Delhi District Court
State. vs . 1. Mashroof Ahmad on 27 April, 2010
1
IN THE COURT OF MS. ADITI CHOUDHARY
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-03,WEST, DELHI.
SC No. 143/09
FIR No. 414/06
U/s 307/34 IPC
PS Kirti Nagar
STATE. VS. 1. MASHROOF AHMAD
R/O HOUSE NO.37,
GULAR WALI ALI
KHAIR NAGAR,
PS DELHI GATE,
MERUT, UP.
2. MANSOOR AHMAD
S/O MUJAFFAR AHMED
R/O HOUSE NO.37,
GULAR WALI ALI
KHAIR NAGAR,
PS DELHI GATE,
MERUT, UP.
Date of institution : 19.01.2009
Judgment reserved on : 23.04.2010
Judgment delivered on : 27.04.2010
JUDGMENT
1. The accused Mashroof Ahmad and Mansoor Ahmad have been committed to the Court of Sessions under Section 307 IPC for having attempted to murder Mohd. Salim @ Kalua on 27.08.2006 in front of 7/28, Kirti Nagar Industrial Area, Delhi when in furtherance of their common intention, on the exhortation of the accused Mansoor Ahmad, the accused Mashroof Ahmad fired upon Mohd Salim from a pistol causing him a bullet injury in his right upper arm.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on receipt of DD NO.
35A (ExPW13/A) dated 27.08.06, SI Rajesh Kumar along with Ct.
Page 1/28 2Sahender reached the spot of crime i.e 7/28, Kirti Nagar Indl. Area. On making enquiries it was revealed that the injured Mohd. Salim was shifted to Kapoor Medical Centre, Naraina. SI Rajesh Kumar along with Ct. Sahender reached Kapoor Medical Centre, Naraina where injured Mohd. Salim s/o Mohd. Israil r/o T-378, Chamelion Road, Ahata Kidara, Delhi was found admitted vide MLC NO. 45/27/8/2006. Dr Neelabh declared him unfit for statement. One of the eye witness of the incident Hazi Nasir got recorded his statement, where in he stated that on 27.08.2006 at about 9.10 pm he and his worker Subhash were present inside the main gate of his meat factory 7/28, Kirti Nagar Indl. Area, when some sound of persons quarreling came from outside i.e.the road. When he and Subhash came outside they saw that Mashroof and Mansoor, whom he knew from before were quarrelling with his cousin Mohd. Salim the injured. On seeing them coming, Mansoor exhorted Mashroof "Maar Saale Ko". Mashroof pointed the pistol towards his cousin Mohd. Salim @ Kalua and fired. Mohd. Salim tried to save himself, when the bullet hit his right shoulder. He and Subhash ran to catch them but both escaped towards Mayapuri flyover in a Pulsar Motorcycle. Thereafter they brought the injured Mohd Salim to Kapoor Medical Centre. Mansoor and Mashroof, both brothers had a quarrel on last Friday in the area of PS Sadar with his younger brothers Haji Salim and Mohd Salim. Both Mansoor and Mashroof were arrested by the police. They threatened that they would not leave him and his brothers. On 27.08.2006 both the accused who are brothers had tried to kill Mohd Salim.
3. SI Rajesh Kumar collected the MLC of the injured. Ct. Sahender produced the clothes of the injured (one shirt ExP-1, one handerchief Ex P-3 and one baniyan Ex.P-2) before the IO SI Rajesh Kumar which was handed over by the doctor. The clothes were converted into a cloth parcel and sealed with the seal of RK and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/A. The seal after use was handed over to Ct. Sahender. IO SI Rajesh Kumar prepared the tehrir (rukka) and got the case registered by Page 2/28 3 sending Ct. Sahender to the police station with tehrir. During the course of investigation, IO prepared site plan (Ex.PW6/2) at the instance of complainant Hazi Nasir (PW-6) , recorded the statements of witnesses and injured U/s 161 Cr.P.C and made efforts to trace the accused persons. IO collected the copy of DD No. 19A (ExPW3/1) and DD NO. 40A (Ex. PW13/E) dated 26.8.06 U/s 107/151 Cr.P.C. from PS Sadar Bazar, Delhi. Continous search for the accused persons was made, but they could not be found. Thereafter on 08.09.2006, accused Mashroof surrendered in PS Kirti Nagar. After interrogation, he was arrested and his disclosure statement (Ex.PW5/1) was recorded. IO produced the accused Mashroof before the Court on the same day and took one day PC remand.
4. Accused Mashroof got recovered his pulsar motorcycle NO. DL-
6SR-2553 from the area of PS Sadar Bazar which was seized vide seizure memo Ex PW 5/2. Efforts were made to trace the co-accused Mansoor, but he was not found. Efforts were made to recover the weapon of offence from the place at the pointing out of accused Mashroof from Yamuna river near ISBT bridge, but same could not be found. On 09.09.06, Mashroof was sent to JC by the Court. On 13.9.06, Mashroof and on 20.09.2006 Mansoor were granted bail by the Sessions Court. On 28.9.06, the red colour motorcycle of Mashroof Ahmed bearing No. DL 6SR 253, Pulsar, was released on superdari. On 15.10.06, co-accused Mansoor Ahmed was also arrested and released on bail in terms of the anticipatory bail orders. Charge sheet was filed against both accused persons. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
5. Both the accused were charged on 24.04.2007 under Section 307/34 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. Prosecution has in all examined 13 witnesses to prove its case.
FORMAL WITNESSES
7. ASI Rajeshwar was examined as PW3. PW3 has testified that on 25.08.2006 information about quarrel between the accused and Mohd Page 3/28 4 Salim @ Sabbu was recorded vide DD No.16A at about 11.10 AM in PS Sadar Bazar. This information was given by Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu who was having injuries on his head. Ct.Sukleshwar took the injured Salim Sabbu to Hindu Rao Hospital for his medical examination.
