Delhi District Court
State vs Bhagwan Sahai on 31 July, 2025
THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER KUMAR BANSAL
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
NEW DELHI DISTRICT,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLND01-012894-2019
In the matter :
SC No. : 343/2019
FIR No. : 133/2016
Police Station : Inderpuri
State Versus 1. Bhagwan Sahai
S/o. Sh. Ram Sahai
R/o. D-272, J.J. Colony,
Inderpuri, Delhi. ..... Accused No.1
2. Rajnish
S/o. Sh. Bhagwan Sahai
R/o. D-272, J.J. Colony,
Inderpuri, Delhi. ..... Accused No.2
3. Sagar
S/o. Sh. Dwarka Prasad
R/o. D-275, J.J. Colony,
Inderpuri, Delhi. ..... Accused No.3
4. Dwarka Prasad
S/o. Ram Sahai
R/o. D-275, J.J. Colony,
Inderpuri, Delhi. ..... Accused No.4
5. Manoj
S/o. Sh. Dwarka Prasad
R/o. D-275, J.J. Colony,
Inderpuri, Delhi. ..... Accused No.5
Date of assignment : 19.07.2019
Date of hearing of arguments : 05.06.2025
Date of Judgment : 31.07.2025
Appearances:
Sh. Shiv Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Sanjeev Rawat, Ld. Counsel for all the accused persons.
Digitally signed by
VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR
KUMAR BANSAL
Date: 2025.07.31
BANSAL 16:17:48 +0530
SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 1 of 16
JUDGMENT
1. On 11.06.2016, Rajesh was present on his shop situated at D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri, New Delhi being run in the name and style of Shyam Jewellers. It was about 11 am, when a boy came and told him that his neighbour is complaining that the drain water from his shop is going towards their shop. Rajesh Kumar came out and started talking with his neighbour Bhagwan Sahai with respect to the drainage water. Rajesh told Bhagwan Sahai that the drainage water from his shop does not go towards their shop. He also brought one bucket of water and poured it in the drain to check the same. A small amount of water went towards Ravi Dairy. In the meanwhile, Bhagwan Sahai and his son Rajnish started abusing him and said that the water comes from his shop only. They started abusing and mishandling him. Rajnish was having a churi. Bhagwan Sahai and his son started beating him. They have also given beatings to his two sons Umesh Aggarwal and Kamal with a danda used to break the ice. They have also threatened to kill them. On this complaint, FIR No.0133 was registered at police station Inder Puri for the offences punishable U/s. 452, 341, 323, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. All the accused persons were apprehended. After completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed.
2. One cross FIR No.132/2016 was also registered for the offences punishable U/s.323, 308 read with Section 34 IPC. The case after investigation and completion of proceedings U/s.207 Cr.PC was committed to the Sessions Court and this being the cross case was also transferred to Sessions Court.
3. All the accused persons were charged by my Ld. Digitally signed VIRENDER by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:18:08 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 2 of 16 Predecessor for the offences punishable U/s.452, 341, 323 read with Section 34 IPC and U/s.506 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Rajesh Kumar, the complainant was examined as PW-1. He deposed that on 11.06.2016, at about 11 am, he was present at his jewellery shop at D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri, New Delhi being run in the name of Shree Shyam Jewellers. One boy came to him and told that accused Bhagwan Sahai is calling him whose shop is situated after the shop of Ravi Dairy. He came to his shop. At that time, the accused was saying that the water from his shop was going towards the shop of the accused. Hot words were exchanged between him and Bhagwan Sahai. He told the accused that water from his shop cannot go to the shop of accused Bhagwan Sahai and to check this he poured a bucket of water there and asked the accused to check if water goes to his shop or not. The water did not go to the shop of Bhagwan Sahai but it went towards the shop of Ravi Dairy.
5. In the meantime, accused Bhagwan Sahai and his son Rajnish started shouting, abusing and scuffling with him. Rajnish son of accused Bhagwan Sahai brought a danda from his shop. Accused Bhagwan Sahai started beating him with his hands and Rajnish gave him beatings with a danda. They took him to his shop while beating him and also gave him beatings inside the shop. Both the accused persons gave beatings to his son Kamal. People from the nearby collected there and saved them. In the meanwhile, his son Umesh also reached there. Both accused Bhagwan Sahai, his son Rajnish, Sagar, Manoj and Dwarka Prasad gave beatings to Digitally signed VIRENDER by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:18:20 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 3 of 16 him, Umesh and Kamal. Due to the beatings, Umesh became unconscious and he was taken inside the shop.
