Delhi District Court
State vs . on 27 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA, SPECIAL
JUDGE (NDPS), NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS,
DELHI.
SC No. 59246/16
FIR No 65/2015
U/s 308/341/34 IPC
P.S. Bhalswa Dairy
STATE
Vs.
1. Daulat Ram
S/o Sh. Mukut Bihari,
R/o A2/333, J.J. Colony,
Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi. .....Accused No.1.
2. Vishal
S/o Sh. Daulat Ram,
R/o A2/333, J.J. Colony,
Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi. .....Accused No.2.
3. Sadhu Ram
S/o Sh. Babu Lal,
R/o A2/333, J.J. colony,
Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi. ..... Accused No.3.
Date of institution : 05.09.2016
Date of arguments : 12.04.2018
Date of judgment : 27.04.2018
JUDGMENT:
1. All three accused were arrested by the Police of Police State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 1 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) Station Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi and was challaned to the Court for trial for commission of offence punishable under Section 308/341/34 IPC.
2. Prosecution story, as unfolded from the perusal of chargesheet, is that on 01.02.2015 at about 12.30 PM, near Park, J.J. Colony, Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of P.S. Bhalaswa Dairy, Delhi all three accused with their common intention had attacked the complainant Vineet @ Vinay by hitting him on head with a stone and with an iron rod with such intention or knowledge that in case they would have caused his death, they would have been guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In his complaint, complainant Vineet @ Vinay has informed that on 01.02.2015 when at about 12.30 PM, he was coming to his house after playing cricket, all three accused namely Vishal, Daulat Ram and Sadhu met him, with whom they had old enmity. Daulat Ram was having an iron rod in his hand. Sadhu had stopped him and caught hold of him as well as Vishal had hit him with a stone on his head due to which he received injuries. After beating him, they all fled away from the spot. On the basis of statement of complainant Vineet @ Vinay Ex. PW3/1, an FIR No. 252/13, U/s 308/34 IPC was registered and the matter was investigated by the police. All three accused were arrested and their disclosure statements were recorded. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completing investigation and conducting other necessary formalities, chargesheet was filed in the court.
State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 2 of 11(FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)
3. After supplying copies of the documents to the accused U/s 207 Cr.P.C., ld. Metropolitan Magistrate committed the present case to the Court of Sessions.
4. Charge U/s 308/34 IPC was framed against all the three accused persons namely Daulat Ram (A1), Vishal (A2) and Sadhu Ram (A3) vide order dated 09.01.2017 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. They were accordingly put to trial.
5. Trial proceeded and in the course of trial, prosecution in order to substantiate its case against all the three accused persons, examined eight witnesses in all.
6. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of all the three accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C wherein all the incriminating evidence, which had come on record during trial against all the three accused persons, was put to them and an opportunity was given to all the three accused persons to explain about the same. Accused persons pleaded that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated by the complainant in this case due to enmity. They had been called on 08.02.2015 by the IO and arrested them but the date on the arrest memo is mentioned as 11.02.2015. It is further submitted by accused Daulat Ram and Vishal that on the date of incident, complainant Vineet had come to their house alongwith his friends; abused; tried to disrobe and outrage the modesty of daughter State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 3 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) of accused Daulat Ram and sister of accused Vishal, who was present at that time in the house. Accused Vishal, who was also present at that time at the house, tried to resist the complainant not to enter in the house and made a call to his father i.e. accused Daulat Ram as at that time he was at his workshop at Karkardooma. When accused Daulat Ram reached the house in the evening, they lodged an FIR No.66/15. Whereas accused Sadhu Ram stated that he has been falsely implicated as he is the neighbour and not having a good relation with the family of the complainant. He is an auto driver and used to left the house early in the morning at 8.00 AM. On the date of incident, he was plying his auto and was not present at the time of incident and at the place of incident. All three accused led evidence in their defence.
7. I have heard Sh. J.S. Malik, ld. Addl. PP for the State and Sh. Mukesh Singh, ld. Counsel for all the three accused persons. I have also perused the material on record.
8. Ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that the allegations made in the present FIR are false and the accused are innocent. He further contended that there are material contradictions in the depositions made by the witnesses and they have not supported the case of prosecution. There is no statement with regard to the fact that the police official had taken the injured to the hospital.
