Delhi High Court
Akil & Others vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 8 May, 2014
Author: S. P. Garg
Bench: S.P.Garg
$-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : 8th MAY, 2014
+ CRL.A.1362/2011 & CRL.M.B.Nos. 2442/2013, 669/2013 &
1047/2013
AKIL & OTHERS ..... Appellants
Through : Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate.
Mr.Rohit Kumar, Mr.Amit &
Mr.Arpan, Advocates for A2.
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP.
Complainant is present in person.
SI Parveen Kumar, PS Ambedkar Nagar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J. (Open Court)
1. The appellants, Akil (A-1) and Rajesh @ Gulli (A-2) question the correctness and legality of a judgment dated 29.09.2011 of Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 81/10 arising out of FIR No. 212/10 PS Ambedkar Nagar by which they were convicted under Sections Crl.A.No. 1362/2011 Page 1 of 5 307/34 IPC. By an order dated 01.10.2011, they were awarded RI for seven years with fine ` 5,000/- each.
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-
sheet, was that on 24.07.2010 at around 11.00 or 11.30 P.M. near House No. A-2/264, Madan Gir, New Delhi, the appellants in furtherance of common intention inflicted injuries to Mohd.Ubesh by a knife in an attempt to murder him. Daily Diary (DD) No. 70B (Ex.PW-13/E) was recorded regarding the incident. ASI Tara Chand along with Const. Sahdev Singh went to the spot and came to know that the victim had already been taken to Trauma Centre, AIIMS. After recording complainant's statement (Ex.PW-1/A), he lodged First Information Report by sending rukka (Ex.PW-4/A). During investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The appellants were arrested and pursuant to A-1's disclosure statement, the crime weapon was recovered from the house of his sister - Nafisa. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants; they were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined fourteen witnesses to substantiate the charges. In 313 statements, the appellants denied their complicity in the crime and pleaded false Crl.A.No. 1362/2011 Page 2 of 5 implication without examining any witness in defence. The trial resulted in their conviction as aforesaid.
3. During the course of hearing, Counsel on instructions stated at Bar that the appellants have opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction and accept it voluntarily. The matter has been settled with the injured and he has been paid ` 50,000/- as compensation. He prayed to take lenient view and modify the sentence order. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has no objection to it.
4. Since the appellants have given up challenge to the findings of the Trial Court on conviction under Sections 307/34 IPC in view of the cogent and reliable testimony of the victim - PW-2 (Mohd. Ubesh) corroborated by PW-1 (Fakre Alam) and supplemented by medical evidence, their conviction stands affirmed.
5. The appellants were sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine ` 5,000/- each. The fine has been deposited. A-1's nominal roll dated 11.02.2014 reveals that he has already undergone two years, six months and eleven days incarceration besides remission for ten months and twenty-one days as on 11.02.2014. A-2's nominal roll dated 13.03.2012 reveals that he has already undergone seven months and seven days incarceration besides remission for two months as on 16.03.2012. Crl.A.No. 1362/2011 Page 3 of 5 Both the appellants are not involved in any other criminal case and are first offenders. Their overall jail conduct is satisfactory. Sentence order dated 01.10.2011 records that A-1 has a family consisting of mother, wife and two and a half year old child. A-2 was a furniture designer and had responsibility to look after his family consisting of mother, wife and a son aged about 5 or 6 years. The occurrence took place over a trivial issue all of a sudden when the complainant refused to pay ` 150/- to A-1 for purchase of liquor. The injuries sustained by the victim were 'grievous' in nature and he was discharged from the hospital after about six days. The parties have settled the dispute and have filed on record the settlement / compromise deed. The Investigating Officer who is present in the Court states that he has verified the memorandum of settlement on record which has been executed between the parties with their free consent without any fear or pressure. A sum of ` 50,000/- is stated to have been given to the victim as compensation. The victim present in the Court reveals that the amount of ` 50,000/- has been taken by him and the matter has been resolved due to intervention of the relatives and friends. Considering these developments / circumstances, the period already undergone by the appellants in this case which is more than three years, is taken as substantive sentence. Sentence order is modified accordingly. Crl.A.No. 1362/2011 Page 4 of 5
6. The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications also stand disposed of. Trial Court record be sent back immediately with the copy of the order. A copy of the order be sent to the Superintendent jail for information.
7. Order dasti.
(S.P.GARG) JUDGE MAY 08, 2014 / tr Crl.A.No. 1362/2011 Page 5 of 5