6. Accused Rajnish brought a knife (churi) and they opened the door of his shop. They have also damaged the outside glass of his shop. Public persons stopped them. He made a call at 100 number. Police arrived and took them to Dr. RML Hospital. Police recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A. He also handed over the CD of the CCTV footage of the incident to the IO. He has correctly identified the accused persons and also the danda used in the commission of the offence. One CD and the pen drive which are on the file of the cross case registered as FIR No.132/2016 is also played. He identified the CD and the Pen Drive as Ex.P-3/1 and Ex.P-3/2 wherein the accused persons are visible quarreling with the injured persons.
7. During cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, he deposed that the quarrel started at about 11 or 11.15 am. Umesh reached at the spot after about 15 minutes of the first incident. He made a call at 100 number after the first incident. The police reached the spot at about 11.30 am.
8. Police officials took him, his sons Umesh and Kamal as well as accused Bhagwan Sahai and Rajnish to Dr. RML hospital in government Gypsy. No other person except the above mentioned persons and the police officials were in the Gypsy. They were discharged from Dr. RML Hospital after about half an hour. IO met them at about 01.00 or 01.30 pm. His statement was recorded after two days of the incident in the police station. His son VIRENDER Digitally VIRENDER signed by KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:18:33 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 4 of 16 Kamal was also present with him at that time.
9. One hawker told him that Bhagwan Sahai was saying "hamari dukaan ka pani unki dukan ki taraf aa raha hai" . Many persons had gathered on the spot at the time of incident but he cannot tell their names. Bhagwan Sahai took a danda meant for breaking the ice from a rehri and Rajnish was having the poker (sua) for breaking the ice.
10. He is illiterate however, he knows how to read devnagri script. He had not read his statement recorded by the IO. His statement was also not read over to him by the IO. He admitted that this FIR was registered on the intervention of Mukesh Meena, IPS.
11. Statements of his sons were also recorded in his presence. Police visited his shop after about three days of the incident. He denied the suggestion that dandas were lying in his shop. He denied the suggestion that no such incident had taken place or that he along with his sons had given beatings to the accused persons. He denied the suggestion that the CD and Pen Drive had been manipulated and fabricated. He denied the suggestion that accused persons have not given him and his sons beatings.
12. Ct. Manoj was examined as PW-2. He deposed that on 11.06.2016, on receipt of DD No.17A and 18A, he along with SI Uday Singh reached the spot i.e. D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri. They came to know that five persons had been removed to Dr. RML Hospital by ERV. One baseball bat and the danda meant for VIRENDER Digitally signed by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:18:45 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 5 of 16 breaking the ice were lying at the spot. SI Uday Singh went to the hospital leaving him at the spot. The testimony of the witnesses has remained unchallenged and uncontroverted.
13. Umesh Aggarwal was examined as PW-3. He deposed that at the time of the incident he was running grocery shop at B-373, ground floor, JJ Colony, Inderpuri. He is also having another shop at D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri in the name of Sh. Shyam Jewellers being run by his father Rajesh and younger brother Kamal.
14. On 11.06.2016, at about 11.10 am, he was sitting at his shop when somebody informed him that a quarrel had taken place at their jewellery shop. He reached there. He asked his father and brother regarding the incident and came out. Accused persons were there along with their relatives armed with lathis and dandas. They quarreled with him and gave beatings to him, his brother and father. He became unconscious. Some people intervened and took him inside the shop. The accused persons again entered the shop and gave them beatings. Call at 100 number was made. Police arrived there and removed them to the hospital. He deposed that the entire incident was captured in the CCTV camera installed in their shop.
15. Police removed them to the hospital where they were treated. His statement was also recorded. He has also identified CD as well as Pen Drive containing the CCTV footage of the incident however, CD and Pen Drive are in the file of case FIR No.132/2016. CD and the Pen Drive were run on computer and the Digitally signed VIRENDER by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:18:58 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 6 of 16 accused persons are visible in CCTV footage quarreling with the injured persons. The footage covers the entire incident.
