Delhi District Court
State vs Ajay Bhajgi (5) on 8 December, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. POOJA TALWAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)-01
WEST DISTRICT TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI
In the matter of:
STATE
Vs.
Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. FIR No.255/15
PS: Ranjit Nagar
JUDGMENT
1. Sl. no. of case Sessions Case No. 362/17
2. CNR no. DLWT010057162017
3. Date of Institution 28.04.2017
4. Date of Commission of 25.04.2015 offence
5. Name of the accused 1. Ajay Bhajgi S/o Krishan Prakash R/o 3013/4, Street no.18, Near Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi
2. Aman Rana S/o Surender Rana R/o 2954 Street no.12, Near Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi
3. Ajay Rana S/o Surender Rana R/o 2954 Street no.12, Near Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi
4. Pankaj Gaur S/o Late Maya Dutt R/o 2970 Street no.12, Near Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 1 of 43 FIR no.255/15 Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
2025.12.08 12:58:48 +0530
5. Ayub Khan S/o Irshad Bhali R/o 2151, T-14, New Patel Nagar, New Delhi
6. Naresh Kumari W/o Umesh Chandra R/o 2947/17, Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi
6. Offence Complained of Section 147/148 r/w Section 149 IPC Section 186 332 353 506 & 34 IPC Section 308/34
7. Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
8. Date of reserving the 04.12.2025 judgment
9. Final order Accused Ajay Bhajgi, Aman Rana, Ajay Rana, Pankaj Gaur convicted under Section 323/34 IPC Accused Ayub Khan and Naresh Kumari acquitted.
10. Date of such judgment 08.12.2025 Case of the prosecution
1. Story of the prosecution is that a complaint was filed by Ct. Jamalludin stating that he was posted at PS Ranjeet Nagar. On 25.04.2015 at about 9.40 pm he alongwith Ct. Dharam Raj was on vehicle checking duty at Shiv Chowk in front of police booth. In the meantime two boys on splendor motorcycle came from Block-7 side and both were without helmet. When they stopped them and asked for documents of the vehicle, they refused to show the same and stated that "Aaj tak kisi ki himmat POOJA nahi hui hai hamari gadi rokne ki". They started abusing them. TALWAR Despite making them understand, they started giving beatings to Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 2 of 43 Date:
FIR no.255/15 2025.12.08
12:58:55 +0530
Ct. Jamalluddin. When they raised alarm Ct. Karam Chand who was passing by tried to intervene, he was abused and given beatings by them. Both the boys were named Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi. Thereafter some known persons/relatives of accused Aay Bhajgi gathered there. Out of them one lady Naresh Kumari also came there and threatened them. Public persons gathered there and they pushed them into the police booth and then accused Ajay Rana hit him with heavy object on the head of Ct. Jamalludin due to which blood oozing out. They provoked the other accused persons present there and gave beatings to the complainant. Uniform of Ct. Karam Chand was torn. Since public persons gathered there, taking advantage of crowd, accused persons Naresh Kumari, Neetu, Ayub Khan and other persons fled. Complainant and Ct. Karam Chand were taken to the nearest hospital for first aid. Accused Ajay Bhajgi, Ajay Rana, Aman Rana and Pankaj Gaur were arrested at the spot. Accused Ayub Khan was arrested on 27.04.2015 from his house near Satyam Cinema. Accused Naresh Kumari was interrogated on 04.03.2017 and was released on bond.
2. On the basis of complaint, FIR under Section 109/147/186/308/332/341/353/506 IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act and 129/177 MV Act was registered.
Charge
3. Charge was framed against all the accused persons under Section 147/148 r/w Section 149 IPC, Section 186, 332, 353, 506 & 34 IPC and Section 308/34 IPC vide order dated 17.12.2018. POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 3 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 12:59:02 +0530 Prosecution evidence
4. In order to prove its case prosecution examined fifteen witnesses as under :-
Material witness:
(i) PW6: ASI Jamaluddin deposed that:
"On 25.04.2015, I 1 was posted at PS Ranjit Nagar as constable) On that day, at about 09.45 PM, I along with Constable Dharam Raj was on motorcycle checking duty at Shiv Chowk infront of Police Booth, Ranjit Nagar. In the meanwhile, two boys came there on a motorcycle without helmet from the side of Gali no. 7. I do not remember the registration number of the said motorcycle. The said boys were got stopped and they were asked to produce the documents of the vehicle. However, the said boys refused to show any documents while stating that "hume kyo rok liya, hume rokne ki kisme himmat haỉ". The said boys started enraged and started abusing us. Out of these boys, one was appearing to be in drunken condition. The said boys raised the noise and on hearing the same, their known persons reached there. The name of the above-mentioned two boys revealed as Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi. In the meanwhile, one constable also reached there while his patrolling duty. However, I do not remember the name of the said constable. The said constable also asked the above-mentioned and their associates as to why, they were quarreling.
The above-mentioned boys and their associates started scrimmage (dhaka mukki) with me and above-mentioned constable and in the said process, they pushed us inside the nearby police booth. The accused Ajay Rana hit on my head one iron made weight (lohe ka batta). Now, I recollect the name of POOJA the above-mentioned constable as Karam Chand. Out of the TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 4 of 43 Digitally signed FIR no.255/15 by POOJA TALWAR Date:
2025.12.08 12:59:11 +0530 above-mentioned boys, one boy gave fist blows near the eye of Ct. Karam Chand. In the meanwhile, one lady namely Naresh Kumari also reached there while stating that "tum nahin jante mujhe, tumhari naukri kharab karwati hử. In the meanwhile, one constable Amit also reached there. On seeing the incident, Ct. Amit made a call at 100 number through his mobile phone. The local police staff including Additional SHO, reached on the spot. Me and Ct. Karam Chand were taken to Aacharya Bhikshu Hospital.
At the time of incident, other associates of accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi, also reached there including Aman, Ayub Khan, Neetu. I do not remember the names of other associates. When the above-mentioned associates reached on the spot, accused Ajay Rana exhorted "maaro salo ko". On this exhortation, the above- mentioned associates and boys gave beatings to police staff. The uniform of Ct. Karam Chand was also torn by the accused persons. (Accused Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhajgi and Aman were apprehended on the spot when, local police staff reached there. The accused Neetu and Ayub Khan succeeded in fleeing away from the spot. The accused lady Naresh Kumari also succeeded in fleeing away from there.
In the above-mentioned hospital, we were medically examined. My statement exhibited as Ex. PW6/A which bears my signature at point A, was recorded by the Investigating Officer in the said hospital.
All the accused persons are present in the court today (correctly identified). Vol. I do not remember the names of accused persons.
POOJA I can also identify accused Ajay Rana, if shown to me. TALWAR (Accused Ajay Rana is exempted for today through his learned Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 5 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 12:59:27 +0530 counsel Sh. Rambir Singh Mann and he is not disputing the identity of the accused Ajay Rana).
The above-mentioned motorcycle was taken into possession vide seizure memo already exhibited as Ex. PW4/A which bears my signature at point D. The place of occurrence was also pointed out by me.
