Delhi District Court
State vs . Rajesh Fir No. 379/01 Ps Subzi Mandi U/S ... on 25 August, 2012
State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC IN THE COURT OF SH. NEERAJ GAUR, METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NORTH - 03, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI S/v Rajesh. FIR No. 379/01. U/S : 324 IPC P.S : Subzi Mandi. CC No. 2811/T. UID NO. 02401R0168152002. 1. Institution of the Case : 02.03.2002. 2. Date of Commission of Offence : 11.11.2001. 3. Name of the complainant : Onkar Nath s/o Sh Santok Singh 4. Name of accused, parentage & address. : Rajesh s/o Raja Ram R/o H. No. 334, Mohalla Gari Maan, Gopi Nath, Purana Bus Adda, Distt. Mainpuri, UP, Presently, R/o Patri, St. Stephen Hospital, Delhi. 5. Offence complained of : U/s 326 IPC. U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 1 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC 6. Plea of Accused : Pleaded Not Guilty. 7. Final Order : Convicted u/s 324 IPC 8. Date reserve for Order : 25.08.2012. 9. Date of judgment : 25.08.2012. J U D G M E N T
Brief Facts and pretrial procedure:
1. The prosecution case in nutshell is that the accused was voluntarily caused grievous hurt on the person of Onkar Singh with a kitchen knife. Accused was sent up to face the trial after completion of investigation. After necessary compliances, charge u/s 326 IPC was framed against the accused on 11.09.03. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Trial
2. To establish the charges, the prosecution examined eight witnesses U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 2 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC in total, whose testimonies are being briefly touched upon as under :
(i) PW1 Sh Onkar Singh supported the prosecution case. He deposed that around 10 pm, he kept his belongings in front of Gate no. 2 of St. Stephen Hospital. He was working as a labourer. The accused was running a dhaba and accused asked him to remove his belongings. The accused became furious and started abusing him and caused injuries to him with a kitchen knife on his left side underarm. He deposed that he was taken to St. Stephen Hospital, where, his statement Ex.PW 1/A was recorded by the police. He identified the accused in the Court.
(ii) PW2 Sh Hari Kishan deposed that he over heard some noise and he came out of his shop in front of St. Stephen. He saw the complainant Onkar Singh in injured condition and he took Onkar Singh to St. Stephen Hospital. He did not identify the accused and U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 3 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC did not support the prosecution case even during cross examination conducted by Ld. APP for the State.
(iii) PW3 ASI Anand Singh deposed that while being posted as Duty Officer on 12.11.01, he received a rukka sent by HC Satya Pal on the basis of which he recorded the instant FIR Ex. PW 3/A.
(iv) PW4 Ct. Satish Kr and PW7 HC Satya Pal Singh deposed that on 11.11.01, on receipt of DD no. 40, they reached at Gate no. 2 of St. Stephen Hospital. The MLC of injured was obtained and statement Ex. PW 1/B was recorded. The sealed pullanda handed over by the concerned doctor was seized vide memo Ex.. PW 4/A. Rukka was prepared. Accused was arrested and personally searched vide memo Ex.. PW 7/A and PW 4/B respectively. Body inspection memo of accused Ex. PW 4/D was also prepared. The pointing out memo of the spot Ex.. PW 4/F was prepared. The memo of the place where accused threw the weapon/ knife is Ex.. U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 4 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC PW 4/G. Site plan Ex. PW 7/C was prepared.
(v) PW6 Ct Sudesh Kr stated that on 11.11.01, he made DD entry no. 40 Ex. PW 6/A in the Roznamcha Register.
(vi) PW 5 Dr. S. Raul deposed that on 11.11.01, patient Onkar Singh was admitted in St. Stephen Hospital. He was having stab incision 4 cm long on the left lateral chestwall in the 7th inter costal space. There was a 4 cm long incision over left forearm. The chest Xray showed left Haemothorax and Pneuthorax. Ultrasound showed Perispelmic collection. The patient was discharged on 22.11.01.