8. HC Kishan Singh was examined as PW1. PW1 has testified that on 26.08.2006 he along with Constable Shambhu Dayal was on beat duty at beat no.8, PS Sadar Bazar, when at about 1.45 PM he heard the noise of quarrel at house no.T-378 Ahata Kedara, Sadar Bazar. When they both reached there they found a crowd. They saw that Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu and his brother Mohd. Salim had caught hold of accused Mansoor Ahmed . Accused Mansoor was hurling abuses at Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu and Mohd.Salim saying that since they had got his brother arrested, they would not be spared and they would have to face consequences for the same. PW1 tried to pacify the accused Mansoor Ahmed,but he did not mend his ways. Thereafter, after narrating the entire incident to the SHO on phone, PW-1 arrested accused Mansoor Ahmed under Section 107/151 Cr.PC. PW1 recorded the proceedings in DD No.40A (Ex.PW1/A). He had prepared the kalendra under Section 107/151 Cr.PC on the basis of DD No. 40A.
9. HC Satender Kumar was examined as PW11. PW11 has testified that on 27.08.2006 while posted as duty officer, at about 9.20 PM he received a wireless message from wireless operator W/54 who in turn had received the message from PCR. The wireless operator W/54 came to him and produced on QST i.e. the exact message received from the PCR. He perused the message which read "7/22 Kirti Nagar Nidhi Factory someone shot fire and fled away". He entered the information vide DD No.35-A (Ex.PW11/A). He prepared copy of the DD No.35-A and handed the same to Ct.Bhupender for handing over to SI Rajesh for taking further necessary action. This witness was not cross examined by the accused..
10. HC Shiv Narain was examined as PW2. He has testified that he was posted as duty officer PS Kirti Nagar when on 28.08.2006 at about 12.:05 Page 4/28 5 AM, on receipt of rukka through Ct.Sahender sent by SI Rajesh, he recorded the FIR no.414/2006 (Ex.PW2/A). He made endorsement on the rukka vide Ex.PW2/B and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to Ct.Sahender.
11. Ct. Sahender was examined as PW4. PW4 has testified that on 27.08.2006 he was posted at PS Kirti Nagar. On receipt of DD no.35-A he along with SI Rajeshwar went to 7/28 Industrial Area, Kirti Nagar,Delhi, where some public persons were present, but no eye witness was there. They came to know that injured Mohd. Salim had already been shifted to Kapoor Medical Centre, Naraina. They reached Kapoor Medical Centre , where the injured was admitted. IO collected the MLC of the injured Mohd. Salim. The doctor handed over the sealed pulanda containing shirt and the baniyan of the injured to him which he handed over to the IO, who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/A.
12. During the cross examination by Ld.APP, PW4 Ct. Sahender testified that the doctor had handed over to him one shirt, one handkerchief and one baniyan in a polythene bag, which he had given to the IO which the IO converted into a pulanda and sealed with the seal of RK and seal was handed over to him and he signed the seizure memo Ex.PW4/A at point A. IO prepared rukka and handed over the same to the duty officer and got registered the FIR and returned to the spot and handed over copy of the FIR and rukka to the IO. Thereafter he, the IO and the complainant Hazi Nasir with a search light reached the place of occurrence and tried to search for the bullet used and the empty cartridge and the weapon, but the same could not be traced. PW4 has further admitted that he had got recorded in his statement that the IO recorded the statement of witnesses, tried to search both the accused persons and that in the morning after reaching PS Kirti Nagar, I.O deposited the case property along with the copies of the memos and thereafter PW-4 returned the seal of RK to the IO. PW4 has identified the shirt Ex.P-1, baniyan Ex.P-2, and handkerchief Ex.P-3 of the injured which were given to him by the doctor. He has testified that he had forgotten the facts due to lapse of Page 5/28 6 time and there was no intentional lapse on his part.
13. In his cross examination PW-4 Ct.Sahender has testified that he went to the Hospital with the IO at about 10.30/11.00 PM. He reached the police station along with Rukka at about 12.05 AM. He reached the spot at about 1.00 AM from the police station after registration of the case.
MATERIAL WITNESSES
14. Mohd. Salim @ Kalua the injured was examined as PW9. He has testified that he worked in the meat factory owned by his cousin Hazi Nazir situated in Kirti Nagar Industrial area. He has testified that on the day of the incident, he was standing near a car in front of the meat factory of his cousin Hazi Nazir at about 9.00 PM, when both the accused persons came to him. Accused Mansoor told accused Mashroof "Maar Saley Ko". Then accused Mashroof put a pistol on his right side back. He tried to save himself and in this process, the bullet hit him near his right shoulder. There were two marks, one towards the right side of his right shoulder and the other through which the bullet had passed was towards the front side of his right arm. Thereafter both the accused ran away on a motor cycle towards Maya Puri fly over side. In the meantime, his cousin Haji Nazir and Subhash rushed towards him and he was taken to Kapoor Hospital, Naraina by his cousin Haji Nazir, Haji Salim and the aforesaid Subhash. Both the accused persons were already known to him as they were residing near the shop of their Khala. PW9 has identified his shirt Ex.P-1, vest Ex.P-2 and the handkerchief Ex.P-3. The shirt Ex.P-1 had a cut mark towards the right shoulder side and Ex.P -1 to Ex.P-3 had blood stains.
15. PW9 has further testified that on 26.08.2006 on the day of Jumma both the accused had inflicted head injuries on his cousin brother Haji Salim @ Sabbu and were arrested in Sadar Thana. The accused had their business at S.P.Mukherjee Market, New Rohtak Road, below the house of their Khala Meena. The accused had their permanent residence at Ghanta Ghar, Meerut.
Page 6/28 716. Hazi Nasir was examined as PW6. He has testified that on 27.08.2006 at about 9.30 PM he and his worker Subhash were present at the main gate of his meat factory and were coming outside the main gate when he saw his cousin brother Mohd.Salim standing near a car at a distance of 15/20 steps from his factory. Both accused Mashroof and Mansoor came there and started quarrelling with Mohd.Salim @ Kalua. His worker Subhash was also present there at that time. When they were coming towards Mohd.Salim, accused Mansoor exhorted his brother Mashroof "Maar Saley Ko"and on this Mashroof fired from his pistol at Mohd.Salim, who turned back in order to save himself, but the cartridge hit above on his left armpit from behind. PW6 and Subhash shouted "Pakdo Pakdo", but in the meantime both the accused escaped on a red colour motor cycle (Ex.P-4) towards PS. Kirti Nagar. PW6 took Mohd.Salim to a nearby Nursing Home for medical aid and informed the PCR. He has proved his first information statement Ex.PW6/1, on the basis of which the FIR was registered. He identified both the accused persons in court.