On 27.04.2015, accused Ayub Khan was apprehended from his house near Satyam Cinema. The address of accused Ayub Khan was in the knowledge of Ct. Pawan as he was the beat officer of the area. The accused Ayub Khan was arrested and personally searched vide personal search memo Ex. PW6/B which bears my signature at point A. At this stage, learned Addl. PP for the State seeks permission to put a leading question with regard to the registration number of the aforesaid motorcycle. Heard. Allowed.
Question: Is it correct that the registration number of the aforesaid motorcycle was DL-6SAB-8108?
Ans:Yes.
I do not remember if besides Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhajgi and Aman, other accused was apprehended on the spot or not.
At this stage, learned Addl. PP for the State again seeks permission to put a leading question to the witness. Heard. Allowed.
Question: Is it correct that accused Pankaj Gaur was also apprehended at the spot?
Ans:Yes.
I can identify the case property, if shown to me.
At this stage, (MHC(M) produced a pullanda in sealed condition The seal impressions are in broken condition. The POOJA TALWAR pullanda is opened. The same is found containing an iron made Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 6 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date:
2025.12.08 12:59:33 +0530 weight of the weight of 01 kg, which is shown to the witness, who correctly identifies it. The said iron made weigh is exhibited as Ex. P-1.) (MHC(M) also produced another pullanda in sealed condition with the seal of RTNGR/ Seven seal impressions are there on the same pullanda, out of which, one seal impression is in broken condition. The said pullanda is opened. The same is found containing a uniform of the police official of rank of constable. On the said uniform, the name plate is there in the name of constable Karam Chand, which is in hanging condition over the pocket of same. The left and right side flaps of the said uniform are without buttons. Two buttons of the said uniform on the right side of it, are also not available on the same. The whistle with its dori of the uniform, is also available in the pullanda. Same are shown to the witness, who correctly identifies it. The said uniform with its dori are collectively exhibited as Ex. P-2 (objected to by the learned defence counsel).
At this stage, learned defence counsel submits that he is not disputing the identity of the motorcycle which was released on superdari to the accused persons. However, the witness has admitted the registration number of the said motorcycle only during putting leading question by the learned Addl. PP for the the State as he was not aware about the same."
(ii) PW7: HC Karam Chand deposed that:
"On 25.04.2015, I was posted at PS Ranjit Nagar as Constable. On that day, I was on patrolling duty and while patrolling at about 09:00-9:30 pm when I reached Shiv Chowk infront of police booth, I saw that several public persons were POOJA gathered there. I saw that some public persons were quarreling TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 7 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 12:59:53 +0530 with police officials and beating them. I intervened and on which the said public persons also started quarreling with me and abusing me. I came to know their name as Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi. The said Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi started shouting and also started beating me. On their shouting, some public person including the relatives of Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi came there. One lady who was relative of Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi came and told her name as Naresh Kumari and she stated to me that "aap mujhe nahi jante, main tumhari nokri khrab karwadungi. Apko main dekhti hoon abhi". Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi with other public perons took me, Ct. Jammaludin and Ct. Dharm Raj who were also present there inside the police booth. Ajay Rana shouted and stated that pankaj and aman who came there and gave beating to us. On this Pankaj and Aman came and also started quarreling with us and pushing us. Ajay Bhojgi also shouted and asked Ayub and Nitu by calling their names to give beating to us. Ayub and Nitu also joined them and quarrelled with us. Ajay Rana hit Ct. Jamaluddin on his head with heavy object and due to which blood started flowing from hea from Ct. Jamaluddin. Ajay Bhojgi gave fist blow on my left eye due to which my eye got swollen. My uniform was also torned by them. Ct. Amit came there and informed about the incident in the PS. On which, IO SI Pardeep Sharma along with Ct. Ashwani Ct Rakesh and other official came there. The above stated Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhojgi, Pankaj and Aman Rana were apprehended at the spot. Naresh Kumari, Nitu and Ayub fled away from there. SI Pardeep along with other staff took me and Ct. Jamlaudin to Achariya Bhikshu hospital where we were medically examined. POOJA Statement of Ct. Jamluddin was recorded by IO and thereafter TALWAR me again came to the spot. One motor cycle bearing Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 8 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:00:34 +0530 DL6SAQ8108 made Hero Splendor plus of Ajay Bhojgi was taken into police possession by IO vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/A bearing my signature at point C. I can identity the motor cycle if shown to me. Identity of motor cycle is not disputed by Ld. Counsel for accused. At the time of incident, both Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi had taken the liquor.
Witness states that all the above sated persons are present in the court today. Witness identified Ajay Bhojgi as Ajay Rana. Witness correctly identified Naresh Kumari. Witness correctly identified Ayub Khan, Pankaj Gaur and Aman Rana.)
(iii) PW4: Ct. Dharam Raj deposed that:
"On 25.04.2015, I was posted as Constable in PS Ranjeet Nagar. On the said date, I and Ct. Jamaluddin were present at the Shiv Chowk in front of police booth at about 9:40 pm and were checking the vehicles. In the meantime, two boys on splendor pro-color black motorcycle came from Block-7 side and both the boys were without helmet and we stopped them. Thereafter, we asked for the documents of the vehicle, however, both the said boys refused to show the documents stating that "tumhari himmat kaise hui, tum documents mangne aur dekhne wale kaun hote ho".
At this stage, witness pointed out towards accused Ajay Rana and Aman Rana and correctly identified stating that these were two boys who were on the above motorcycle without helmet. At this moment, I do not recollect the registration of the said motorcycle due to lapse of time, however, I can tell after seeing my statement. Thereafter, both the accused persons named POOJA above started abusing us. When these accused persons were TALWAR abusing us, in the meantime, 4-5 known persons of accused Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 9 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:00:46 +0530 persons also came there. Thereafter, all the accused persons catch hold Ct. Jamaluddin who was with me and took inside the booth near the spot and caused injury but I cannot tell as to which of the accused caused injury and by which weapon it was called as I was not inside the booth. I notice blood on the head of Ct. Jamaluddin when he came. I tried to pacify and requested the accused persons not to cause injury but of no avail.
At this stage, witness pointed out towards accused Ayub and Pankaj Gaur stating that these were the persons who alongwith above named accused persons took the Ct. Jamaluddin inside the booth and caused injury. Witness also pointed out towards accused Ms. Naresh Kumari stating that this accused also came at the spot during the incident. All the three accused persons correctly identified by the witness.
During the incident/scuffle accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi had grappled (gutham gutha) with Ct. Jamaluddin. When the accused persons Ct. Jamaulddin inside the booth by grappling with him, in the meantime, Ct. Karam Chand of PS Ranjeet Nagar, who was on patrolling duty in the area also reached there and in the meantime, Ct. Amit also reached at the spot. Ct. Karam Chand also reached at the spot. Ct. Karam Chand also tried to pacify. But accused persons namely Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi gave a fist blow to Ct. Karam Chand but at this moment, I do not recollect as to which of the accused gave the fist blow. When accused Naresh Kumari alongwith some other lady of the area reached at the spot, she also abused and Ct. Jamaluddin. She also extorted "tum kaun hote ho, tumhari naukri kha jaaungi i etc.") etc.' POOJA TALWAR Accused persons had assaulted Ct. Jamaulddin inside the booth with some weapon but I cannot tell the description of the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 10 of 43 2025.12.08 13:00:55 FIR no.255/15 +0530 said weapon. Accused person present in the court extorted the same words as extorted by accused Naresh Kumari. Accused persons namely Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi were under the influence of liquor at that time.
