Delhi District Court
State vs . on 7 April, 2010
1
IN THE COURT OF SURINDER KUMAR SHARMA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - NORTH EAST
KARKARDOOMA COURTS:DELHI
State
Vs.
1. Mukesh @ Lamboo
S/o Nathu Lal
R/o A-block, Gali No-19
Sonia Vihar, Khajoori
Delhi.
2. Nakta @ Shahibe Alam
S/o Mohd. Yunus
R/o H.No.53, Gali No.3,
Kachhi Khajuri
Delhi
3. Jane Alam
S/o Mohd. Yusus
R/o H.No.53, Gali No.3,
D-block, Kachhi Khajuri
Delhi.
4. Sheru
S/o Sri Sharifa
R/o Not known
(Proclaimed Offender)
FIR No. 631/07
P.S. : Gokalpuri
U/s : 307/34 IPC
Sessions Case No. : 02/2009
Date of Institution of case : 29.11.2007
Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 1/9
2
Date on which reserved for Judgment : 07.04.2010
Date of delivery of Judgment : 07.04.2010
JUDGMENT:
The present case stands registered on the statement of Junaid who is injured in this case. He stated in his complaint that on 1.9.2007 he was passing through Tripal Factory, Old Mustafabad at that time he met Mukesh @ Lamboo, Nakta, Sheru and Shahibe Alam. He knew them earlier. They asked him that they would go and meet friends at Khajuri and reached Sonia Vihar, Gali No.21, Mandir Wala chowk. At that time he asked Mukesh for Rs.500/- which he (Junaid) had given to Mukesh. On this Mukesh started abusing him and he (Junaid) objected to it and asked Nakta, Sheru and Shahibe Alam to make Mukesh understand. He further stated that they also started abusing him and started giving him kick and fist blows. During this time, Mukesh took out an ustra and accused Sheru and Shahibe Alam caught hold of him (Junaid) and Mukesh gave ustra blows to him with an intention to kill him. Thereafter, all of them ran away from there. He further stated that some how he came to Khajuri Pushta where one rickshaw wala Arif took him to GTB Hospital.
On this statement of injured, FIR in this case was registered. Investigation was carried out. Accused Mukesh was arrested from his house at the instance of Junaid. Ustra was got recovered by accused Mukesh. Other three accused Sheru, Nakta and Sahibe Alam and Jane Alam were not traceable and could not be arrested. So, the challan was filed against accused Mukesh for Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 2/9 3 offences punishable under section 307/34 IPC keeping these accused in column number 2.
Ld.M.M after supply of copies etc, committed the case to the court of Sessions.
Vide orders dated 17.12.2007, My Ld Predecessor framed charge against accused Mukesh for offence punishable under section 307/34 IPC to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
On 23.4.2009 supplementary challan in respect of accused Nakta @ Shahibe Alam and Jane Alam was filed in the court of Ld.M.M and after necessary proceedings same was committed to this Court.
Vide orders dated 21.8.2009, charge for the offence punishable under section 307/34 IPC was framed against both the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Vide orders of the same date, both the cases were clubbed together.
In support of its case the prosecution examined three witnesses.
PW-1 Arif stated that he was a rickshaw puller. He further stated that he does not remember the exact date nor the duration of time, but it was 9.00/10.00 p.m., he was returning after dropping passenger via Khajuri Pushta and when he reached near Thana More, at that time two persons put a boy in his rickshaw who was in injured condition. He further stated that he took the injured to police station and thereafter that injured person was taken somewhere in the police vehicle. He further stated that he was kept in Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 3/9 4 police station and his cycle rickshaw was kept in PS for two days. He further stated that police made inquires from him and his statement was also recorded. He further stated injured had not told his name. This witness was declared hostile by the prosecution and was cross- examined by the Ld.Addl.PP. Nothing incriminating could surface on record which could help the prosecution in proving their case.
PW-2 HC Rajender Kumar stated that on 1.9.2007 at about 1.00 a.m a call vide DD No.39-A was received by SI Dharmender that one injured has been admitted in GTB Hospital. He further stated that he accompanied IO to GTB Hospital, where IO collected the MLC of the injured Junaid and recorded the statement of the injured. He further stated that IO then made his endorsement on the same and handed over the Rukka to him for the registration of the case. He further stated that he got the case registered and returned to the spot with original rukka and copy of the FIR. He further stated that injured Junaid produced his blood stained clothes i.e. pant and shirt having cut marks, and same was sealed by the IO with the seal of PR. He further stated that thereafter, they reached at the spot and then to the house of injured at Indra Vihar where brother of the injured met them who told that he knew the assailants. Then he took them in gali no. 19 at Sonia Vihar and pointed out the house of accused Mukesh. He further stated that they opened the house and brother of injured identified Mukesh and he was arrested vide memo Ex.PW-2/A, his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW-2/B and accused made his disclosure statement Ex. PW-2/C. He further stated that accused Mukesh got recovered one Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 4/9 5 ustra from underneath bricks under stair case of his house and IO prepared the sketch of the ustra, which is Ex. PW-2/D and seized the same after sealing the same with the seal of PR.
