Delhi District Court
State vs . Sonu And Ors. on 25 February, 2022
State vs. Sonu and ors.
IN THE COURT OF SH CHANDER MOHAN : ACMM01(CETRAL) TIS
HAZARI COURT: DELHI
State Vs. Sonu and ors.
FIR no. : 126/2015
U/s : 324/34 IPC
PS : Paharganj
JUDGMENT
a) Sl. No. of the case : 70/16
b) Date of institution of the case : 18.11.2015
c) Date of commission of offence : 02.03.2015
d) Name of the complainant : Sh. Rahul
e) Name & address of the : (1)Sonu S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar
accused R/o H.No. 90C Aram Bagh,
Pahar ganj, Delhi.
(2) Suresh S/o Sh. Shamay
Singh R/o H.No. 90C Aram
Bagh, Paharganj, Delhi
(expired during pendency of
trial ).
(3)Rahul @ Shanky S/o Sh.
Naresh Kumar , R/o H.No.
63/60 DIZ Area Goel Market
Delhi.
(4)Rohit Tyagi S/o Sh. Jai
ParkashTyagi, R/o H.No. 10
staff qtr, type III LHMC
Bangla Sahib Road, Delhi.
FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 1 of 13
State vs. Sonu and ors.
f) Offence charged with : 324/34 IPC
g) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
h) Arguments heard on : 16.2.2022
i) Final order : Convicted u/s 324/34 IPC
j) Date of Judgment : 25.2.2022
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1. Briefly stated, the present FIR was lodged on the complaint of one Rahul S/o Sh. Vikram Singh Rawat R/o 94B Aram Bagh, Paharganj New Delhi on the allegations that on 2.3.2015 at around 10:15 pm while he was returning to his home and was drunk , he met one of his known Ashish with whom he got into an altercation and in the meanwhile all the three accused persons namely Sonu S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar, Rahul @ Shanky S/o Naresh and accused Rohit Tyagi S/o Sh. Jai Parkash Tygi came there and started threatening him . Accused Sonu said as to why he was making noise in the gali in a drunked state. When the complainant told all the three accused persons to mind their own business, the accused abused him and caught him. At that time Suresh father of accused Sonu came to the spot with a danda and started beating the complainant and all the three accused persons also gave him kick and fist blows. Accused Rohit Tyagi assaulted the complainant with some sharp object and the complainant in order to save himself raised his left hand and the sharp object landed on his left hand. After beating the complainant , all the accused persons left the spot . When Ashish saw that there was a fight he distanced himself. After that complainant FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 2 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
went to the house in an injured condition where her mother called the police by dialing 100 number. After registeration of above FIR investigation was initiated.
2. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet U/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed by the IO on 18.11.2015 and the accused persons were consequently summoned. On 12.5.2016 a charge U/s 324/34 IPC was framed against the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Perusal of the record shows that accused Suresh Chand died during the course of trial and proceedings against him were abated vide order dt. 9.3.2018.
3. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined (8) eight witnesses.Victim /injured Rahul Rawat stepped into the witness box as PW1 and narrated the entire incident in his testimony. He deposed that on 02/03/2015 at about 10:00 p.m, he was going to his home i.e. 94B, Aram Bagh, Paharganj, Delhi where he used to reside at the time of incident; that he met with one person namely Ashish who also used to reside in his locality and he started talking to him and altercation broke between them on which he started abusing him in a filthy language; that in the meantime accused Rahul @ Shanky, Sonu and Rohit Tyagi also came to the spot ; that three accused person also started abusing him in filthy language and started threatening him of dire consequences; that in the meantime father of accused Sonu namely Suresh also came to the spot along with one danda and started beating him with the same; that FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 3 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
immediately all the three accused persons also started beating him; that in the meantime one of the accused person took out some sharp object and attacked him with the same; that he tried to save himself and due to which the sharp object landed on his right hand and blood started oozing out the same; that seeing this, all the accused persons fled away from the spot; that he immediately went to his house from where his parents made a telephonic call to the Police officials and narrated the whole incident; the police officials arrived at his house and took him to Lady Harding Hospital from where he was taken to RML Hospital and medically examined; that thereafter, he narrated the whole incident to the police officials on the basis of which the present FIR was lodged. He further deposed that on the next day i.e. 03/03/2015 he took the police officials to place of incident where site plan Ex. PW1/A bearing his signature at point A, was prepared at his instance; thereafter the police officials arrested accused namely Sonu vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/B bearing his signature at point A and also arrested accused Suresh vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/C bearing his signature at point A; police officials arrested accused Rahul vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/D bearing his signature at point A and also arrested accused Rohit Tyagi vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/E; that during the course of investigation, IO recorded his statement. He identified all accused persons in the court.