All the six accused persons are present in the court today and correctly identified by the witness by face. When the witness is asked whether he identify all the accused persons by their names, accused identified all the accused persons by name excep Aman Rana and Ajay Bhojgi.
Court observation: Witness identified accused Aman Rana as Ajay Bhojgi and accused Ajay Bhojgi as Aman Rana but witness has correctly identified both the accused persons by their face. Accused persons also torn the wearing uniform of Ct. Karam Chand at the spot. Ct. Amit informed at PS Ranjit Nagar about the incident. After receiving information, the then Addl. SHO, SI Pradeep Sharma and other staff reached at the spot. The police officials had apprehended four accused persons namely Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhojgi, Pankaj Rana and Ajay Rana at the spot, while the remaining accused persons managed to ran away from the spot. Crowd of people also gathered at the spot at the time of incident. I cannot able to tell or identify the other persons from the crowd. Both the injured namely Ct. Jamaluddin and Ct. Karam Chand were sent to Acharya Bhikshu Hospital, Moti Nagar for treatment. Crime team also reached at the spot, who inspected the spot and Crime team photographer took the photographs of spot. SI Pradeep reached from Acharya Bhikshu hospital. He handed over rukka to Ct. Sunil to the spot. Ct. Jamaluddin and Ct. Karam Chand also reached at the spot from POOJA hospital after taking treatment there. Thereafter both the injured TALWAR were sent to PS Ranjit Nagar. IO prepared site plan of occurrence Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 11 of 43 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:01:01 +0530 at the instance of Jamaluddin. IO took into possession one motorcycle mentioned above on which accused persons were plying without helmet but number I do not recollect, vide seizure memo Ex. PW-4/A which bears my signature at point A."
Formal witnesses:
(i) PW10: Dr. Irshad Hussain, Senior Medical Officer, Acharya Bhikshu Hospital on 25.04.2015 Ct. Jamalluddin was brought to the casualty by self at about 10.35 pm with alleged history of physical assault at around 9.45 pm. He examined him and prepared his MLC Ex.PW10/A bearing his signatures at point A. He found one lacerated wound of size 1x 0.5 cm above right ear, tenderness over left side chest wall and abrasion on forehead above left eye.
After examining the said person, he was referred to SR Surgery for chest trauma (injury). As per the MLC no.38101 dated 25.04.2015, one Karamchand was brought to the casualty by self with alleged history of physical assault at around 9.45 pm. He examined him and prepared his MLC Ex.PW10/B bearing his signature at point A. He found swelling above left eye and swelling behind left ear. After examining the said person, he was referred to DDU/higher center for ophthalmological (eye) examination and needful treatment. He did not provide the nature of injury as it could be provided only after the report of ophthalmological (eye) examination report and his noting in this regard is at point B.
(ii) PW11: Dr. Dhruv Nayan Kundra, HOD Surgery, Medeor Hospital, Qutub deposed that on 25.04.2015, he was posted at POOJA TALWAR Acharya Bhikshu hospital as SR Surgery. As per the MLC Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 12 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:01:09 +0530 no.38100 of Ct. Jamalluddin, the said patient was referred to surgery department from the casualty with alleged history of injury to chest. He examined the said patient. There were no signs of any external injury over chest region. Patient was conscious and oriented. There was no obvious fracture noted on chest X-ray (formal reporting by radiologist was awaited). He made his notings in this regard on MLC Ex.PW10/A from point C to C and bearing his signatures at point D. He gave opinion that nature of injuries was simple at point E. Witnesses of Investigation:
(i) PW1: ASI Sant Kumar deposed that on the intervening night of 25-26.04.2015 he was working as duty officer from 8 pm to 8 am. On that day at about 2.15 AM Ct. Sunil came in the Duty Officer Room alongwith rukka which was endorsed by SI Pradeep. On the basis of contents of rukka he got registered the FIR through computer operator. Computer generated copy of the FIR is Ex.PW1/A bearing his signatures at point A. After registration of FIR he made endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW1/B. After registration of FIR he sent rukka and copy of FIR to SI Sandeep through Ct. Sunil. He also issued certificate under Section 65B of Evidence Act Ex.PW1/C bearing his signatures at point A.
(ii) PW2: HC Vikas deposed that on 26.04.2015 IO/SI Pradeep Kumar, deposited one motorcycle bearing registration no.DL6SAQ8108 and one sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of RTN GR-I, in the maalkhana and he made entry at srl. no.874.
Photocopy of the entry is Ex.PW2/A. On 27.04.2015 SI Pradeep POOJA TALWAR Kumar deposited one more sealed pullanda sealed with the seal Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 13 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date:
2025.12.08 13:01:14 +0530 fo RTN GR-II, in the maalkhana and he made entry at srl. no.875. Copy of same is Ex.PW2/B. On 02.06.2015 the motorcycle mentioned above was released to Ajay Kumar on Superdari. He made entry in register no.19 corresponding to the entry.
(iii) PW3: Retd. Inspector Dhan Singh deposed that on the intervening night of 25-26.04.2015 he was Incharge Crime Team, Central District. On the said date he received information from the District Control Room to reach at Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar, Police Booth. He alongwith team members i.e. ASI Pawan Kumar, finger print expert, Ct. Ajay Kumar-photographer reached the spot where SI Pradeep alongwith local police staff was found present. They found broken pieces of windowpanes and stones etc. details of which mentioned in his report. Ct. Ajay Kumar photographer took the necessary photographs from all angles at his instructions as well as instructions of SI Pradeep.
ASI Pawan Kumar, Finger Print Expert at the instructions of IO and him tried to develop and take the chance print trace but he could not succeeded despite efforts. Hence no chance print could be lifted by ASI Pawan Kumar. Thereafter he examined the scene of crime and report handed over the same to the IO. SOC report is Ex.PW3/A bearing his signatures at point A.
(iv) PW5: Head Constable Ajay deposed that on 25.04.2015, he was posted with Mobile Crime Team, Central District as photographer. On that day, on receipt of the information about the incident, he along with Mobile Crime Team reached at Police Booth, Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar. There, Sl Dhan Singh, POOJA Incharge of Mobile Crime Team, Inspected the spot. The local TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 14 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date:
2025.12.08 13:01:22 +0530 police officials were also present at the spot. At the instance of SI Pradeep/IO of the present case, he took 14 photographs of the spot from different angles. No chance print could be lifted from the spot despite best efforts by fingerprint expert ASI Pawan. SI Dhan Singh prepared a scene of crime report and handed over the same to Investigating Officer. Later on, the developed photographs were sent to the Investigating Officer. The photographs are Ex.PWA.
(v) PW8: HC Ashwani deposed that on 25.04.2015 on receipt of DD no.40 A, he along with SI Pardeep and other staff reached at Shiv Chowk, Near Police booth where several public persons were gathered. They separated the said public persons from there.