16. During cross examination by the Ld. Defence counsel, he deposed that his statement was recorded by the IO on the next day of the incident. His father was also present with him at that time. IO did not record the statement of any other person besides him. He cannot tell the name of the person who informed him about the incident. His father had also made a call to the police before he reached the spot. Police was again informed that the accused persons gave beatings to him. Police arrived after about ten minutes after the accused persons have given beatings to him. They were discharged from the hospital at about 04.30 or 05.00 pm on the same day. He does not remember the exact date when the FIR was registered but so far as he remembers, the FIR was registered after 03/04 days of the incident. The CD and Pen Drive are having the first incident when he was not present. He denied the suggestion that CD and Pen Drive have been manipulated and fabricated. He denied the suggestion that the accused persons have not given any beatings to him or to his father and younger brother.
17. Ms. Jyoti was examined as PW-4. She deposed that at the time of incident, she was studying in class 12 and was working as sales girl at Shyam Jewellers situated at D-2 JJ Colony, Inderpuri, New Delhi.
18. On 11.06.2016, at about 11.00 am she along with owner of the shop Rajesh, Kamal and Umesh as well as boy namely Kuldeep were present at the shop. One vegetable vendor Digitally signed VIRENDER by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:19:12 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 7 of 16 came and told Rajesh that Bhagwan Sahai is calling him outside the shop. A dispute arose with regard to the flowing and stagnation of water outside the shop between Rajesh, Kamal and Bhagwan Sahai i.e. accused. Bhagwan Sahai was also running a jewellery shop which is situated after one shop from the shop of Rajesh. Accused Bhagwan Sahai and Rajnish (both correctly identified) entered their shop. Rajnish was having a danda and gave danda blow to Kamal. They also gave beatings to Rajesh. Public persons intervened and rescued them.
19. After sometime, Umesh another son of Rajesh came there after hearing about the quarrel. Accused Bhagwan Sahai and other three persons whose name she does not know but are present in the court (correctly identified) gave beatings to Rajesh, Umesh and Kamal with dandas. The accused persons also threatened to kill Rajesh.
20. During cross examination by the Ld. Counsel, she deposed that she has come to the court at the instance of Rajesh. She admitted that during the incident, she did not come outside the shop. She denied the suggestion that she did not witness the incident which had occurred outside the shop. Police did not make inquiry from her. Her statement was also not recorded. She admitted that she is working at Shree Shyam Jewellers for the last nine years. She denied the suggestion that no such incident had taken place or that she is deposing falsely. She also denied the suggestion that accused persons had not given beatings to Rajesh, Kamal and Umesh. She also denied the suggestion that the accused persons had not entered the shop of Shree Shyam Jewellers.
VIRENDER Digitally signed by
VIRENDER KUMAR
KUMAR BANSAL
Date: 2025.07.31
BANSAL 16:19:22 +0530
SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 8 of 16
21. Ranjit Kumar Shah was examined as PW-5. He
deposed that he is a vegetable vendor and running a rehri of vegetables outside Shree Shyam Jewellers situated at D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri.
22. On 11.06.2016, at about 11 am, he was putting the vegetables on his rehri. There was stagnation of water near the shop. Bhagwan Sahai the accused came there and enquired from him about the stagnated water and also asked him to call the owner of Shree Shyam Jewellery. He called Rajesh and the conversation took place between Rajesh and Bhagwan Sahai. Thereafter, Rajesh went inside the shop and he left the spot. He stated that no incident took place in his presence.
23. He was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State as he resilled from the statement recorded by the police.
24. During cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, he stated that police did not make any inquiry from him and his statement was not recorded. He denied the suggestion that while Rajesh and Kamal were talking with Bhagwan Sahai suddenly Rajesh son of Bhagwan Sahai started beating Rajesh and Kamal with a danda. He also denied the suggestion that Rajesh and Kamal entered their shop and the accused persons also entered the shop of Rajesh and Kamal while beating them. He was confronted with his statement Ex.PW5/A wherein it was found so recorded. He also denied the suggestion that after sometime Umesh brother of Kamal came there and the arguments again started. He denied the suggestion that all the five accused persons present in the court Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:19:35 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 9 of 16 gave beatings to Rajesh, Kamal and Umesh. He was confronted with his statement Ex.PW5/A. He deposed that he left the place while conversation between accused Bhagwan Sahai and Rajesh was going on.
25. Inspector Sandeep was examined as PW-6. He deposed that investigation of this case was assigned to him on 14.06.2016 by the orders of the SHO. Duty Officer handed over to him the computer copy of the FIR Ex.A-1 along with certificate U/s.65B of the Indian Evidence Act. He examined SI Uday and Ct. Manoj who visited the spot on the day of incident.