4. PW 3 Ms Kusum Lata is the mother of PW 1 . As per her testimony at the relevant time she was residing at H.No. 94 B Aram Bagh Paharganj ,a Government accommodation alloted on the name of her FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 4 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
husband; that name of her son is Rahul and he was studying in 10 th class; that on 2.3.2015 at about 10:30pm, her son Rahul came to the house in injured condition; that there was a tikona park nearby her house ; her son Rahul described her that he was being beaten by accused persons namely Sonu , Rahul, Rohit and Suresh with the help of sharp edged weapon and a wooden stick; that she had also seen accused persons chasing her son and thereafter on seeing her they fled away from there; that she made call at 100 no; that her son was got admitted in Lady harding hospital and then to RML hospital. All accused persons present in the court were correctly identified by the witness in the court during her testimony. She further added that after the registration of this case, during the pendency of the trial, accused persons were trying to pressurize her and her son and also threatening her son and he has again beaten by accused persons.
5. PW 2 Dr Neha Sharma CMO Dr Ram Mahohar Lohia Hospital conducted the MLC of victim Rahul on 3.3.2015 at about 12:30am vide MLC no. 48369 which is Ex PW 2/A and as per the same, there was cut lacerated wound on right fore arm , abbression on left leg and haematoma on scalp; that patient was brought in the hospital with alleged history of assault; that she opined nature of injury as sharp injury; that patient was referred to surgical emergency.
6. PW 4 HC Deepak deposed that on 3.3.2015, he was posted at PS Paharganj as duty officer; that he registered FIR on the basis of rukka FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 5 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
which is Ex. PW 4/ A ( OSR) bearing his signatures at point A; that he also made an endorsement on the rukka which is already Ex. PW1/B bearing his signatures at point A.
7. PW 5 Ct Shiv Kumar deposed that on 2.3.2015 he recorded DD no. 68B which is Ex PW 5/A .
8. PW 6 Ct Naresh deposed that on 2.3.2015 he was posted at PS Paharganj as Constable and on that day he alongwith IO were on emergency duty; that on obtaining DD no. 68 B , he alongwith IO reached at 94 B Government Staff quarter, where they came to know that the injured was taken to the LHMC hospital; that they went at hospital and met with injured Rahul who was under influence of alcohol; that IO obtained his MLC and he was referred to RML hospital; that Dr opined the nature of injury as sharp; that IO recorded statement of Rahul and prepared the rukka and same was handed over to him for registration of FIR. FIR was got registered; that accused persons who were arrested on the identification of Rahul vide arrest memo already Ex. PW 1/ C , PW 1/ D and PW 1/ E all bearing his signature at point D; that IO recorded his statement. The witness correct identified all accused persons in the court.
9. PW 7 Dr Mohd Sahid Murtuza, Senior Resident RML Hospital deposed that he was working in RML hospital since 2012; that on 3.3.2015 one patient namely Rahul was brought to the hospital with the FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 6 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
alleged history of assault ; that he was examined by the CMO and was not found in the surgical emergency as he had absconded on the same day at about 9:00am; that opinion / nature of injury was opined by the CMO; that his report on MLC no. 48369/15 already Ex. PW 2/ A bearing his signature at point B.