Ct. Jamaludin and Ct. Karm Chand were found there in injured condition. They told them that Ajay Bhojgi, Ajay Rana, Aman Rana and Pankaj Gaur have gave beating to them. with the help of other polcie officers, they apprehended them. SI Pardeep sent Ct. Jamaluding and Ct. Karam Chand to Achariya Bhikshu hospital. SI Pardeep inspected the spot and left for Achariya Bhikshu Hospital. He and other staff were directed to stay at the spot. SI Pardeep came back to spot after recording of statement of Ct. Jamaludin. SI Pardeep called the crime team at spot and got inspected the spot and photographs of the spot were also taken. SI Pardeep prepared therir and handed over to Ct. Sunil to get FIR registered. Ct. Sunil came back to spot after registration of FIR and handed over copy of FIR and original tehrir to SI Pardeep. SI Pardeep arrested all four accused person vide arrested memo Ex.PW8/A of Ajay Rana bearing his signatures at POOJA point A, Ex.PW8/B of Ajay Bhojgi bearing his signatures at point TALWAR A, Ex.PW8/C. of Pankaj Gaur bearing his signature at point A Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 15 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:01:29 +0530 and Ex.PW8/D of Aman Rana bearing his signature at point A. They were personally searched by personal search Ex.PW8/E of Ajay Rana bearing his signatures at point A, Ex.PW8/F of Ajay Bhojgi bearing his signatures at point A, Ex.PW8/G of Pankaj Gaur bearing his signatures at point A and Ex.PW8/H of Aman Rana bearing his signatures at point A. Disclosure statement of all above stated accused persons were recorded. The said accused persons were got medically examined. The said accused persons were taken to PS Patel Nagar and sent to lockup of Patel Nagar as there is no lockup in PS Ranjit Nagar. He incorrectly identified Ajay Rana as Ajay Bhojgi. He incorrectly identified Aman Rana as Pankaj Gaur due to lapse of time, he could not identify accused persons by their names.
(vi) PW9: HC Sachin deposed that on 25.04.2014, a call was received in the PS regarding quarrel and on which, he along with SI Pardeep reached at Shiv chowk, Ranjit Nagar where several persons were present. Ct. Jamalluddin and Ct. Karamchand were also present there in injured condition. With the help of public persons, they over-powered 4 persons namely Ajay, another Ajay, Pankaj and Aman. Ct. Jamalludin and Ct. Karamchand who had sustained injuries were taken to Acharya Bhikshu hospital by SI Pardeep for their medical examination. Thereafter, SI Pardeep came back to the spot and prepared tehrir and handed over to Ct. Sunil for registration of FIR. All the 4 persons were arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/A Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D and they were personally searched vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/F, Ex.PW8/G and Ex.PW8/F POOJA bearing my signature at point B. All the 4 persons were got TALWAR medically examined. All the 4 persons were put behind lockup of Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 16 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:01:35 +0530 PS Patel Nagar as there was no lockup at PS Patel Nagar. He correctly identified the accused Ajay, Ajay Rana, accused Pankaj and accused Aman Rana on seeing them on the basis of their faces.
(vii) PW12: HC Pawan deposed that on 27.04.2015 he joined the investigation in the present case with SI Pardeep Sharma. SI Pardeep Sharma called him in the parking of Satyam Cinema. He reached there where SI Pardeep Sharma and Ct Jamalluddin met him. One secret informer met him and he informed that one wanted accused Ayub Khan resides in the area of New Patel Nagar. Upon receiving such information they went to New Patel Nagar where accused Ayub Khan was sitting outside his house. Ct Jamalluddin identified the accused Ayub Khan. Thereafter they apprehended him. IO interrogated him and arrested the accused Ayub Khan vide arrest memo Ex.PW12/A bearing his signatures at point A and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW6/B bearing his signatures at point B. They took the accused to PS. On the directions of the IO, he took the accused Ayub Khan to Lady Harding Hospital for his medical examination. After medical examination of the accused he took him to police station and he was lodged in the lock up. He correctly identified the accused Ayub Khan in the court.
(viii) PW13: HC Amit deposed that on 25.04.2015 he was on patrolling duty and while patrolling he reached near Police booth in front of Shiv Chowk, Ranjit Nagar where quarrel was going on. Some persons were giving beatings to police staff. He POOJA intervened and save the police officials from the persons and TALWAR thereafter made call to the PS and informed about the incident. SI Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 17 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date:
2025.12.08 13:01:43 +0530 Pradeep alongwith other staff came to the spot. Ct. Jamaluddin and Ct. Karamchand were beaten by the persons and both of them identified the persons who gave beatings to them at the spot when SI Pradeep alongwith other staff came to the spot. Ct. Jamaludding and Karamchand identified Ajay, Ajay Bhajgi, Pankaj and Aman Rana at the spot as the persons who gave beatings to them and other persons fled away from the spot. They with the help of other staff apprehended the accused persons Ajay, Ajay Bhajgi, Pankaj and Aman Rana. As Ct. Jamaluddin and Ct. Karamchand sustained injuries therefore they were sent to Aacharya Bikshuk Hospital. SI Pradeep went to hospital and recorded statement of injured and came back to the spot. Ct. Jamalludin and Ct. Karamchand also came back to the spot from the hospital. Ct. Jamalludin pointed the place of incident and SI Pradeep prepared the site plan of the spot at the instance of Jamalludin. SI Pradeep prepared tehrir and handed it over to Ct. Sunil to get the FIR registered. Ct. Sunil came back to the spot after registration of FIR. All the above stated persons were arrested at the spot vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/A(Ajay Bhajgi) bearing his signatures at point B. Personal search of the accused Ajay Bhajgi was also made in his presence vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/F bearing his signatures at point C. Accused Pankaj was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/C bearing his signatures at point B. Personal search of the accused Pankaj was also made in his presence vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/G bearing his signatures at point C. Accused Aman was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/D bearing signature at point B. Personal search of the accused POOJA Aman was also made in his presence vide personal search memo TALWAR already Ex. PW8/F bearing his signatures at point C. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 18 of 43 13:01:53 +0530 FIR no.255/15 Accused Ajay Rana was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/A bearing his signatures at point B. Personal search of the accused Ajay Rana was also made in his presence vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/E bearing his signatures at point C. All the said persons were sent for their medical examination in the hospital. Thereafter, accused persons were sent to the lockup of PS Patel Nagar. Out of the above said persons who were apprehended and arrested at the spot, three who were present in the court, he did not remember the face of the fourth one. He could not identify them by their names. Witness pointed towards accused Aman, Pankaj and Ajay Bhojgi as the persons who were arrested at the spot.
(ix) PW14: SI Amit Tyagi deposed that in the month of December 2015 present case was marked to him for further investigation. During investigation, on 04.03.2017 he examined accused Naresh Kumari at her residence and recorded her disclosure statement vide memo Ex.PW14/A bearing his signatures at point A. After interrogation he released her on personal bond. Thereafter, he searched suspect Nitu during his investigation but the same remained untraceable. Thereafter, he prepared the chargesheet and filed before the court. He correctly identified the accused Naresh Kumari in the court.