26. On 16.06.2016, he reached the spot and prepared site plan Ex.A-5 at the instance of Rajesh Kumar. He recorded statement of Rajesh Kumar, Kamal and Umesh and also checked the CCTV footage at the instance of victims.
27. On 17.06.2016, he recorded the statements of Jyoti and Kuldeep who were working as sales persons at the shop of Rajesh. He also recorded the statement of Ranjeet Kumar.
28. All the accused persons were granted anticipatory bail. On 23.06.2016, he formally arrested accused Bhagwan Sahai and Rajnish vide arrest memos Ex.PW6/A and Ex.PW6/B. On 30.06.2016, he formally arrested accused Sagar, Dwarka Prasad and Manoj vide arrest memos Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D and Ex.PW6/E. He correctly identified all the accused persons.
29. He also collected DD No. 50B Ex.PW6/F, DD No.18A Ex.A3. DD No. 50B and seized the same vide memo Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:19:46 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 10 of 16 Ex.PW1/B. He also collected the copy of the seizure memo of dandas meant for breaking the ice and the baseball stick from the file case FIR No.132/2016. He obtained the results on the MLCs of the injured. Doctor opined the nature of injuries as 'simple' on the MLCs Ex.PW6/F, Ex.PW6/G and Ex.PW6/H.
30. During cross examination by the Ld. Defence counsel, he stated that he has not seized any case property. He admitted that baseball stick and danda were seized in case FIR no.132/2016.
31. On 16.06.2016, he reached the spot in the afternoon but he does not remember the time. He cannot say if Kuldeep and Jyoti were found present at the spot. He denied the suggestion that Kuldeep and Jyoti were planted witnesses and that is why their statements were recorded on 17.06.2016 in connivance with the complainant. He denied the suggestion that he had not properly and fairly investigated the matter or that the accused persons had no concern with the case. He denied the suggestion that FIR against the accused persons was recorded under pressure of senior police officer.
32. Kuldeep was examined as PW-7. He deposed that at the time of incident, he was working at Shyam Jewellers as sales person. On 11.06.2016, he along with owner of the shop namely Rajesh and Kamal and the sales girl Jyoti was preset at the shop. At about 11 or 11.30 am, accused Bhagwan Sahai (correctly identified), who also runs a jewellery shop at D-4, Inderpuri, sent Ranjit vegetable seller to call Rajesh in connection with the Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.07.31 16:19:59 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 11 of 16 stagnation and flow of water. Rajesh went outside the shop. After sometime Rajesh and Kamal entered the shop while running. Both the accused Bhagwan Sahai and his son Rajnish (correctly identified) armed with danda gave beatings to Rajesh and Kamal. Nearby shopkeepers intervened in the matter.
33. After sometime Umesh son of Rajesh reached there. Again a dispute took place.
34. The witness was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State wherein he denied the suggestion that when Umesh reached the spot, accused persons namely Bhagwan Sahai, Rajnish, Dwarka Prasad, Sagar and Manoj gave beatings to Rajesh, Kamal and Umesh with dandas. He also denied the suggestion that the accused persons gave merciless beatings to Rajesh, Kamal and Umesh. Public persons intervened. He admitted that the incident was captured in the CCTV camera installed in the shop.
35. During cross examination by Ld. Defence counsel, he stated that he has no proof showing that he was working as an employee at Shyam Jewellers at the time of incident. He admitted that he cannot tell as to what had happened outside the shop. Police did not read over his statement to him. He denied the suggestion that he is planted or that he is deposing falsely.
36. SI Parveen was examined as PW-8. He deposed that on 31.01.2017, due to transfer of SI Sandeep the case was assigned to him. He took the case file from the MHC(R) and perused the same. The investigation was completed. He prepared the Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 16:20:09 BANSAL +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 12 of 16 chargesheet and filed the same. The testimony of the witness has remained unchallenged and uncontroverted.
37. SI Uday Singh (Retd.) was examined as PW-9. He deposed that on 11.06.2016 he was posted as Sub Inspector at police station Inderpuri. DD No.17A, 18A were assigned to him. He along with Ct. Manoj reached the spot i.e. D-2/4, D Block, Near Police Booth, Inderpuri, where they found five persons in injured condition. He sent all the injured persons to Dr. RML hospital in ERV. He also went to Dr. RML Hospital leaving Ct. Manoj at the spot to supervise the same. In the hospital, all the five injured were found hospitalized. He collected the MLCs of all the injured persons and recorded the statement of Bhagwan Sahai. He prepared rukka and got the FIR registered.