17. PW6 Hazi Nasir was cross examined by the Ld.APP. During cross examination, PW6 has testified that both the accused fled away from the spot towards the Maya Puri Fly over side when he and Subhash chased them. He and Subhash removed Mohd. Salim to Kapoor Medical Centre at Naraina. He has further testified that in fact Mohd. Salim sustained bullet injuries on his right side armpit but inadvertently due to negligence and confusion he stated in his examination-in-chief that he sustained injuries on his left armpit.
18. Subhash was examined as PW7. He has testified that on 27.08.2006 he alongwith his employers Haji Salim @ Sabbu and Hazi Nasir was present in the meat factory. Mohd. Salim @ Kalua was also present in the factory. Haji Salim had gone to the first floor and he along with Hazi Nasir was present on the ground floor, when at about 9.15 PM on hearing the noise of quarrel he and Hazi Nasir went outside the factory and saw two persons beating Mohd. Salim. The names of those two Page 7/28 8 persons later on were revealed as Mansoor and Mashroof. On seeing them, accused Mansoor exhorted Mashroof "Maar Saale Ko". Mashroof fired a shot towards Mohd. Salim and both the accused fled on their motor cycle towards Maya Puri. Mohd. Salim fell down. He sustained injuries on his right arm. Thereafter Haji Salim @ Sabbu shifted injured Mohd. Salim to Kapoor Hospital, Naraina. Next day police recorded his statement. This witness identified the accused Mashroof in the police station after about 10 days, when he alongwith Haji Salim @ Sabbu went there to know about the progress of the case. He had signed as a witness on the arrest memo Ex.PW7/1 and personal search memo Ex.PW7/E of accused Mashroof. PW7 has further testified that after about one and half months, he saw the Mansoor walking in the area of SP Mukherjee Market and informed the IO in the PS Kirti Nagar. He and the IO went to the S.P.Mukherjee Market and the police arrested accused Mansoor. This witness has proved the arrest memo Ex.PW7/3 and the personal search memo Ex.PW7/4 of Mansoor.
19. Haji Salim @ Sabbu was examined as PW8. He has testified that on 27.08.2006 he was present at the first floor and his brother Hazi Nasir and one labour Subhash were present on the ground floor of the meat factory, run by him and his brother Hazi Nasir. On hearing the noise of a quarrel and the sound of bullet shot, he immediately came down and rushed outside the factory and saw his brother Mohd. Salim @ Kalua lying on the ground having injuries on his right arm. He had seen the accused persons fleeing from the spot. He shifted his brother Mohd. Salim to a hospital in Naraina. PW8 has further testified that on 25.08.2006 he had a quarrel with both the accused outside his house. The accused had a grudge against him, since he had interfered in the dispute between his aunt (Khala) and the accused persons. On the day he had a fight with the accused persons, , Mashroof had caused injuries on his head with a piece of brick. In the said incident Both the accused were arrested and produced before the Magistrate in Sarai Rohilla . Both the accused threatened him in the said court that they would set then right Page 8/28 9 after being released . His brother Salim was also with him on that day.
20. Meena Begum was examined as PW-10. PW10 has testified that she was residing on the first floor of property no. B-31, S.P.Mukherjee Market, New Rohtak Road, New Delhi and on the ground floor she had a shop of repair and denting and painting of cars, being run her two sons Mohd.Umeed and Mohd. Junaid. Since both her sons were minors, she and her husband also sat in the shop for supervising. Beneath the staircases of her house, there was the shop of Mashroof, who worked there as an auto electrician. Accused Mashroof had not been permitting her sons and their mechanic to park the vehicles brought to her shop for the purposes of repair and denting and painting in front of her shop and on this count, there used to be altercation between accused Mashroof on one hand and herself, her husband and their mechanic on the other hand. In the said shop of Mashroof, his brother Mansoor also used to sit. PW10 has further testified that Haji Salim @ Sabbu and Mohd. Salim @ Kalua who are her distant nephews in relation and are known to her for the last 5 to 6 years also used to bring their vehicles in their shop for repair and both used to advise both the accused not to raise any objection regarding parking of the vehicles in front of their shop, which used to be brought for repair purposes. However both the accused did not pay any heed to the said advice and still used to fight with them and with Haji Salim @ Sabbu and Mohd. Salim @ Kalua.
21. In her cross examination, PW10 Meena Begum has testified that on that very day, when Kalua sustained injuries, she had gone to the hospital to see injured Kalua at about 9.00 PM. Her statement was recorded by the police after about 2-4 days of the incident.
MEDICO WITNESS Page 9/28 10
22. Dr. Neelabh Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Kapoor Medical Centre was examined as PW12. He has testified that he had medically examined the patient Mohd. Salim. He has proved his opinion in the MLC of Mohd. Salim Ex.PW12/1 as per which the injury was a gun shot injury.
23. In his cross examination, PW12 testified that he had not seen the weapon, but injury on the arm of Mohd. Salim was from a fire arm because of the blackening of the skin surrounding the one wound.
WITNESSES OF INVESTIGATION
24. Ct.Prahlad was examined as PW5. PW5 has testified that on 08.09.2006 he was involved in the investigation of this case with SI Rajesh, when accused Mashroof came to the police station Kirti Nagar. He got the accused medically examined. They searched for the fire arm in the Yamuna as well as other places on the pointing out of accused Mashroof. They recovered one motor cycle from Sadar Bazar on the pointing out of accused Mashroof, which was deposited in the malkhana. Accused Mashroof was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/1. His personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW7/2. SI Rajesh recorded the disclosure statement (Ex.PW5/1) of accused Mashroof. This witness has disclosed that the motor cycle no. DL-6SR-2553 (Ex.P-4) was recovered from the area of Pan Mandi, Sadar Bazar, and was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/2. The co accused Mansoor was not traceable. He had taken Mashroof to DDU hospital for medical examination and handed over the medical documents to the IO after his medical examination. IO recorded his statement. PW5 has further testified that on 15.10.2006 he again joined investigation of this case with IO SI Rajesh. IO arrested accused Mansoor from SPM Market vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/3 and his personal search vide memo Ex.PW7/4 was conducted . The accused Mansoor was released on the spot because he was on anticipatory bail. This witness identified the motorcycle ExP-4 as being the same motorcycle on which both the Page 10/28 11 accused had fled.