(x) PW15: Inspector Pradeep Sharma deposed that on 25.04.2015 a PCR call was received regarding quarrel vide DD no.40A and same was marked to him. He alongwith Ct. Sunil went to the spot i.e. Shiv Chowk, Near Police Booth, Ranjit Nagar where he met Ct. Karamchand and Ct. Jamaluddin who were in injured POOJA TALWAR condition alongwith other police staff. Ct. Jamaluddin sustained Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 19 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date:
2025.12.08 13:01:59 +0530 injuries on his head and four accused persons were apprehended at the spot who were identified by Ct. Jamaluddin. The names of apprehended persons are Aman Rana, Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhajgi and Pankaj Gaur. The injured Ct. Karamchand and Ct. Jamaluddin were sent to Acharya Bhikshu hospital for their treatment. He left Ct. Amit, Ct. Sunil, Ct. Dharamraj alongwith other police staff at the spot and he proceeded for the hospital and at the hospital Ct. Karamchand got the first aid and Ct. Jamaluddin was found fit for statement. Thereafter he recorded the statement of Ct. Jamaluddin Ex.PW6/A bearing his signatures at point B and he came back at the spot. Crime team was also called at the spot and the spot was inspected by the crime team alongwith photography. Photographs are Ex.PW5/A. The crime team prepared the SOC report at the spot and handed over the same to him. The SOC report is Ex.PW3/A. Thereafter he made endorsement on the complaint of Ct. Jamaluddin and prepared rukka. Same is Ex.PW15/A bearing my signatures at point A and handed over the same to Ct. Sunil for registration of FIR and Ct. Sunil went to the PS and got the FIR registered and came back at the spot alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka. Meanwhile Ct. Karamchand and Ct. Jamaluddin came at the spot. Thereafter he prepared the site plan at the instance of Ct. Jamaluddin. The same is already Ex.PW6/D1 bearing his signatures at point A. Thereafter both the Ct. Karamchand and Ct. Jamaluddin left the spot because of injuries and Ct. Jamaluddin having headache. Thereafter all four accused persons, namely, Aman Rana, Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhajgi and Pankaj Gaur were arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B and Ex.PW8/C. All bearing his signatures at point X and they also got personally POOJA TALWAR searched vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/F, Ex.PW8/E, Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 20 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:02:07 +0530 Ex.PW8/F and Ex.PW8/G. All bearing his signatures at point X. All the above-said accused persons are present in the court today. Correctly identified by the witness. He identified the above-said accused persons by their names.
He also seized the motorcycle make Hero Splendor Pro from the spot vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/A bearing his signatures at point X. He also recorded the disclosure statement of above-said arrested accused persons, namely, Aman Rana, Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi. Same are Ex.PW15/B, Ex.PW15/C and Ex.PW15/D. All bearing his signatures at point A. Thereafter accused persons were taken to the hospital for their medical examination. After medical examination the accused persons were sent to PS Patel Nagar and thereafter they produced before court concerned and sent to judicial custody.
On 27.04.2015 he searched for the fifth accused, namely, Ayub and reached at his home at New Patel Nagar with Ct. Jamaluddin and Ct. Pawan. Accused Ayub as interrogated and arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW2/A bearing his signatures at point X and got personally searched vide personal search memo Ex.PW6/B and his disclosure statement Ex.PW15/E bearing his signatures at point A. 1 kg weight (batta) was recovered at the instance of accused Ayub Khan and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW15/F bearing his signatures at point A. On 04.05.2015 the MLCs of injured Ct.
Karamchand and Ct. Jamaluddin were sent to the hospital for opinion. Thereafter he was transferred from the PS Ranjit Nagar. He handed over the case file to MHCR.
He identified one police uniform shirt with name POOJA TALWAR plate of Ct. Karamchand with lanyard (dori) and whistle. Two Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 21 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:02:13 +0530 upper buttons of the shirt and the shoulder of the uniform were missing as Ex.P-2. He also identified an iron made weight of the weight of 1 kg as Ex.P1.
Statement of accused Under Section 313 CrPC.
5. In their statement it is submitted by accused persons that they have been falsely implicated in the present case.
Arguments on behalf of the State
6. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that all the prosecution witnesses deposed against the accused persons. Their testimonies are sufficient to hold the accused persons guilty. There is ample evidence on record against them. They deserve to be convicted.
Arguments on behalf of accused
7. Ld. counsel for accused, per contra argued that prosecution failed to prove presence of accused Ayub Khan and Naresh Kumari at the place of incident. In fact accused Ajay Bhajgi and Ajay Rana were caught driving without helmet and when they failed to grease the palms of the police officials by paying Rs.2000/- they were falsely implicated in the present case. In fact all the accused persons were brutally assaulted by the police officials when they refused to fulfill their demand. When the accused failed to succumb to their demands having no other way to wreck vengeance they falsely implicated them in the present case which is evident from the fact that none of the witness could identify the accused persons correctly. Accused persons deserve to be acquitted. POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 22 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:02:23 +0530
8. I have heard the arguments advanced by all concerned and have perused the records including documents relied upon by the prosecution carefully.
Analysis of law:
9. Sections 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) are related to the crime of rioting and the liability of members of an unlawful assembly. Section 147 deals with the punishment for rioting, while Section 148 provides a more severe punishment for rioting when a deadly weapon is used. Section 149 establishes vicarious liability, holding every member of an unlawful assembly responsible for any offense committed by any member in pursuit of the common object.
Section 147: Punishment for rioting- This section defines the punishment for the offense of rioting. Punishment: Imprisonment for up to two years, a fine, or both.
Section 148: Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon- This section imposes a stricter penalty for rioting when members are armed with a deadly weapon. Punishment: Imprisonment for up to three years, a fine, or both.
Section 149: Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of the offense.
This section is a crucial concept of vicarious liability.
It states that if an offense is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object, every person who was a member of that assembly at the time the offense was committed is also guilty of that offense.
The common object is the object shared by all POOJA members of the assembly to achieve a common goal. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 23 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date:
2025.12.08 13:02:37 +0530 Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) addresses the offense of "Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions". It states that anyone who voluntarily obstructs a public servant in the performance of their public duties can be punished with imprisonment for up to three months, a fine of up to 500 rupees, or both.
10. Key Elements of Section 186: For an act to be punishable under Section 186, the following essential ingredients must be present:
1. Public Servant: The person obstructed must be a "public servant" as defined under Section 21 of the IPC. This includes government officials, judges, military personnel, police officers, and others holding positions in the service of the state.
2. Voluntary Obstruction: The obstruction must be intentional and deliberate. The term "voluntarily" implies that the obstruction is caused with the knowledge and intent of the offender.
3. Discharge of Public Functions: The obstruction must occur while the public servant is discharging their official duties or public functions. It should directly relate to their role as a public servant.
4. Punishment: The offender can be sentenced to imprisonment for a term up to three months, fined up to 500 rupees, or both.
11. Complaint Required: A complaint under Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is a POOJA TALWAR mandatory requirement for the court to take cognizance of this offence. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:02:42 +0530 SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 24 of 43 FIR no.255/15
12. Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) penalizes the use of assault or criminal force against a public servant to prevent or deter them from performing their official duties, or as a consequence of them performing those duties lawfully. The punishment for this offense can be imprisonment for up to two years, a fine, or both.
