Delhi District Court
Fir No. 205/06, P.S M.S Park, U/Sec. ... vs Pankaj on 17 July, 2009
1
FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ
IN THE COURT OF SH. B.S. CHUMBAK, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
JUDGE : DELHI
Case ID Number 02402R0313022007
Session Case No. 125/08
Assigned to Sessions 03/08/07
Arguments heard on 17/07/09
Date of order 17/07/09
FIR NO. 507/06
Police Station Welcome
Under Section 308/506 IPC
State
Versus
Abdul Aziz s/o Abdul Khalik
r/o H. No. 5Z, IIIrd welcome
Delhi.
PRESENT : Ms. Neelam Narang, Ld. Addl. PP for the state.
Sh.Javed Akhtar, Ld. Counsel for the accused.
JUDGMENT
1. On 29/7/06 a case u/sec.308/506 IPC was registered at police station Welcome vide FIR No. 507/06, on the basis of statement made by the 1 2 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ complainant Smt. Sanno w/o AbdulAziz r/o H. No. 5Z, IIIrd welcome Delhi.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 29/7/06 complainant Smt. Sanno went to the police station in an injured condition and after recording her statement she was taken to the GTB hospital by Const. Dharambir and was got medically examined vide MLC No. A-3542/06. Her statement was recorded which is as follows:
' On 29/7/06 she was sitting on the gate of her house in the mean time at bout 2 P.M her husband namely Abdul Aziz reached there and asked for providing food. "Maine Thanda Khana Apne Pati ko Paros Diya"
Due to this reason he started abusing her and also beat her with legs & mukka blows. When she resisted he landed three/four dunda blow on her head due to which she received injuries, blood started oozing and he also extended threats in case she would lodge a report against him, he would kill her and run away from the spot.'
3. Investigation of this case was assigned to ASI Mukut Lal. On 29/7/06 he went to the place of occurrence at about 6 P.M, site plan was prepared, 2 3 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ weapon of offence i.e dunda was taken into possession. Accused Abdul Aziz was arrested, result of nature of injuries obtained, statement of witnesses were recorded and after completion of all the necessary investigation challan u/s 173 Cr.P.C was presented to the court of Ld. MM.
4. Ld. MM after taking cognizance for the offence u/s 308/506 IPC supplied the copies of the challan as required u/s 207 Cr.P.C and committed the case to the court of Sessions and on turn allocated to this court for trial.
5. Arguments on the point of charge heard. After hearing arguments charge for the offence u/s 308/506 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, thereafter case was fixed for prosecution evidence.
6. Smt. Sanno (injured) was examined by the prosecution as (PW1), ASI Surener Pal (Duty Officer) as( PW.2) and Const. Dharam Pal as (PW.3). 3 4
FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ
7. Brief testimony of the aforesaid witnesses are as follows :
(i) PW1 deposed that accused present in court is her husband. She did not remember the date, month and the year of the incident but it was 3 or 4 P.M when accused landed an iron rod blow on her head as a reuslt of which she received injuries and started bleeding. She was taken to GTB Hospital and was got medically examined and again said she went to the hospital along with the police officials. She also lodged a report Ex.PW 1/A bears her thumb impression at point A. She also stated that before causing injuries to her, accused extended threat that he would not keep her in his house. In the night accused was arrested, weapon of offence was recovered from him. While deposing so she resiled from her earlier statement on many points and on the basis of request of Ld. Addl. PP she was cross-examined wherein she stated that she did not state to the police that accused picked a dunda and attacked on her two/three times.
She also not stated that accused got recovered the dunda from his house and while deposing so she was confronted from her statement 4 5 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ from point A to A and point B to B from her statement Ex.PW1/B. During her cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for the accused she stated that her statement Ex.PW 1/A was not read over to her. She further stated that she got up from the Charpai, and accidentally her head hit with the Chokhat of the door due to which she received injuries. She made her earlier statement on the point that her husband hit a dunda on her head was given under influence of the police official. During further cross- examination by Ld. Addl. PP she specifically denied that accused caused injuries on her head and reiterated her testimony as submitted by her during her cross-examination.
(ii)PW2 is formal witness, he only recorded the FIR of this case, bearing No. 507/06 Ex.PW 2/A on the basis of rukka handed over to him by ASI Mukut Lal. He also made endorsement on the rukka at point 'X', same is Ex.PW 2/B.
(iii)PW3 deposed that on 29/7/06 he was on emergency duty from 8 A.M to 8 P.M and on that day at about 2.30 P.M complainant reached to police 5 6 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ station Welcome in an injured condition. ASI Mukut Lal instructed him to get Smt. Sanno/complainant medically examined at GTB Hospital. Accordingly he took her to GTB Hospital and obtained her MLC. He along with complainant returned back to the police station and handed over the MLC to the IO. IO recorded the statement of complainant, got the case registered. After registration of the FIR he along with the complainant and the IO went to the spot i.e 5Z IIIrd Welcome. IO prepared the site plan at the instance of the complainant in his presence. In the meanwhile Const. Rashid Pathan reached at the spot with copy of FIR and rukka and handed over the same to the IO. Accused was not found present at his house therefore, they proceeded to police station and on the way at Photo chowk Welcome accused was apprehended at the instance of the complainant. Accused was arrested. His arrest memo Ex. PW 3/A and his personal search memo Ex.PW 3/B were prepared in his presence. Accused also got recovered the weapon of offence i.e dunda which was seized vide memo Ex.PW 3/C bearing his signatures at point 'A'. Accused was also brought to the police station. He also identified the case property as Ex.P.1 to be the same which was 6 7 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ seized in his presence.
8. After examination of aforesaid witnesses, Ld. Counsel for accused requests for closing of prosecution evidence and submitted that case was registered on the basis of statement of complainant and she has been examined as PW1, during her statement she clearly stated that accused has not caused any injury on her head however she received injuries while hitting her head with Chokhat of the door.
9. In view of the submission of Ld. Counsel for accused, I also perused the testimony of PW1 and other witnesses wherein it transpired that complainant has not supported the prosecution version and therefore no fruitful purpose would be served for fixing the case for remaining witnesses. Accordingly prosecution evidence was closed and case was fixed for examination of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C.
10.During the course of examination of the accused u./s 313 Cr.P.C he 7 8 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ controverted all the allegations as alleged against him and submitted that he was innocent and falsely implicated in this case. He did not desire to lead defence evidence, therefore, defence evidence in this case was closed and case was fixed for final arguments.
11.I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for the state and Ld. Counsel for the accused. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that before convicting the accused under any penal law it is the duty of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and in the present case complainant/injured on the basis of whose statement this case was registered has not supported the prosecution version and specifically stated that accused has not caused any injury on her head. However she received injury while hitting her head on the Chokhat of the door. PW2 is formal witness. He only recorded the FIR in this case. PW.3 is official witness who joined the investigation of this case with the IO and in his testimony he specifically stated that IO recorded the statement of PW.1 and on the basis of her statement, present case was registered. PW1 no where stated that she has made any such statement before the 8 9 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ police and submitted that prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and requests for acquittal of the case.
12.After hearing the arguments and in view of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and after having been taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the considered view that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
13.I accordingly hereby acquit the accused Abdul Aziz for the offences u/sec. 308/506 IPC as alleged aginst him. His bail bond cancelled. Surety be discharged. File be consigned to the Record Room.
(B.S. CHUMBAK) ASJ-3/North East District KKD/Delhi Announced in the open court on 17th Day of July 2009 9 10 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ 10 11 FIR NO. 205/06, P.S M.S PARK, U/SEC. 307IPC, STATE VS PANKAJ 11