25. The IO Inspector Rajesh Kumar was examined as PW13. He has testified that on 27.08.2006 he was posted as Sub Inspector at PS Kirti Nagar. At about 9.25 PM, on receipt of copy of DD No.35-A (Ex.PW13/A) with regard to information about some one having run away after gun shot firing near Nidhi factory , 7/22 Kirti Nagar having been received, he along with Ct.Sahinder reached at the spot and learnt that the incident of firing had taken place at 7/28 Kirti Nagar Industrial Area. They reached there, but no eye witness met them and they came to know that the injured had been removed to Kapoor Medical Centre at Naraina. IO along with Ct. reached there and collected the MLC of injured Mohd.Salim @ Kalua. On his written request Ex.PW13/B, the doctor opined the injured unfit to make statement. He interrogated the eye witness Hazi Nasir in the Kapoor Medical Centre and recorded his statement Ex.PW6/ 1, and made his endorsement Ex.PW13/C. Before making the endorsement, he received the shirt, vest and handkerchief of the injured handed over to him by Const. Sahinder and after converting them into a parcel sealed with the seal of RK seized the same vide memo Ex.PW4/A. He sent the rukka to the police station through Ct. Sahender and got the FIR (Ex.PW2/A) registered. He along with complainant Hazi Nasir reached at the spot, inspected the spot and prepared the site plan Ex.PW6/2 at the instance of complainant Hazi Nasir. He could not trace the bullet or empty cartridge near the spot. He recorded statement of the eye witness Subhash at the spot. He made search for the accused persons at their shop at S.P.Mukherjee Marg and other places including Sadar Bazar, however they could not be traced. He again tried to trace the bullet, empty cartridge, but failed. On reaching the police station he deposited the sealed parcels in the malkhana and recorded the statement of Ct.Sahender.
26. PW13 Insp. Rajesh Kumar has further testified that on 28.08.2006 he reached Kapoor Medical Centre and met the injured. He moved an application Ex.PW13/D on which the doctor declared the injured Mohd.
Page 11/28 12 Salim fit to make statement. He recorded the statement of injured Mohd. Salim under Section 161 Cr.PC, who disclosed the names of assailants as Mansoor Ahmed and Mashroof Ahmed besides other facts of the incident. He made search for the accused persons in Delhi as well as in Meerut, UP, but they could not be traced. On 07.09.2006 he examined ASI Rajeshwar and HC Kishan Singh of PS Sadar Bazar, who arrested both the accused persons in the case u/s 107/151 Cr.PC and collected photo copy of kalendra Ex.PW3/1 and Ex.PW13/E. On 08.09.2006 Haji Salim the brother of injured and Subhash eye witness came to the Police Station to know the position of the case, when in their presence accused Mashroof surrendered himself. Accused Mashroof was identified by both the witnesses. He interrogated Mashroof and prepared the arrest memo Ex.PW7/1 and personal search memo Ex.PW7/2. He recorded the disclosure statement of Mashroof Ex.PW5/1. Mashroof led them to the area of Pan Mandi and got recovered one motor cycle no.DL 6 SR 2553 which was used by the accused persons in fleeing from the spot after committing the crime which was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/2. The weapon of offence could not be traced despite best efforts. On 15.10.2006 accused Mansoor Ahmed met him at his shop i.e. B-31 SP Mukherjee Market, New Rohtak Road, Delhi and with the help of PW Salim and Subhash, he arrested Mansoor Ahmad vide arrest memo ExPW7/3. The motor cycle Ex. P-4 was released to accused Mashroof from the court on execution of superdarinama Ex.P- F. During investigation, he recorded the statement of the witnesses and obtained the nature of injury on the MLC of Mohd Salim. He identified the shirt P-1, vest P-2and handkerchief P-3 of injured Mohd Salim.
In his cross examination,PW13 has testified that he reached the place of incident 7/28 Industrial Area Kirti Nagar, where he came to know that the injured had been shifted to Kapoor Medical Centre, Nariana. He collected the MLC of the injured on 27.08.2006. He did not record the statement of the injured on the same day as he was declared unfit for statement. He recorded his Page 12/28 13 statement on 28.08.2006. From the spot he along with the eyewitness Hazi Nasir came to the spot. He searched for the empty cartridge at the spot however could not find the same.
STATMENT OF THE ACCUSED U/S 313 Cr.PC
28. Both the accused persons in their statement under Section 313 Cr.PC denied the prosecution case and claimed false implication. They stated that they had been falsely implicated in the case in order to evict them from their shop. They have further deposed that on 27.08.2008 at about 5.00 PM they had gone to Meerut, where they were telephonically informed by a relative that a case had been registered against them.
29. In their supplementary statement, the accused stated that the place of occurrence i.e. 7/28 Kirti Nagar Industrial Area was a cold storage and not the meat factory. PW Meena belongs to "Teli biradari"
and the injured and his relatives/witnesses belong to "Qureshi Biradari"
i.e. Kasai/Butcher. The independent prosecution witnesses had illicit relations with Meena (PW10) and her daughters and so had falsely implicated them in this case.
DEFENCE WITNESSES
30. Both the accused have examined four witness in their defence.
31. HC Surender Kumar was examined as DW1 has testified that he had brought the photo copy of the order (Mark X) dated 02.01.2006 of the DCP (Central) for destruction of old records including complaints. The record summoned by the accused persons (relating to complaint dated 06.06.1998 against Meena) had been destroyed. He has testified that without seeing the record in his office, he was unable to tell whether the complaint dated 06.06.1998 (Mark Y also ExDW2/A) against Meena made by all the shopkeepers of the market around B-31 SP Market was Page 13/28 14 received in the PS DBG Roads on 23.06.1998 or not.