13. Key Elements of the Offence:
1. Assault or Criminal Force: The act must involve either an assault (a gesture or preparation that makes someone apprehend immediate use of criminal force) or the actual use of criminal force.
2. Public Servant: The victim of the assault or criminal force must be a public servant.
3. During Duty: The assault or force must occur while the public servant is carrying out their duty, or with the intent to prevent them from doing so, or in retaliation for their lawful actions.
4. Purpose of the Section: The primary aim of Section 353 is to protect public servants in the performance of their official duties and to ensure that they can carry out their functions without hindrance or injury. This is crucial for maintaining law and order and the smooth functioning of the government.
14. The essential ingredients of Section 332 are:-
1. Voluntarily with free consent causing hurt or grievous hurt to a public servant in his duty. POOJA TALWAR
2. The hurt should be caused.Digitally signed by POOJA
SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 25 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:02:49 +0530 a. Acting in public servant duty b. Stopping the public servant in stopping to do the act. c. It is done intentionally to cause discharge of his function will be the consequence.
307. Attempt to murder.--Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
15. The essential ingredients to prove offence under Section 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder) are: (1) An act done with intention or knowledge to cause death and (2) This act must be performed under such circumstances that if it resulted in death, it would constitute murder.
16. The prosecution must prove the mens rea (guilty mind) and the actus reus (guilty act). Proof of injury is not mandatory, but the act itself must be of a nature that shows the intention or knowledge to cause death.
17. Now in order to prove Intention or Knowledge to cause death, prosecution must prove that the Act must be POOJA performed with the specific intent to cause death, or with the TALWAR knowledge that it is likely to cause death.
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:02:56 +0530SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 26 of 43 FIR no.255/15
18. In the five prime point to complete the offence are enumerated below:
1. The Act: The accused must have performed an act that shows a clear intention or knowledge to commit murder.
2. Circumstances: The circumstances surrounding the act must be such that if the act had resulted in death, it would have been considered murder.
3. Risk of Death: The act must be so dangerous and imminently threatening that it carries a high probability of causing death or severe bodily injury, and the accused has no excuse for incurring this risk.
Important Considerations- Proof of Injury is Not Required:
Unlike murder, causing an actual injury is not a necessary element to prove an attempt to murder under Section 307. The focus is on the act and the intention or knowledge behind it.
4. Failed Attempt: A Section 307 offense is, by definition, a failed attempt to commit murder, where the death is not ultimately caused.
5. Severity of the Act: The severity of the offense is determined by the potential risk involved and the circumstances, not merely the eventual outcome.
19. Section 34 IPC provides exception to the general rule that no man can be held responsible for an independent act and wrong committed by another. It lays down the principle of joint liability in the doing of a criminal act. The essence of that liability is to be found in the existence of common intention, emanating from the accused leading to the doing of a criminal act in furtherance of such intention. It deals with doing of separate POOJA TALWAR acts, similar or adverse by several persons, if all are done in Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 27 of 43 by POOJA TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:03 +0530 furtherance of common intention, each person is liable for the result thereof as if he had done the act himself. The soul of Section 34 IPC is the joint liability of doing a criminal act. This section only provides a rule of evidence and does not create a substantive offence. Two elements are necessary to fulfill the requirement of Section 34 IPC. One is that the person must be present on the scene of occurrence and the second is that there must be a prior concert or a pre- arranged plan. Unless these two conditions are fulfilled, a person cannot be held guilty of an offence by operation of Section 34 IPC.
20. Common intention implies a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuance to that plan. Common intention comes into being prior to the commission of act in point of time which need not be a long gap.
Observation of the Court
21. Proceedings in the present case were initiated on the Statement Ex.PW6/A of Ct. Jamalludin wherein it is stated that on 25.04.2015 around 9.40 pm he alongwith Ct. Dharamraj stopped a motorcycle for checking on which two boys were riding without helmet. upon being asked to show the documents they got agitated and started quarreling with them. They started manhandling him. Hearing their noise Ct. Karamchand reached there and some relatives of the aforesaid two boys also came. One Naresh Kumari threatened them and all of them took them inside the police booth and assaulted him as well as Ct. Karamchand. Even the uniform of Ct. Karamchand was torn during the fight. Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhajgi, Pankaj Gaur and Amar POOJA Rana were arrested from the spot and the other three including TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 28 of 43 Digitally signed FIR no.255/15 by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:10 +0530 Naresh Kumari, Neetu and Ayub Khan fled from the spot.
22. Prosecution placed reliance upon testimony of SI Dharam Raj PW4, injured ASI Jamalludin PW6 and HC Karamchand PW7, PW8 HC Ashwani, PW9 Sachin, PW13 HC Amit and IO/Inspector Pradeep Sharma PW15. All these witnesses corroborated the testimony of each other in order to prove the story of prosecution.
23. Prosecution also relied upon testimony of Dr. Irshad Hussain PW10 who proved MLC of Ct. Jamalludin Ex.PW10/A and Ct. Karamchand Ex.PW10/B.
24. With this backdrop I shall decide the charges levelled against the accused persons.
25. Accused persons have firstly been charged with the offence under Section 147/148 r/w Section 149 IPC for being the members of an unlawful assembly and with common object they all obstructed the public servants in discharge of duty and also assaulted Ct. Jamalludin and Ct. Karamchand with iron weight.
26. Before scrutinizing the evidence qua the accused persons for being members of unlawful assembly and committing the offence it would be pertinent to interpret Section 149 IPC. Interpretation of Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code as laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Zainul Vs. The State of Bihar POOJA Crl. Appeal no.1187/2014 decided on 07.10.2025. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 29 of 43 13:03:17 +0530 FIR no.255/15 The essentials of Section 149 of the IPC are reiterated herein for the sake of convenience:
i. There must be an assembly of five or more persons;
ii. An offence must be committed by any member of that unlawful assembly;
iii. The offence committed must be in order to attain the common object of that assembly, or iv. The members of the assembly must have the knowledge that the particular offence is likely to be committed in order to attain the common object.
46. Section 149 of the IPC stipulates that if an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly (of 5 or more persons) in prosecution of the common object (as defined in Section 141 of the IPC) of that assembly, or if the members of the assembly knew that the said offence is likely to be committed in prosecution of the said common object, every person who, at the time of committing that offence, was a member of that assembly, will be guilty of that offence.
47. The first limb of the provision envisages the commission of an offence by a member of an unlawful assembly in order to attain the common object of that assembly. Whereas, the second limb of the provision encapsulates knowledge on the part of a member of the unlawful assembly qua the likelihood of such offence being committed in order to attain the common object.