(vii) PW8 Sh Anurag Singh, Medical Record Clerk, St. Stephen Hospital stated that MLC no. 409 dated 11.11.01 Ex. PW 8/A was prepared by Dr. S.K. Rao. Opinion about the nature of injuries were given by Dr. S. Raul (PW 5).
U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 5 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC Statement of accused and Defence
3. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused u/s 313 CrPC was recorded. Accused claimed his innocence and denied any quarrel took place with Onkar Singh. He pleaded false implication stating that Onkar Singh fell on the grill in the drunken condition.
Facts in issue :
4. The following facts are in issue in the present case :
(i) Whether the accused voluntarily caused hurt with the intention or knowledge that he was likely to cause grievous hurt?
(ii) Whether the injuries suffered by Onkar Singh were grievous hurt as defined in Section 320 IPC?
(iii) Whether the grievous hurt was voluntarily caused by means U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 6 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC of an instrument of shooting, stabbing or cutting?
Arguments and appreciation of evidence
5. Ld. APP for the state submitted that the charges have been duly established against the accused. On the contrary, accused argued that it is a case of false implication.
6. The main witness relied upon by the prosecution is PW1 Sh Onkar Singh, who categorically deposed about being given stab injuries with a knife by the accused. His cross examination on behalf of the accused could not shake his testimony. It does not suggest any falsehood in the prosecution story. I find no reason to disbelieve PW1 on a hypothetical ground pleaded by the accused.
7. After holding that PW1 is a reliable witness and his statement can be acted upon, I shall now proceed to examine the other U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 7 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC issues.
8. Ld. APP for the State argued that the accused used a knife for causing the injuries. I have given my thoughtful considerations. The number of injuries found on the body of the Onkar Singh clearly suggest that the intention of the accused was to cause grievous hurt. The weapon used by the accused was a kitchen knife being used in the Dhaba. Even in the absence of recovery of the knife, the MLC clearly suggest that there were stab injuries. When a knife is being used by a person as a weapon, it can be safely inferred that he possessed sufficient knowledge that it could cause grievous injuries. In these circumstances, I have no hesitation to hold that the accused intended or had knowledge of likelihood of causing grievous hurt.
9. The next question to be decided is as to the nature of injuries. PW5 Dr. S. Raul opined that the injuries were grievous in nature. Whether an injury is grievous or not can be decided only in the light of U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 8 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC Section 320 IPC. The injuries suffered by Onkar Singh are not covered in first Seven clauses of Section 320 IPC. According to Clause 8thly, a hurt can be designated as grievous which endangers life or causes the sufferer to be, during the space of 20 days, in severe bodily pain or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.
9.1 Dr. Raul did not state the basis of his opinion. He did not state or depose that the injury was such as to endanger life. Certainly, there are stab injury on left forearm and left chest, however, such an injury, in absence of any well founded opinion, cannot be categorized under Clause 8thly of Section 320 IPC. As per Dr. Raul, Onkar Singh was discharged on 22.11.01 which implies that he underwent a hospitalization for 11 days. Onkar Singh did not depose that he was under severe bodily pain for 20 days or more or that he was unable to follow his ordinarily pursuits for 20 or more days. In these circumstances, I am unable to hold that Onkar Singh, in fact suffered a grievous hurt. U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 9 of 10 State Vs. Rajesh FIR No. 379/01 PS Subzi Mandi U/s 326 IPC
10. The facts proved on record, however, constitute a minor offence of causing hurt by a knife which is punishable u/s 324 IPC. By virtue of Section 222 CrPC, a conviction u/s 324 IPC (a minor offence) can still be recorded.
Conclusion
11. After going through the evidence available on record and in the light of above discussion, I found the accused Rajesh not guilty u/s 326 IPC. I have found him guilty u/s 324 IPC. Accused is accordingly convicted u/s 324 IPC.
Announced in the open (NEERAJ GAUR)
Court today i.e. 25.08.12. MM(3)N/DELHI.
U.ID NO. 02401R0168152002. Page No. 10 of 10