32. Yoginder Singh was examined as DW2. He has testified that he owned shop no.A-84, S.P.Mukherjee Market, New Rohtak Road, Delhi- 110005 for the last about 24 years. The workshop of the accused persons and the residence of Meena were about 25-30 meters from his shop. The accused had been running their shop for the last about 13-14 years. Both the accused were co-operative and shy in nature. Meena was residing above the workshop of the accused persons alongwith his family. The persons Hazi Nasir, Haji Salim and Salim were known to him as they used to come to the workshop of the accused persons for getting their cars repaired. They also used to visit the house of Meena.
33. DW2 Yoginder Singh has further testified that accused Mushroof and other persons of the area had sent a complaint at PS Desh Bandhu Gupta Road against Meena and her family and he had also signed on the said complaint Ex.DW2/A as a witness at point 'C' The other neighbourers also signed on the complaint Ex.DW2/A, beside the accused. They as neighbourers were also disturbed by the family of Meena. The husband of Meena was keeping a gas cylinder near the workshop of the accused persons and had captured the space with the support of Hazi Nasir, Haji Salim and Mohd. Salim. He was also the office bearer of the market association and had come to the court to depose in the said capacity also. He came to know that there was some altercation between Mohd. Salim and accused Mashroof about 2-3 years back. The accused persons were very god-fearing and innocent persons.
34. In his cross examination by Ld.APP, DW2 Yoginder Singh has testified that he was running the business in the name of N.N. Builders. He had no knowledge about the source of income of Meena and her husband. He could not tell the names of the daughters and sons of Meena. DW2 denied that he did not know the accused, Haji Nasir and Hazi Salim. He admitted that a civil litigation was pending trial between Meena and the accused persons over the possession of the space of workshop and volunteered that both the parties were at fault. He Page 14/28 15 admitted that the accused had a motorcycle and that both the accused were booked and released on the very next day by the SEM.
35. ASI Krishan of Vigilance Branch,Delhi Police was examined as DW3. He has proved the complaint dated 15.12.2005 as Ex.DW3/A, received in the Office of the Commissioner of Police, PHQ on 15.12.2005. The said complaint was sent to DCP, Central District for necessary action. The complaint dated 15.12.2005 (Ex.DW3/A) has been made by Mashroof addressed to the Home Minister, Police Commissioner amongst others to take action on the complaint lodged by him about the illegal construction done by Meena on the 1st and 2nd floor of her premises B-31, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Market.
36. Shafiq Ahmed was examined as DW4. He has testified that the accused were his neighbours in Meerut. The accused were well mannered and soft spoken persons and were not quarrelsome. On 24.08.2006 he came to Delhi for purchase of utensils for the marriage of his daughter and at about 2.30-3.00 PM came to the workshop of the accused. There he came to know from the accused Meena along with her family were residing on the first floor of the workshop of the accused persons. The accused told him that Meena and her daughters were not of good character. After purchasing the utensils, he spent his night in the house of the accused persons and on the next day morning he left for Meerut. Both the accused persons met him in their house at Meerut in the evening of 27.08.2006 at about 7.00 - 7.30 PM. There both the accused told him about their false implication in criminal cases under Section 107/151Cr.PC at the behest of some Sabbu and Shakur or Nasir or Shakur.
37. DW4 has further testified on the next day morning accused Mashroof informed him that last night he had got a telephone call from Delhi that police had came to his residence in Delhi to search for him and it appeared that they had been involved in some false criminal case. He advised them to engage some counsel. Both the accused could not cause any injury to anyone as they were very fearful and law abiding Page 15/28 16 citizens. They did not even participate in the Qurbani on the eve of Bakr- Id.
38. In his cross examination by Ld.APP, DW4 has testified of having no personal knowledge about Meena's reputation.
39. I have heard Ld.APP Shri Harvinder Kumar Nar and Ld.defence Counsel Sh.Mohd. Ali on behalf of both the accused persons and perused the record with utmost care.
40. The most material witness is the injured Mohd. Salim @ Kalua (PW9) himself. He has testified that on the day of the incident (27.08.2006) he was standing near a car in front of the meat factory of his cousin Haji Nasir at about 9.00 PM, when both the accused persons came to him. Accused Mansoor exhorted accused Mashroof "Maar Saley Ko". Then accused Mashroof put a pistol on his right side back. He tried to rescue himself and in this process, the bullet hit him near his right shoulder. There were two marks, one towards the right side of his right shoulder and the other through which the bullet had passed which was towards the front side of his right arm. Thereafter both the accused ran away on a motor cycle towards Maya Puri fly over side. In the meantime, his cousin Haji Nazir and Subhash rushed towards him and he was taken to Kapoor Hospital, Naraina by his cousin Hazi Nazir, Haji Salim @ Sabbu and Subhash. Both the accused persons were already known to him as they were residing near the shop of his Khala (mausi) Meena. PW9 has identified his shirt Ex.P-1, vest Ex.P-2 and handkerchief Ex.P-3. The shirt Ex.P-1 had a cut mark towards the right shoulder side and Ex.P -1 to Ex.P-3 had blood stains.
41. PW9 Mohd. Salim was cross examined by the Ld.APP during which he testified that he had stated in his statement to the police that his cousin Hazi Nasir and Subhash tried to apprehend both the accused while they were trying to escape after causing bullet injuries to him.
42. In the cross examination conducted on behalf of both the accused persons, PW9 has deposed that he was standing alone near the car of his cousin, parked outside the factory prior to the incident. He has further Page 16/28 17 testified that they had come to the factory and that he had come out of the car and was attending a telephone call. After finishing the talks, he was about to go inside the factory. He was accompanied by Haji Nazir, Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu and driver Tammanna when they came to the factory in the aforesaid car of his cousin. Driver Tammanna had gone inside the factory, when he was talking on phone. He was standing alone outside the factory talking on his phone. The accused persons had come when he finished his talks on the phone. The accused were known to him as he used to get his car repaired through them. Initially, there was a "hatha pai" between him and the accused persons. In reply to a specific question, PW9 has testified that accused used to fight with his Khala (Meena) and when he intervened on her behalf, both accused got annoyed and fought with him. Pistol had been taken out by accused Mansoor and in the process of saving himself, he sustained injuries. He was taken to the hospital by his brother Hazi Nazir. He denied the suggestion that he could not give correct date, month and year of the incident in his examination in chief since no such incident ever took place. He has further denied that the injuries on his body were self inflicted. PW9 has admitted that litigation had been going on between his Khala and the accused and that his Khala wanted the shop situated on the ground floor, to be vacated by the accused. He denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely at the instance of his brother Hazi Nasir (PW6). In reply to a specific question, PW-9 has testified that his version to the effect that accused Mansoor had exhorted accused Mashroof by stating "Maaro Saale Ko" and on this accused Mashroof put pistol on his right side back, was correct.