48. The distinction between the two limbs of Section POOJA 149 of the IPC was elucidated in the decision of Mizaji v. State TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 30 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:25 +0530 of U.P., reported in 1958 SCC OnLine SC 95. The relevant observations are reproduced herein below:-
49. The expression "in prosecution of the common object" means that the offence committed must be directly connected with the common object of the assembly, or that the act, upon appraisal of the evidence, must appear to have been done with a view to accomplish that common object. In Charan Singh v. State of U.P., reported in (2004) 4 SCC 205, this Court held that the test for determining the "common object" of an unlawful assembly must be assessed in light of the conduct of its members, as well as the surrounding circumstances. It can be deduced from the nature of the assembly, the weapons carried by its members, and their conduct before, during, or after the incident. The relevant observations read as thus:-
"13. [...]Section 149 IPC has its foundation on constructive liability which is the sine qua non for its operation. The emphasis is on the common object and not on common intention. Mere presence in an unlawful assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a common object and he was actuated by that common object and that object is one of those set out in Section 141. Where common object of an unlawful assembly is not proved, the accused persons cannot be convicted with the help of Section.
27. In order to bring home the charge under Section 147 and 148 IPC prosecution is first and foremost is require proved POOJA that the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:31 +0530 SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 31 of 43 FIR no.255/15
28. It is alleged by PW4 Ct. Dharamraj, PW6 ASI Jamalludin, PW7 Ct. Karamchand that two accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi were stopped by the constables posted at a police booth for checking the vehicles. When these two boys were asked to show the documents they got agitated and picked up a quarrel with PW4. Ct. Dharamraj and PW6 ASI Jamalludin. After some time their relatives/acquaintance, namely Pankaj Kumar, Ayub Khan, Aman Rana and Naresh Kumari reached there.
29. The altercation ensued between accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi and the police officials. It was not within the knowledge of any of the accused persons that Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi would be stopped by the police officials and would be asked to show the papers.
30. There was no common object with which the accused persons were present at the place of incident. In fact only accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi were crossing through that way and were caught. It was not within the far fetched imagination of any of the accused that both these persons will be stopped and that they would pick up a quarrel with the police officials. Hence the common object of commission of offence is missing in the present case.
31. Furthermore, prosecution was also required to prove POOJA the presence of atleast five accused persons at the place of TALWAR incident which is a prime requirement of quoting a group of Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 32 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:37 +0530 FIR no.255/15 people as an unlawful assembly.
32. Reverting back to the case of the prosecution it is alleged by all the prosecution witnesses that Ajay Bhojgi and the Ajay Rana were the first ones to be stopped by the police officials who were standing near the police booth for checking the vehicles.
33. It is undisputed that accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhojgi were present at the place of incident. Their presence is not denied by them either in the cross-examination of the witnesses or at the time of recording of their statement under Section 313 CrPC.
34. Perusal of testimonies of prosecution witnesses will reveal that there had been confusion in the mind of prosecution witnesses with identification of the accused Ajay Bhojgi and Ajay Rana by names. Though all the witnesses correctly identified the accused persons from their faces but except the IO both the accused could not be identified by their names correctly.
35. Be that as it may, all witnesses correctly identified them as the persons who were stopped by them while they were going on the motorcycle. Admittedly the accused persons were not known to the police officials prior to the incident hence not remembering the names correctly after a lapse of time is not POOJA TALWAR abnormal or fatal to the case.
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 33 of 43 13:03:43 +0530 FIR no.255/15
36. Moving on to other accused persons, it is deposed by PW4 that accused Ajay Rana, Ajay Bhojgi, Pankaj Gaur and Aman Rana were apprehended at the spot. His testimony is corroborated with the testimony of PW6 ASI Jamalludin, PW7 HC Karamchand, PW8 HC Ashwani, PW9 HC Sachin and IO Inspector Pradeep Sharma PW15.
37. No suggestion has been given to any of the aforesaid witnesses that accused Aman Rana and Pankaj Gaur were not present at the place of incident. Even in their statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC no plea of alibi is taken by any of the four aforesaid accused persons.
38. In so far as accused Ayub Khan is concerned, it is alleged that he was present at the place of incident but fled. He was apprehended on 27.04.2015 from his house.
39. Accused has denied his presence or role at the place of incident. It is alleged against him that he was arrested on 27.04.2015 from his house near Satyam Cinema. It is not explained as to how the police team reached the house of Ayub Khan. Admittedly on the date of incident he fled. How his name and address came to the knowledge of police officials is not explained. It is stated by PW6 Jamalludin that Ct. Pawan being the beat constable knew the house of accused Ayub. One witness states that the accused was arrested from the gali and the other says he was arrested from his house. The place of his arrest is as POOJA suspicious as his presence at the place of incident. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 34 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:03:51 +0530
40. No active role of accused Ayub has come in the testimony of prosecution witnesses except that an iron weight which was allegedly used for assaulting Ct. Jamalludin was recovered at his instance.
41. Recovery of iron weight is not admissible in evidence under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act as the same is easily available in market and was got recovered from his rehri which he was using as a street vendor. The iron weight was being used by him in his normal course of work and thus the recovery at his instance of a common object as iron weight that too from his rehri is insignificant and not of much resort to prosecution.
42. Admittedly HC Pawan was not present at the place of incident. He did not see accused Ayub on the day of incident. It is quite improbable that he could identify the house of accused whose name just surfaced during investigation.
43. Moreover as per the IO, ASI Jamalludin identified Ayub as the person who was present with the other accused persons at the place of incident. Even accused Ayub was allegedly arrested in his presence, however the arrest memo does not bear signatures of ASI Jamalludin but his name is present in the coloumn of witnesses which create suspicion with respect to his presence and identification of accused Ayub at the time of his arrest.
POOJA
TALWAR
Digitally signed
by POOJA
TALWAR
SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 35 of 43
Date: 2025.12.08
FIR no.255/15 13:03:57 +0530
44. From the aforesaid discussion, it stands unproved that accused Ayub was either present at the place of incident or was involved in commission of offence alongwith the other accused persons.
45. The another accused whose presence is sceptical is Naresh Kumari who allegedly reached the place of incident and intimidated the police officials. The only role assigned to her is of intimidating the police officials and exhorting the other accused against the police officials.
46. As per the prosecution story accused Naresh Kumari herself revealed her name to the police officials. Her application for anticipatory bail got dismissed in the year 2015 itself yet she was interrogated in March 2017. It is not explained by the IO as to how he reached Naresh Kumari after two years when she was residing in the vicinity of the place of incident.
47. Prosecution failed to prove her relations/connect with the accused persons and the motive of her presence at the place of incident. Her identification parade was not got done from any of the witnesses. Her being identified in court by the witnesses would not be read against her as she was the only female who was named for commission of offence. Hence could have been identified by default.
48. Hence in view of the aforesaid prosecution failed to POOJA prove her presence at the place of incident or for commission of TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 36 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:04:06 +0530 offence.
49. One Nitu though named in complaint, but has not been found during investigation.
50. Once prosecution only succeeded in proving presence of four accused persons at the place of incident hence the accused persons cannot be held liable under Section 147, 148 read with Section 149 IPC.
51. Further the accused persons have been charged for the offence under Section 186/332/353/506/34 IPC.
52. In order to bring home the said charge prosecution is required to prove that firstly the victim is a public servant secondly he should be discharging his official duty and thirdly the accused should have obstructed him, used criminal force and caused hurt to the public servant.
