminal Appeal No. 54/2010.
Unique ID No. 02405R.
Nitin,
S/o Sh Ram Karan,
r/o House No.29, BBlock,
Sultan Garh, Najafgarh,
New Delhi. ..... Appellant.
Versus
The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi). ..... Respondent.
Date of institution of appeal :08.03.2011. Date of reserving order: :10.03.2011. Date of pronouncement of judgment : :10.03.2011. JUDGMENT (Oral).
1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 29.11.2010 passed by Ld Metropolitan Magistrate, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi whereby appellant was convicted for committing offence under Section 224 IPC. Vide separate order on sentence dated 07.02.2011, appellant was sentenced to undergo SI of one year and six months. Appellant was granted benefit of Section 428 Cr P C.
2. In brief, the facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal are that on 19.11.2008 at about 9 p.m, outside Police Station, Palam Village, New Delhi, appellant who was in lawful custody of Constable Dharamvir and Constable Rajbir pushed both of them and escaped from their custody. On the complaint of SI Rajesh Sukhla FIR was registered and the matter was investigated by the :-2-:
police.
3. I have heard Ld APP for the State and Sh. Arun Sharma, Ld counsel for the appellant. After some some arguments, Ld counsel contended that he is not challenging the conviction on merits. However, he prayed for a lenient view.
4. I have gone through the trial court record. PW4 SI Rajesh Sukhla is the material witness in this case. PW5 SI Vidhya Dhar Singh is the IO of the case. PW4 has fully supported the prosecution case. He was not crossexamined by the appellant.
Hence, the testimony of PW4 has remained unrebutted qua the appellant. There is no infirmity in the judgment passed by Ld Metropolitan Magistrate. The appellant was rightly convicted by the trial court for the offence under Section 224 IPC. Hence, the conviction of the appellant is upheld. However, considering the fact that appellant has already remained in custody for about one year and three months and he is a young boy aged about 21 years, appellant is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for the period already undergone by him in judicial custody. The appeal stands disposed of. The Jail Superintendent be informed accordingly and a copy of the judgment be supplied to appellant free of cost through Jail Superintendent. Trial Court record be sent back with a copy of the judgment and appeal file be consigned to Record Room.
Dictated & announced in open (PRAVEEN KUMAR) Court on March 10, 2011. Addl.Sessions Judge, Dwarka, New Delhi.