43. There is no blemish in the testimony of the injured Mohd. Salim and the same inspires confidence. His testimony has withstood the lengthy cross examination. The testimony of the injured Mohd Salim PW-9 had been fully corroborated by the medical evidence on record.
44. Dr. Neelabh, Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Kapoor Medical Centre (PW12) has proved the MLC of Mohd. Salim Ex.PW12/1 and has Page 17/28 18 testified that he had medically examined him. He has proved his report in the MLC Ex.PW12/1 as per which the nature of the injury was gun shot injury in the right arm described as :
(1) Entry wound of size 1 cm in diameter over posteriolateral aspect of arm approximately 3 fingers below acromion process. Blackening of skin present around wound oozing of blood also present. (2) Exit wound of size approximately 1.5 cm in diameter present over anteromedial aspect of right arm oozing of blood present.
45. In his cross examination, PW12 Dr. Neelabh has testified that he had not seen the weapon, but injury was from a fire arm because of the blackening of the skin surrounding the one wound.
46. The testimony of the injured Mohd Salim PW-9 has also been fully corroborated by the testimony of the two eyewitnesses Hazi Nasir (PW6) and Subhash (PW7).
47. Hazi Nasir (PW6) has corroborated the version of PW9 Mohd.Salim testifying that on 27.08.2006 at about 9.30 PM he and his worker Subhash were present at the main gate of his meat factory and were coming outside the main gate when he saw his cousin brother Mohd.Salim standing near a car at a distance of 15/20 steps from his factory. Both accused Mashroof and Mansoor came there and started quarrelling with Mohd.Salim. His worker Subhash was also present there at that time. When they were coming towards Mohd.Salim, accused Mansoor exhorted his brother Mashroof "Maar Saley Ko"and on this the accused Mashroof fired from his pistol at Mohd.Salim, who turned back in order to save himself, but the cartridge hit above on his left armpit from behind. PW6 and Subhash shouted "Pakdo Pakdo", but in the meantime both the accused escaped on a red colour motor cycle (Ex.P-4) towards PS. Kirti Nagar. He took Mohd.Salim to a nearby Nursing Home for medical aid.
48. PW-6 Hazi Nasir has testified that both the accused were known to him prior to the aforesaid incident . He identified the shirt Ex.P-1, vest Ex.P-2 and handkerchief Ex.P-3 of Mohd.Salim. He also identified the Page 18/28 19 motor cycle Ex.P-4 of the accused persons on which they had fled from the scene of crime.
49. In his cross examination, by the Ld.APP, PW6 Hazi Nasir testified that both the accused fled away from the spot towards Maya Puri Fly over side when he and Subhash chased them. He and Subhash removed the injured to Kapoor Medical Centre at Naraina. Mohd Salim sustained bullet injuries on his right side armpit but inadvertently due to negligence and confusion he have stated in his examination-in-chief that he sustained injuries on his left armpit. The incident took place about 10-15 steps away from the gate of his factory. The distance between the road and the main gate where they were standing at the time of the incident was about 15-20 steps. The incident took place in the gali where his factory was situated which had a width of 20/22 feet. Trucks and vehicles can pass through it. At the spot there was a light from his factory and the electricity pole was also nearby. At the time when his cousin was fired at by Mashroof he was present at a distance of 15/20 steps. And the motorcycle was parked at a distance of 20 steps from the place of occurrence on the road. He removed Mohd. Salim to the Medical Centre in his purple Escoda car. At that time Subhash, Haji Salim were with him. At the time of the incident Haji Salim was inside the factory and came out on hearing the shot fired. He reached the Hospital in about half an hour. The site plan Ex.PW6/2 and the testimony of the IO corroborates the version of this witness.
50. The second eyewitness Subhash (PW7) has testified that on 27.08.2006 he along with Haji Salim and Haji Nasir was present in the meat factory with Mohd. Salim. Haji Salim had gone to the first floor and he along with Haji Nasir were present on the ground floor, when at about 9.15 PM on hearing the noise of quarrel he and Haji Nasir went outside the factory and saw two persons were beating Kalua. The names of those two persons later on were revealed as Mansoor and Mashroof. On seeing them, accused Mansoor asked accused Mashroof "Maar Saale Ko" . Accused Mashroof fired a shot towards Kalua and both the accused Page 19/28 20 ran away from the spot on their motor cycle towards Maya Puri. Kalua fell down. He sustained injuries on his right arm.
51. In his cross examination, PW7 Subhash has testified that he had seen the incident from a distance of 15 steps. There was proper light at the spot through a tube light installed on the outer wall of the factory. The motor cycle was parked at a distance of 4 feet from the spot. Police recorded his statement on 28.08.2006 in the factory. He denied that no such incident had taken place in his presence or that he was deposing at the instance of Hazi Nasir. This witness identified both the accused in Court.
52. Haji Salim @ Sabbu (PW8) has corroborated the version of Hazi Nasir (PW-6) and Subhash (PW-7) by proving in his testimony that on hearing the sound of quarrel and bullet shot, he immediately came down and rushed outside the factory where he saw his brother Mohd. Salim lying on the ground having injuries on his right arm and the accused persons fleeing from the spot. He has also testified to having shifted his brother Mohd. Salim to one hospital in Naraina. In his cross examination, PW8 has testified that he had taken Mohd. Salim to the hospital after he had sustained bullet injury at around 9.00 - 9.30 PM.
53. The testimony of both the eyewitnesses Hazi Nasir (PW-6) and Subhash (PW-7) so also Haji Salim @ Sabbu (PW-8) has withstood the test of cross examination and evokes confidence. The testimony of the said three witnesses amply corroborate each other and the testimony of the injured Mohd Salim. The MLC ExPW12/1 proved by Dr Neelabh who examined the injured Mohd Salim bears the left thumb impression of Haji Salim and signatures of Hazi Nasir going to prove that they had got Mohd. Salim to the hospital.