53. It is alleged against accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi that while they were asked to stop their vehicle by Ct. Jamalludin PW5 and by Ct. Dharamraj PW4 for checking the papers of the vehicle, they started abusing them and refused to show their documents. Thereafter their associates Amar Rana and Pankaj Gaur too joined them. Accused Ajay Rana hit one iron weight on the head of ASI Jamalludin and Ajay Bhajgi gave fist blows near the eye of Ct. Karamchand. The other associates gave POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 37 of 43 FIR no.255/15 Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:04:23 +0530 beatings to the police staff and in the process uniform of Ct. Karamchand was torn.
54. Testimony of PW4 Ct. Dharamraj, PW6 ASI Jamalludin and HC Karamchand is corroborated with the testimony of each other. All these witnesses deposed that the accused persons obstructed them in performance of their duties used criminal force against them and caused injury to ASI Jamalludin and Ct. Karamchand.
55. Presence of the all the aforesaid accused persons stands proved as discussed in the preceding paragraphs. Accused Ajay Rana and Ajay Bhajgi were stopped by police officials while checking papers is not disputed. Injuries caused to ASI Jamalludin and HC Karamchand is corroborated with the MLC Ex.PW10/A and Ex.PW10/B. As per the said MLCs both ASI Jamalludin and HC Karamchand sustained injuries. Testimonies of aforesaid prosecution witnesses could not be impeached despite extensive cross-examination.
56. The ruckus created at the police booth stands proved by the testimony of PW3 Inspector Dhansingh who was the crime team Incharge and at whose instance Ct. Ajay Kumar PW5 took photographs at the place of incident. No suggestion is given to the said witness that photographs do not pertain to the alleged place of incident. Even to HC Ajay PW5 no such suggestion that the photograph do not pertain to alleged place of incident is POOJA TALWAR given.
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 38 of 43 Date: 2025.12.08 FIR no.255/15 13:04:46 +0530
57. Prosecution story as brought on record by the witnesses is found to be trustworthy and reliable. Prosecution succeeded in proving the presence of the accused persons through oral testimony of its witnesses, recovery of bike of accused, broken window panes etc. of the police booth, the fact of accused persons being drunk at the time of incident which is proved through MLCs of accused persons collected during investigation. Moreover non denial either of the incident or about presence of the accused persons at the place of incident proves the story of prosecution in all material particulars. No plausible defence has been taken by the accused persons either during cross-examination or in their statement under Section 313 CrPC.
58. Accused persons have also been charged with the offence under Section 506 IPC for extending threats to the police officials. In case testimony of material witnesses is discerned, none of the said witness has alleged that any of the four accused persons extended threats. The only allegation against them is with respect to assault and causing hurt. Hence offence under Section 506 IPC is not proved.
59. Further the accused persons have been charged with the offence under Section 308 IPC for causing injury on the head of ASI Jamalludin and eye of Ct. Karamchand with intention and knowledge that the same could cause their death.
60. It has already been discussed in the preceding POOJA paragraphs that injuries were caused to ASI Jamalludin and Ct. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 39 of 43 TALWAR FIR no.255/15 Date: 2025.12.08 13:04:57 +0530 Karamchand by the accused persons. It is alleged against the accused that when they were stopped by the police officials for checking the papers of the vehicle the accused persons got agitated and took the police officials to the police booth and hit Jamalludin with an iron weight and HC Karamchand with a fist blow.
61. Admittedly the accused persons did not carry any weapons or pre-meditated the quarrel rather it was on the spur that the same ensued. As per the MLCs of the two victims the injuries sustained were simple. No opinion was taken from the doctor to prove that the injuries so sustained were sufficient to cause death.
62. No doubt the injuries were inflicted on the head and near the eye but the same were not as grave as would have led to the death of the victims.
63. Pre requisite to prove section 308 IPC is intention or knowledge and the injuries caused are such as are likely to cause death.
64. The intention or knowledge on the part of accused is to be assessed from the manner in which the injuries were caused, the nature of injuries and the specific part of the body where such injuries were sustained. Hence it is difficult to hold that accused persons had intention or knowledge to inflict said POOJA injury which was sufficient to cause death and hold them guilty TALWAR Digitally signed SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 40 of 43 by POOJA FIR no.255/15 TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:05:08 +0530 of culpable of homicide.
65. It is proved on record that injuries were sustained by the aforesaid two police officials at the hands of accused persons though not with an intention or knowledge to cause death.
66. Accordingly I am of the considered opinion that offence under Section 308 IPC is not made out.
67. Although, prosecution has failed to prove that offence under Section 308 IPC is made out but in view of Section 222 CrPC when offence proved is included in the offence charged, even if the charged offence is not proved the same would not entail acquittal in case the offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence. Section is reproduced herein under:
222. When offence proved included in offence charged- (1)When a person is charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of some only of which constitutes a complete minor offence, and such combination is proved, but the remaining particulars are not proved, he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it.(2)When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, although he is not charged with it.(3)When a person is charged with an offence, he may be convicted of an attempt to commit such offence although the attempt is not separately charged.(4)Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a POOJA TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 41 of 43 Digitally signed FIR no.255/15 by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:05:27 +0530 conviction of any minor offence where the conditions requisite for the initiation of proceedings in respect of that minor offence have not been satisfied."
68. Offence under Section 323 IPC is a minor offence included within Section 308 IPC. Section 323 reproduced herein under:
323. Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.--Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
69. In view of the law as laid down by Apex Court it is settled law that for the purpose of Section 323 IPC the nature of injury is critical to determine the liability of the offender. It is also required to be proved that the offence was committed voluntarily with an intention to cause hurt.
70. It has been proved in the preceding paragraphs that the accused persons voluntarily caused hurt to ASI Jamalludin and HC Karamchand which is proved through the MLCs of both the victims coupled with the other reliable ocular evidence.
71. Keeping in mind the aforesaid discussion, in my considered opinion all the four accused persons having common intention caused hurt to the victims. Offence under Section 323/34 IPC stands proved against accused Ajay Bhajgi, Aman POOJA Rana, Ajay Rana and Pankaj Gaur. However, prosecution failed TALWAR SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 42 of 43 Digitally signed FIR no.255/15 by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:05:36 +0530 to prove the presence of accused Ayub Khan and Naresh Kumari, hence they are acquitted.
Conclusion:
72. In view of aforesaid findings, accused persons i.e. Ajay Bhajgi, Aman Rana, Ajay Rana and Pankaj Gaur are convicted for commission of offence under Section 323/34 IPC and acquitted for commission of offence under Section 147/148 r/w Section 149 IPC, Section 186, 332, 353, 506 & 34 IPC and Section 308/34.
73. Accused Ayub Khan and Naresh Kumari are acquitted from commission of offence under Section 147/148 r/w Section 149 IPC, Section 186, 332, 353, 506 & 34 IPC and Section 308/34.
POOJA Announced in the open court (POOJA TALWAR) TALWAR on 08.12.2025 ASJ-01(FTC) West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2025.12.08 13:05:53 +0530 SC No.362/17 State. Vs. Ajay Bhajgi & Ors. Page : 43 of 43 FIR no.255/15