9. Per contra, ld. Addl. PP for State has contended that State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 4 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts and there is not an iota of doubt in coming to the conclusion that the all the three accused persons have committed the offence, and, hence, they are liable to be convicted in this case.
10. The depositions made by the witnesses are as under :
i) PW1 ASI Amrit Lal is the Duty Officer, who has proved the copy of FIR as EX. PW1/1, his endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW 1/2 and certificate U/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act as Ex.PW1/3.
Testimony of this witness remained unchallenged during crossexamination.
ii) PW2 is Sh. Dinesh Kumar. He deposed that some quarrel had taken place between Vinay and Vishal over some cricket bat. Though he stated that he did not remember the date or month of incident but he deposed that the incident took place about two years back, in the month of January/February. He further deposed that Vinay gave fist and leg blows to Vishal. Vishal picked up a brick and hit it on the head of Vinay. Vinay started bleeding from head and he took Vinay to a doctor for medical aid. Thereafter, he left for his home.
This witness was crossexamined by ld. Addl. PP on some material facts. He deposed that it might be possible that the State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 5 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) incident took place on 01.02.2015 between 12.30 to 1.00 PM. He further deposed that he did not know the two accused persons, who are present on that day in Court. He denied the suggestion that at the time of incident accused Sadhu had caught hold of Vinay or that Daulat Ram hit him with an iron rod. He has further stated that the police had recorded his statement but denied having made any such statement MarkP2/A to the police except regarding Vishal having hit Vinay with stone. He further denied the suggestion that he was intentionally not identifying the two accused persons, who were present in court out of fear or that he was deposing falsely in order to save them. He further stated that he can identify accused Vishal, if shown to him.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused persons, PW2 deposed that he knew Vinay since childhood and he had taken Vinay to Dr. Vir Singh and not had taken him to any hospital. He deposed that at the time of incident, there were 45 young boys (children) in the park. He denied the suggestion that no incident as stated by him ever took place or that he had not seen Vishal hitting Vinay with stone/brick or that he has deposed falsely at the instance of Vinay.
iii) PW3 is Vineet Kumar @ Vinay. He deposed that on 01.02.2015 at about 12.30 PM when he was going back home after playing cricket, accused Daulat Ram caught hold of him, accused Vishal hit him on head with a stone and accused Sadhu also hit him with a rod, who were known to him and had old enmity with them. All State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 6 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) three kept beating him there and he became unconscious. He further deposed that he regained his senses when he was in a Government hospital. He had bandages on his head and hand. He proved his statement Ex. PW3/1 made to the police in the hospital.
This witness was crossexamined by ld. Add. PP on some material points and during his crossexamination, he admitted that he had been caught hold of by accused Sadhu and it was Daulat Ram, who hit him with rod. He further admitted that he had taken police to the spot on 06.02.2015; had shown them the spot of incident and police had prepared site plan of the spot. A suggestion was given to him that he had disclosed complete particulars of the three accused persons to police on 06.02.2015 but he denied the same.
During his crossexamination on behalf of the accused persons, he denied the suggestion that there had been any quarrel between him and accused persons in the Cricket field while playing cricket on that day or that the incident did not happen in the manner as stated by him or that the accused persons had not caused any injury to him or that he has deposed falsely on account of old enmity with the accused persons.
iv) PW4 is Dr. Neeraj Chaudhary, who has proved the portions in handwriting of Dr. Chhitiz on MLC of Viney @ Vinit as Ex. PW4/1 & Ex.PW4/2.
Testimony of this witness remained unchallenged during crossexamination.
State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 7 of 11(FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)
v) PW5 is Sh. Rakesh. He deposed that on 01.02.2015 at about 3.15PM, when he was playing cricket, some 'tutumaimai' took place between Vishal and Vineet. In the meantime, Sadhu Ram came there and he caught hold of Vineet. Daulat Ram also reached there with an iron rod and had hit Vineet with said iron rod on his head due to which Vineet had fallen on the ground. He further deposed that Vishal picked a stone lying nearby and hit Vineet on his head. After causing injuries to Vineet, all the three accused persons ran away from there. He further deposed that he with the help of Ranjeet, Rinku, Golu, and Dinesh took Vineet to BJRM Hospital and informed his family members about the incident.