54. From the testimony of the above prosecution witnesses the motive of the crime also emerges. PW-9 Mohd. Salim @ Kalua has testified that one day before the incident both the accused had inflicted head injuries on his cousin brother Haji Salim @ Sabbu (PW8) and were arrested in Sadar Thana. In his cross examination by the Ld. APP he testified that Page 20/28 21 both the accused had extended threats to him and his cousin brothers on 26.08.2006 that they would eliminate them.
55. PW-8 Haji Salim @ Sabbu has testified that on 25.08.2006 he had a quarrel with both the accused outside his house. The accused had a grudge against him, since he had interfered in the dispute between his aunt (Meena) and the accused persons. On the said day, accused Mashroof had caused injuries on his head by a piece of brick. Both the accused were arrested and produced before the Magistrate in Sarai Rohilla . Both the accused threatened him in the said court that they would set them right after being released . His brother Mohd. Salim was also with him on that day.
56. PW-6 Hazi Nasir has testified in his examination in chief that a quarrel between his cousin Mohd.Salim, (the injured) and his real brother Haji Salim on one hand and both the accused on the other hand on 26.08.2006 on the issue of parking of the bike by the accused near the house of Meena had taken place. In the said quarrel his real brother Haji Salim was hit by Mashroof on his head with a brick. The FIR was lodged at PS Sadar Thana and accused Mashroof was arrested and released on bail from the Court of SEM. Outside the court, both the accused threatened his real brother Haji Salim and his cousin brother Mohd.Salim that they would not let them live because they had got them (both accused) arrested..
57. In his cross examination by ld.defence counsel for the accused persons, PW6 Hazi Nasir has testified that a civil litigation was pending between the accused persons and Meena. She was residing above the shop of the accused persons. He admitted that he visited the house of Meena and that he had at times acted as a mediator between the accused and Meena for settling their disputes.
58. HC Kishan Singh PW1 has testified that on 26.08.2006 he along with Constable Shambhu Dayal was on beat duty at beat no.8, PS Sadar Bazar, when at about 1.45 PM he heard the noise of quarrel at house no.T-378 Ahata Kedara, Sadar Bazar. When they both reached there they Page 21/28 22 found a crowd. They saw that Salim Shabbo and his brother Mohd. Salim had caught hold of accused Mansoor Ahmed . Accused Mansoor was hurling abuses at Salim @ Sabbu and Mohd.Salim and was saying that since they had got his brother arrested, they would not be spared and they would have to face consequences for the same. PW1 tried to pacify the accused Mansoor Ahmed,but he did not mend his ways. Thereafter, after narrating the entire incident to the SHO on phone, PW- 1 arrested accused Mansoor Ahmed under Section 107/151 Cr.PC. PW1 recorded the proceedings in DD No.40A which he proved as Ex.PW1/A. He had prepared the kalendra under Section 107/151 Cr.PC on the basis of DD No. 40A..
59. PW-1 in his cross examination has testified that he did not initiate any action against Haji Salim and Mohd Salim since it was not warranted and that in fact it was accused Mansoor alone who had been abusing them. The question of his intimating about any offending action of Mohd.Salim and Haji Salim did not arise since they were not doing anything offensive. He denied the suggestion that the proceedings initiated by him against the accused Mansoor Ahmad were false.
60. ASI Rajeshwar (PW3) in his testimony has proved that on 25.08.2006 information about quarrel was recorded by vide DD No.16A at about 11.10 AM in PS Sadar Bazar. This information was given by Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu who was having injuries on his head. Ct.Sukleshwar took the injured Mohd. Salim @ Sabbu to Hindu Rao Hospital for his medical examination. On 26.08.2006 he along with Ct.Suresh reached B-31 SP Mukherjee Marg, New Rohtak Road i.e. the shop of accused persons for conducting inquiry with regard to DD No.16-A dated 25.08.2006 where accused Mashroof met them at the shop. He was interrogated. Mashroof became furious and told that Salim had lodged complaint against him in the police station yesterday and he would teach him a lesson. Thereafter taking preventive measures, the accused Mashroof was arrested under Section 107/151 Cr.PC. Vide DD No.19-A dated 26.08.2006 (Ex.PW3/1). The accused was produced before the SEM Page 22/28 23 concerned.
61. From the testimony of the above witnesses it stands amply proved that there was enmity between the injured Mohd. Salim, Haji Salim and Haji Nasir and the accused persons because of the former siding with Meena who wanted the accused to vacate her premises and there was also dispute about the accused obstructing parking of cars coming for repairs to Meena's shop. The enmity was escalated because of Mashroof being arrested at the instance of Haji Salim because of which both accused as proved by Mohd Salim threatened that they would not let them live. The existing enmity between the injured and his cousins on the one hand and the accused persons on the other and their having had an altercation with the accused persons prior to the incident because of which Mashroof was arrested explains the motive behind the accused persons attacking the injured Mohd Salim.
62. It was argued by the ld counsel for both accused that the enmity between the parties was the reason for the injured and his cousins to have falsely implicated the accused persons and that the injury on the person of the injured Mohd Salim was self inflicted.
63. This argument of the ld. counsel for both accused is too far fetched. It cannot be believed that for the sake of enmity one would risk one's own life to falsely implicate another that to by shooting at his own upper arm. There appears no reason for shielding the real culprit. Also looking at the nature of the injury and the entry and exit point of the bullet it cannot be believed that the injured would have manged to shoot himself from behind and would risk shooting himself so close to his chest.
64. It was also argued by the ld. counsel for the accused persons that the testimony of both the prosecution witnesses Hazi Nasir and Haji Salim could not be believed since they were related to the injured Mohd Salim and because of their enmity with the injured they were interested witnesses.
65. Testimony of related witnesses cannot be rejected only on the ground of their relationship and their testimony has to be appreciated Page 23/28 24 like the testimony of any other witness and if found reliable, conviction can be based upon such testimony. In the case titled Surinder Singh v. State of UP(2003) 10 SCC 26 it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that :
" Relationship is not a factor to affect the credibility of a witness. It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal the actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person. Foundation has to be made if a plea of false implication is made."