PW-3 SI Dharmender is the IO fo the case and he stated that on 1.9.2007 on receipt of DD 39-A, Ex.PW 3/A, regarding admission of injured Junaid in GTB Hospital, he along with Ct.Rajender reached at the hospital and collected the MLC of injured Junaid Ex.PW3/B whereon the injured had been declared fit for statement. He further stated that he recorded statement of injured Junaid which is Ex.PW3/C and made his endorsement Ex.PW 3/D on the same and handed over the rukka to Ct. Rajender for getting the FIR registered. He further stated that he interrogated rickshaw puller who had admitted injured in the hospital and in the meanwhile Ct.Rajender came back to hospital after registration of FIR. IO further stated that he seized the blood satined clothes lying with injured Junaid, sealed them in cloth parcel with seal PR and seized vide memo Ex.PW3/E. He further stated that thereafter he reached at the spot but could not ascertain the spot therefore he went to the house of complainant along with Ct.Rajender where Parvesh, brother of injured met them and he told that he knew accused Mukesh involved in the crime and also knew his house. Thereafter they all reached at house of accused Mukesh. IO further stated that he arrested accused Mukesh on identification of Parvez vide memo Ex. PW2/A, conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW2/C and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW-2/C. IO further stated that thereafter accused Mukesh led them to the spot and pointed out the same and he Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 5/9 6 prepared site plan Ex.PW 3/C at his instance. IO proved the copy of FIR as Ex.PW3/G. He further stated that thereafter accused Mukesh got recovered one ustra from his house stating that he had used this ustra for causing injuries on the person of Junaid. He prepared sketch of the ustra which is Ex.PW 2/B, converted it into parcel, sealed with seal of PR and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW2/E. He further stated that he brought the accused Mukesh to PS and put him in lock up. Case property as deposited in malkhana and he also recorded statement of MHC(M) and Ct. Rajender.
IO PW-3 further stated that he made search for other accused but they could not be traced. On 10.9.2007 complainant/injured Junaid came to the PS and told that he had wrongly mentioned the name of accused Sahib Alam and Nakta, but in fact they were they were the same persons and Sahibe Alam is known as Natka also. Complainant further told that the other accused was Jane Alam. IO stated that he recorded statement of complainant Junaid and further made search for accused persons but cold not be traced, obtained result of MLC of Junaid and Doctor opined the nature of injuries as grievous.
IO further stated that he obtained NBW against accused Sahiba Alam @ Nakta, Janne Alam and Sheru, completed the investigation and filed charge sheet as accused Mukesh was in J/C. He further stated that he obtained process under section 82/83 Cr.P.C against all the above three accused and they were declared P.O on 1.7.2008. IO further stated that on 1.3.2009 DD NO.38-B Ex.PW3/H was received regarding arrest of accused Shiaba Alam @ Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 6/9 7 Nakta in the area of PS Kotwali. IO further stated that on the next day DD No.50-B Ex.PW3/J was received regarding arrest of accused Jane Alam. IO further stated that he reached at Karkardooma Courts and arrested both the accused with permission of the court vide arrest memo Ex.PW 3/K-1 and PW 3/K-2, their personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW 1/L-1 and PW 1/L-2.
IO further stated that accused Jane Alam was sent to J/C and accused Sahibe Alam was taken on PC remand for recovery of the knife but he could not get the same recovered and pointing out memo Ex.PW 3/M was prepared. IO proved the copy of the kalandra under section 41.1(C) Cr.P.C is Ex.PW 3/N. IO further stated that he interrogated both the accused, recorded their disclosure statement Ex.PW3./P-1 and PW 3/P-2. IO further stated that accused Sheru has not been arrested till date Statement of all the three accused were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. All the accused claimed to be innocent and stated that they had been falsely implicated in this case. They however, did not prefer to lead any DE.
I have heard Sh.Ashok Kumar Addl.PP for the State and have also heard the accused persons. I have also gone through the case file.
Perusal of the file shows that PW Junaid and Parvez were the main and star witnesses of the prosecution case. Both the said witnesses have not been produced by the prosecution. The summons of said two witnesses were given to the IO for their service but they could not be served. IO SI Dharmender PW-3 made Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 7/9 8 statement before the court that despite his best efforts he could not trace the said two witnesses and they are also involved in number of cases and have been declared P.O. IO further stated that he cannot produce them in the court.
The public witness whose testimony has come on record is PW-1 Arif who had taken the injured to the Hospital. This witness did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile by the prosecution. Nothing material could emerge could come on record which could help the prosecution in proving their case.
Other two witnesses examined by the prosecution are the police officials who came into action after the registration of the FIR.
It was the testimonies of PW Junaid and Parvez which could have established the case of the prosecution but they have not been examined by the prosecution. Evidence that has come on record, does not proves that it were the accused who had caused injuries on the person of Junaid.
Thus, from the evidence that has come on record, it can be said that no evidence has come on record which could establish the charge against the accused persons that on the day of the incident, all the accused in furtherance of their common intention caused hurt on the person of Junaid.
All the accused are therefore, acquitted of the charges against them. Their bail bonds stands cancelled. Sureties are discharged.
File be consigned to Record Room with option to the Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 8/9 9 prosecution to revive the same and and when accused Sheru is apprehended.
Announced in open Court on this 07.04.2010 (Surinder Kumar Sharma) Additional Sessions Judge (North East) Karkardooma Courts, Delhi Sessions Case No.02/09 Page 9/9