10. PW 8 HC Vishnu Dutt ( it appears he has been inadvertently mentioned as PW 7) is the IO of present case.He deposed that on 02.03.2015, he was posted at PS Paharganj as Head Constable and on that day, on obtaining DD no. 68A, he along with Ct. Naresh where they came to know that the complainant has already been taken to the LHMC hospital and then taken to the RML hospital along with them; that complainant refused to give his statement and on the next day and he came to the police station and he got recorded his statement which is Ex. PW7/A bearing his signature at point A ; that he prepared the rukka Ex. PW1/B bearing his signature at point B; that he prepared the site plan Ex. PW1/A bearing his signature at point B; that all the accused persons were arrested vide memos already Ex. PW1/B, PW1/C, Ex. PW1/D and Ex. PW1/E, all bearing his signature at point C; that he recorded the statement of witnesses. Further the witness correctly identified all the three accused persons. He finally stated that he obtained the MLC of the injured and thereafter he filed the charge sheet in the court.
11. After conclusion of PE, statement of accused U/sec. 313 Cr.PC was FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 7 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
recorded on 28.10.2021 wherein accused persons claimed to be falsely implicated in this case . Accused chose not to lead any defence evidence in their favour.
12. It is argued by ld counsel for the accused persons that accused persons had an enmity with the complainant and therefore they have a motive to falsely implicate the accused persons . He has further argued that it is beyond any comprehension for anybody to beat someone without any reason. He has further argued that the statement of complainant and that of his mother are contrary to each other and further it has also come on record that at the time of the incident complainant was heavily drunk and not in his senses. Further counsel for the accused has invited the attention of this court towards the improvements and contradictions in the statement of complainant and his mother. Finally , as per counsel for accused it has been established that complainant had an altercation with one Ashish which was compromised but accused persons were implicated in the present case.
13. I have ld APP for State, counsel for accused and also gone through the written submissions filed on behalf of the accused persons.
14. Presence of injuries on the body of complainant / victim Rahul stand established from the testimony of PW 2 Dr Neha Sharma CMO Resident Ram Manoharlal Lohia Hospital, who examined the injured after he was brought to the hospital as per MLC no. 48369 Ex PW 2/A and PW 7 Dr FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 8 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
Mohd Shahid Murtuza , Senior Resident RML hospital has also deposed that one patient namely Rahul was brought to the hospital with alleged history of assault and identified his signatures on MLC no. 48369/15 ( Ex PW 2/A) . PW 6 Ct Naresh and PW 7 HC Vishnu Dutt also saw the complainant injured in the hospital. Further PW3 mother of the complainant has also stated in her testimony the his son came to the house in an injured condition. As per the MLC no. 48369/15 Ex PW 2/A, complainant was found with cut lacerated wound on right fore arm, abbression on left leg and haematoma on scalp; that patient was brought in the hospital with alleged history of assault and injury was sharp injury and that patient was referred to surgical emergency. Now the next question that remains to be adjudicated as to whether these injuries were inflicted by the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention and in the manner described by the complainant.