38. He also recorded the statement of the another injured Rajesh Kumar, which is Ex.PW1/A. As the injuries sustained by Rajesh Kumar were simple, he recorded DD No.50B and discharged the injured Rajesh Kumar. On 14.06.2016, injured Rajesh Kumar brought a CCTV footage in which the complainant of case FIR No.132/2016, police station Inderpuri, Bhagwan Sahai along with Rajnish, Sagar, Manoj and Dwarka Prasad were entering in the shop of complainant Rajesh Kumar armed with dandas. On the strength of CCTV footage, he prepared rukka Ex.PW9/A on the statement of Rajesh Kumar. He handed over the rukka to DO who registered FIR No.133/2016.
39. On 14.06.2016, the complainant produced the CD containing the CCTV footage of his shop which he seized vide VIRENDER Digitally signed by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:20:20 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 13 of 16 seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. After registration of FIR, the further investigation was assigned to another police officer He identified the accused persons and also identified Hard Disk and the CCTV footage. He identified the Hard Disk which is Ex.P-4 in case FIR No.132/2016 and is now Ex.PW9/P-1.
40. During cross examination by the Ld. Defence counsel, he stated that he reached the spot at about 11.15 am, he recorded the statement of complainant Rajesh in the police station at about 04.00 pm. When he reached the spot, complainant Rajesh Kumar was present. He admitted that the date mentioned on the seizure memo of the Hard Disk in FIR No.133/2016 is 15.06.2016. He denied the suggestion that he had not seen the Hard Disk on 14.06.2016. He admitted that tehrir in this case was written by him on the orders of the SHO and FIR was registered after collecting the MLCs of the injured persons.
41. He had run the Hard Disk in shop No.D-2 belonging to the complainant of the present case on 14.06.2016. He denied the suggestion that FIR in this case was registered on the directions of senior police officer Mukesh Meena. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed.
42. Statements of the accused persons were recorded U/s.313 CR.PC wherein they denied the entire evidence. They did not wish to lead evidence in defence and the case was listed for final arguments.
43. I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for the State, Ld. Defence counsel for the accused persons and perused the record. Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:20:30 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 14 of 16
44. In this case, there were three injured, but one of the injured Kamal had already expired. The other two injured have been examined as PW1 Rajesh Aggarwal and PW3 Umesh Aggarwal. There are other eye witnesses i.e. Jyoti examined as PW4 and Kuldeep examined as PW7. They both were working at the shop of PW1. There is another witness Ranjeet who was a vegetable vendor. The injured witnesses have corroborated each other and their testimony found corroboration from the statement of Jyoti PW4 and Kuldeep PW7. They all specifically stated that the accused persons armed with dandas entered the shop i.e. D-2, JJ Colony, Inderpuri. There is CCTV footage also placed on record and it has been observed in the CCTV footage being run that the accused persons are visible entering the shop of the injured armed with dandas. Though, there are certain contradictions in the statements of the witnesses, but those are minor contradictions not going to the root of the case. It is important to note here that Ranjeet PW5 has not fully supported the case and stated that in his presence, no such quarrel had taken place. But at the same time, keeping in view the testimony of PW1, PW3 and PW4, coupled with the testimony of PW7, it is clear that all the accused persons armed with dandas entered the shop and also assaulted them. However, there is no such evidence brought on record that the accused persons has obstructed the way of any of the injured or extended any threat.
45. Keeping in view this evidence, all the accused persons are convicted for the offence punishable U/s.452 read with Section 34 IPC and U/s.323 read with Section 34 IPC. However, as there is no cogent evidence for convicting the accused persons for Digitally signed VIRENDER by VIRENDER KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL Date: 2025.07.31 BANSAL 16:20:44 +0530 SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 15 of 16 the offence punishable U/s.341 read with Section 34 IPC and U/s. 506 read with Section 34 IPC, hence they are acquitted under the said Sections.
Digitally signed by VIRENDER VIRENDER
KUMAR KUMAR BANSAL
Date: 2025.07.31
BANSAL 16:20:54 +0530
Announced in the open Court (Virender Kumar Bansal)
st
on 31 July, 2025 Principal District & Sessions Judge
New Delhi District,
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
SC No. 343/2019 State Vs. Bhagwan Sahai & Ors. Page No. 16 of 16