Delhi District Court
State vs . Amit Tyagi on 31 January, 2019
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-05 (SOUTH-
WEST), DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
PRESIDED BY : SH. SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH
STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI
FIR No. 518/16
Police Station: VIKAS PURI
Under Section: 326/34 IPC
Date of institution : 06.12.2017
Date of reserving : 24.01.2019
Date of pronouncement : 31.01.2019
JUDGMENT
a) Serial number of the case 9486/17
b) Date of commission of offence 09.08.2016
c) Name of the complainant Sh. Ravi s/o Sh. Om Parkash,
r/o WZ 10 Vikas Puri, West
Delhi.
d) Name, parentage and address 1. Amit Tyagi of the accused persons s/o Sh. Rishi Raj r/o WZ 128A Bhudela Village Vikas Puri, New Delhi.
2. Sonu Tyagi (JCL)
3. Raju Nepali (Not arrested)
e) Offence complained of Section 326/34 IPC STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI FIR No. 518/16 PS : VIKAS PURI u/S : 326/34 IPC 1
f) Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
g) Final order Acquitted
h) Date of final order 31.01.2019.
BRIEF REASONS FOR THE JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2016 at about 9:00 pm at Dhauli Piyau Red light main Najafgarh Road, Shivwadi Bhola Mandir, Vikas Puri, you along with (Sonu Tyagi JCL and Raju Nepali not arrested) in furtherance of your common intention voluntarily caused sharp grievous injuries to the complainant Sh. Ravi. It is alleged that you have committed of- fences punishable u/s 326/34 IPC.
2. Charge was framed against the accused Amit Tyagi un- der Section 326/34 IPC vide order dated 29.05.2018 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined one witnesses namely PW1 Sh. Ravi/ complainant.
STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI FIR No. 518/16 PS : VIKAS PURI u/S : 326/34 IPC 2 One of the accused Sonu Tyagi was declared JCL as per charge sheet.
4. After the examination of witness, PE was closed and the recording of statement of accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C was dispensed with as the eye witnesses became hostile.
5. I have heard the submissions of Sh. Shiv Kumar, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and Sh. N. K. Sharma, Ld. Defence counsel and perused the record carefully.
6. In this case PW1 is the main eye witness and he has become hostile on the point of identity of the accused. PW1 had failed to identify the accused Amit Tyagi.
This witness was declared hostile. Witness was cross examined by Ld. APP. Even in cross examination witness failed to identify the accused Amit Tyagi.
7. Rest of the witnesses are not so vital or main witnesses being the formal/police witnesses either who participated in the investigation or conducted the same. They were not the eye STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI FIR No. 518/16 PS : VIKAS PURI u/S : 326/34 IPC 3 witnesses or main witnesses to the incident.
8. I have heard the arguments and perused the material on record.
9. PW1 had already become hostile on the point of identity of the accused. Even witness failed to identify the accused when he was cross examined by Ld. APP.
10. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the decision given by the Apex Court in the case of Satish Mehra Vs. Delhi Administration and Another (1996 JCC 507) :
"...........when the Judge is fairly certain that there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction the valuable time of the Court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on a future date".
11. In view of above, it is held that prosecution has failed to prove its case against accused beyond reasonable doubts.
STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI FIR No. 518/16 PS : VIKAS PURI u/S : 326/34 IPC 4 Therefore, I do not have any option but to pronounce the accused Amit Tyagi not guilty. Accordingly, he is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 326/34 IPC.
12. Fresh bail bonds u/s 437A Cr.P.C. of accused Amit Tyagi furnished and accepted.
13. Documents, if any be returned to the rightful person. Endorsement, if any be cancelled. Bail bonds stand canceled. Superdignama if any, be cancelled.
14. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Court on 31.01.2019.
(SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH) Metropolitan Magistrate-05 (South-West) 31.01.2019.
Digitally signed by SANTOSH SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH
KUMAR SINGH Date: 2019.02.04 10:32:11
+0530
STATE Vs. AMIT TYAGI FIR No. 518/16 PS : VIKAS PURI u/S : 326/34 IPC 5