During crossexamination, PW5 denied the suggestion that Vineet had abused Vishal calling foul names for her sister or that Vishal was not present in the park at the time of incident or that with respect to the same incident, a cross case had also been registered against Vineet and his family members or that injuries had not been caused to Vineet with iron rod or stone. A suggestion was given to him that he had not seen the accused persons inflicting injuries on the person of Vineet.
vi) PW6 is Dr. Lokesh Dharwal, who has proved the MLC No.91653 dated 01.02.2015 in respect of Vinay @ Vineet as Ex. PW6/1.
Testimony of this witness remained unchallenged during State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 8 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) crossexamination.
vii) PW7 is ASI Jaiveer Singh. He had joined the investigation alongwith IO. He further proved the arrest memo and personal search memo of accused Vishal as Ex. PW7/1 & Ex. PW 7/2; arrest memo and personal search memo of accused Daulat Ram as Ex. PW7/3 & Ex. PW7/4; arrest memo and personal search memo of accused Sadhu Singh as Ex. PW7/5 & Ex. PW7/6 and disclosure statement of accused Daulat Ram as Ex. PW7/7.
During crossexamination on behalf of accused, PW7 deposed that the injured had been taken to hospital in PCR Van and they followed PCR Van on motorcycle. He denied the suggestion that he had never joined the investigation of this case.
viii) PW8 SI Rajender Kumar is the IO of the case. He had deposed about the proceedings conducted by him. He further proved the rukka Ex. PW8/1 and site plan prepared by him as Ex. PW8/2.
PW8 had been crossexamined at length. He admitted that a cross case had been registered regarding the incident and this fact had come to his knowledge on the day of incident itself.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE :
11. This court perused Ex. PW6/1, Ex. PW4/1 & Ex. PW State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 9 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) 4/2, which is the MLC and description of injuries of the injured Vinay @ Vineet. This MLC has been proved by PW4 and PW6 and despite opportunity, during crossexamination testimonies of both these witnesses have not been challanged. He has suffered simple injuries. He also suffered two head injuries which are of simple in nature. PW3 specifically deposed that he had old enmity with all the accused. A1 (Daulat Ram) caught hold of him. A2 (Vishal) hit him on head with a stone. A3 (Sadhu Ram) also hit him with a rod. All three kept beating him there. Therefore, the injuries mentioned in Ex.
PW6/1, Ex. PW4/1 & Ex. PW4/2 are corroborated with the testimony of PW3. PW5 also deposed that while playing cricket some "Tu Tu Mai Mai" took place between Vishal (A2) and Vineet (victim). He also explained that A1 (Daulat Ram) also reached there with an iron rod and hit Vineet with iron rod on his head. Vishal (A
2) took a stone lying nearby and hit Vineet on his head with the stone. After causing injuries to Vineet, all the three accused persons ran away from there. PW8 also deposed that when he reached at the place of occurrence, Vineet @ Vinay was found present there in injured condition. Therefore, the offence committed by all the three accused persons U/s 308 IPC is proved in asmuchas all three accused hit the victim on his head. Therefore, all the three accused persons in furtherance of their common intention hit victim on his head and injured him with simple injuries, as mentioned in MLC Ex. PW6/1, Ex. PW4/1 & Ex. PW4/2. Hence, the prosecution has successfully proved its case against all the three accused persons for the offence State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 10 of 11 (FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy) punishable U/s 308/34 IPC.
CONCLUSION :
12. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and upon the observations made herein above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against all the three accused persons namely Daulat Ram (A1), Vishal (A2) and Sadhu Ram (A3) for the offence punishable U/s 308/34 IPC for attempting to commit culpable homicide by causing injuries to PW3 Vineet @ Vinay, his MLC proved as Ex. PW6/1, Ex. PW4/1 & Ex. PW4/2.
13. Therefore, all the three accused persons namely Daulat Ram (A1), Vishal (A2) and Sadhu Ram (A3) are held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 308/34 IPC.Digitally signed
JITENDRA by JITENDRA
KUMAR KUMAR MISHRA
Date: 2018.05.02
MISHRA 16:11:41 +0530
Announced in open Court (JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA)
today i.e. on 27.04.2018. Special Judge (NDPS)/North Rohini Courts, Delhi.State Vs. Daulat Ram etc. Page 11 of 11
(FIR No. 65/2015 PS Bhalaswa Dairy)