15. PW 1 Rahul Rawat and PW 3 Kusum Lata are the eye witnesses to the present case . As per the testimony of the complainant PW1 all the three accused persons arrived on the spot after an altercation broke between him and one person namely Ashish while he was going to his home. Complainant has correctly identified all the three persons in the court during the course of its evidence . Further, it has also come in his testimony that they were residing in his locality and therefore there does not remain any doubt regarding the identity of accused persons. Complainant has further stated that all the three accused persons started beating him and one of the accused persons took out sharp object and FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 9 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
attacked him with the same. It has also come in his evidence that father of accused Sonu namely Suresh also came at the spot with one danda and started beating him. As per counsel for accused persons it has come in evidence that complainant was drunk. He has invited the attention of this court towards the MLC Ex PW 2/A were this fact is recorded and further submitted that complainant has himself mentioned it in his complaint Ex PW 7/A and further that the IO has also deposed that in the hospital victim was in eberatted condition . This court is of the opinion that merely because a witness is proved to be drunk cannot be itself a ground to discard his testimony if otherwise he is found to be conscious and well oriented. Nothing has come on record that he was drunk to the extent as to not understand the nature of the crime or the identity of the persons who inflicted the same. Nothing has come in the testimony of PW 6 who went to the hospital on 2.3.2015 alongwith the IO PW7 to record the statement of complainant to draw an inference that complainant was out of his senses. PW 7 HC Vishnu Dutt has stated in his testimony that when on 2.3.2015 he went to the hospital complainant refused to give his statement and on the next day he came to the PS and got his statement recorded. In his cross examination he has again reiterated this fact but also added that complainant was having pain in his hand and the doctor who was attending the complainant did not tell anything about the state of his health. Hence it appears that it was due to the pain or state of his health that victim had refused to give statement to the police on the day of incident rather than being drunk. After FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 10 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
reading the testimony of complainant ( PW 1 Rahul Rawat ) as a whole the same is found to be reliable and trustworthy .Further the same cannot be doubted merely because he has not given any reason / motive of the accused persons to assault him. Motive is immaterial when there is direct evidence of crime. The complainant has specifically identified each accused and also stated that they had beaten him and one of the accused took out some sharp object and attacked him with the same which landered on his right hand and this injury is consistent with the MLC Ex PW 2/A in which the presence of wound on the right arm is mentioned.
16. Learned counsel for the accused has tried to discredit PW 3 Kusum Lata mother of complainant by pointing out improvements ,contradictions and inconsistencies in he's testimony. The following facts have emerged from her evidence.
a) On 2.3.2015 at about 10:30pm his son Rahul came at the house in injured condition .
b) He told that he was beaten by accused Sonu, Rahul , Rohit and Suresh with the help of sharp weapon and wooden stick.
c) she had called the police.
17. She has further stated that she has seen accused persons while chasing her son and on seeing her they fled away.No doubt this appears to be an improvement as this fact was not found to be present in her statement u/s 161 CrPC and she was also confronted with the same FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 11 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
during her testimony. However, it is not unusual for a witness , particularly a mother, to improve a statement to ensure punishment to persons who beat her son but such improvement does not render her entirely untrustworthy and reliance can be placed on her testimony to the extent mentioned above .The following observations of supreme court are instructive in this regard.
18. In Ugar Ahir and Ors. v. State of Bihar, AIR 1965 SC 277, Court held as under:
The maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (false in one thing, false in every thing) is neither a sound rule of law nor a rule of practice. Hardly one comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggerations, embroideries or embellishments. It is, therefore, the duty of the court to scrutinise the evidence carefully and, in terms of the felicitous metaphor, separate the grain from the chaff. But, it cannot obviously disbelieve the substratum of the prosecution case or the material parts of the evidence and reconstruct a story of its own out of the rest.
19. Defence raised by accused that accused persons only intervened to pacify after they observed that complainant was fighting with one Ashish and therefore falsely implicated them or that the injuries are self inflicted do not inspire any confidence. It is quite unnatural that complainant will implicate as many as three persons who try to pacify the situation . Rather he would be grateful to them . Similarly this court finds no reason FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 12 of 13 State vs. Sonu and ors.
for the complainant to self inflict injuries to implicate the accused persons. Although during the course of cross examination the suggestion has been put to the complainant that the present accused persons are witnesses and he is accused in a case pending before Patiala House Courts but except this oral suggestion nothing has come on record to prove this fact. If such would have been the situation then there is no explanation as to what prevented the accused persons to summon and prove the pendency of any such complaint in their defence. vide statement dt. 21.12.2021 accused have specifically stated that they do not want lead any defence evidence.
20. In view of the above reasons, prosecution has successfully proved that all accused persons in furtherance of their common intention beat the complainant and one of the accused attacked the complainant with the sharp object and accordingly all the three accused persons stand convicted u/s 324/34 IPC . Digitally signed by CHANDER CHANDER MOHAN MOHAN Date:
2022.02.25 16:33:13 +0530 Pronounced in the open court on 25.2.2022 (Chander Mohan) ACMM01(Central)/Delhi/ 25.2.2022 FIR No. 1262015 PS Paharganj Page no. 13 of 13