66. In the light of the above observation it having been held above that the testimony of both the witnesses was credible, the existence of prior enmity with both accused or relationship with the injured would not make any dent on the worthiness of their testimony and for this reason their testimony cannot be discarded. It is in fact the enmity which proves the motive of the crime.
67. It was also argued by the ld. counsel for both accused that the discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses made the prosecution version improbable. PW-6 Hazi Nasir in his cross examination on the one hand claimed that it was he who informed the PCR at about 9.20 PM on 27.08.2006 while later in his cross examination he has stated that the telephone call was made by somebody else. Also while Hazi Nasir (PW-6) testified that the motorcycle of the accused persons was red in colour , Mohd. Salim (PW-9) claimed that it was black in colour. Regarding the previous fight with the accused persons on 25.08.2005 Mohd. Salim in his testimony stated that the accused had a quarrel with Hazi Nasir while as per PW8 Haji Salim @ Sabbu the fight was with him while as per Hazi Nazir the fight was both with Mohd. Salim and Haji Salim. Also that Hazi Nasir PW6 has testified the number of factory outside which the incident took place as being 27/8 and not 7/28 Kirti Nagar. Nowhere in the site plan Ex.PW6/B the presence of the Escoda Car by which the injured was taken to the hospital was shown.
Page 24/28 25 Also PW7 Subhash could not tell the registration number of the car of Hazi Nasir.
68. The discrepancies pointed out by the ld. counsel for the accused persons are minor discrepancies and not major contradictions which would shake the otherwise credible testimony of the eye witnesses corroborated by the other evidence on record as set out above. The factum of quarrel between both accused, Mohd. Salim, Hazi Salim, and Hazi Nasir two days prior to the date of the incident has been proved. The site of the crime also from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses as set out above has been proved to be in front of the meat factory of Hazi Nasir which is 7/28 Kirti Nagar . The not showing of the Escoda in the site plan nor Subhash knowing its registration number does not effect the prosecution case.
69. It was also argued by the ld. counsel for both accused that as per the MLC of the injured Mohd. Salim, no bony injury was found and so this was at the most a case of simple injury.
70. This argument of the ld. counsel for both accused cannot be accepted.
In order to justify a conviction under Section 307 IPC it is not essential that bodily injury capable of causing death should have been inflicted. The section makes a distinction between the act of the accused and its result if any. What has to be seen is if the act irrespective of its result was done with the intention or knowledge and under the circumstances mentioned in Section 307 IPC. The nature of the weapon used, the intention expressed by the accused at the time of the act, the motive of the commission of the offence, the nature and size of the injuries if caused are factors which have to be considered together.
71. DW4 Shafiq Ahmad has attempted to create an alibi for the accused persons claiming that on 27.08.2006 they were at their house in Meerut where he met them. However, this alibi in the face of clinching testimony of the prosecution witnesses as set out above cannot be believed. The fact remains that their testimony qua the actual incident of the accused Mansoor exhorting his brother accused Mashroof to fire at Page 25/28 26 Mohd. Salim and him firing so with his pistol outside the factory of Hazi Nasir remains unshaken and amply corroborated by medical evidence and has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
72. The incident is of 27.08.2006. The IO Inspector Rajesh PW13 has testified that both the accused could not be traced after the incident either in Delhi or in Meerut. It is only on 08.09.2009 that Mashroof surrendered and he was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/1 while Mansoor was arrested on 15.10.2006 from his shop vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/3. Both accused persons disappearing after the crime only points towards their guilt.
73. The injured Mohd. Salim (PW9) in his testimony has proved that Mashroof put the pistol on his right side back and it was in the process when he was trying to save himself that he moved when the bullet hit his upper arm. The manner in which both accused came armed with the pistol looking for the injured and his cousins and the manner in which Mansoor exhorted his brother Mashroof to attack the injured Mohd. Salim and thereafter Mashroof firing at Mohd. Salim at close range aiming at his back (right portion) in the backdrop of their enmity and threat to eliminate Mohd. Salim only proves premeditation on their part to kill Mohd. Salim. The part of the body aimed at in the first instance was vital and a bullet injury from close range would definitely have been fatal. It is because of the injured Mohd. Salim having moved to save himself and both accused aborting their further attack on seeing Hazi Nasir and Subhash running towards them that the injured Mohd Salim was saved. The consummation of the intention of both accused was hindered by circumstances beyond their will. Thus, this is a case clearly covered under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC.
74. In view of the aforesaid discussion I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been successful in bringing home the guilt of the accused Mushroof and Mansoor beyond reasonable doubt under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. I therefore hold them both guilty under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and convict them Page 26/28 27 accordingly.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THIS THE 27th DAY OF APRIL, 2010.
(ADITI COUDHARY) ADDL.SESSION JUDGE -03 (WEST) DISTRICT : DELHI.
Page 27/28 28 IN THE COURT OF MS. ADITI CHOUDHARY ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-03,WEST, DELHI.
SC No. 143/09 FIR No. 414/06U/s 307/34 IPC PS Kirti Nagar STATE. VS. 1. MASHROOF AHMAD R/O HOUSE NO.37, GULAR WALI ALI KHAIR NAGAR, PS DELHI GATE, MERUT, UP.
2. MANSOOR AHMAD S/O MUJAFFAR AHMED R/O HOUSE NO.37, GULAR WALI ALI KHAIR NAGAR, PS DELHI GATE, MERUT, UP.
Date of institution : 19.01.2009 Judgment reserved on : 23.04.2010 Judgment delivered on : 27.04.2010 ORDER ON THE POINT OF SENTENCE.
1. The accused Mashroof Ahmed and Mansoor Ahmed have been convicted under Section 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC vide judgment dated 27.04.2010.
2. I have heard Ld.Addl.PP for the State and Ld.counsel Shri Mohd Ali for both convicts on the point of sentence.
3. It was argued by the Ld.Addl.PP for the State that the offence being serious and premeditated maximum sentence should be given.
Page 28/28 29
4. The ld.counsel for both convits submitted that a lenient view be taken as both convicts are the sole bread earners of their families. Convict Mashroof has one minor daughter. While convict Mansoor has four minor children to look after.
5. Having considered the personal circumstances of both convicts I am of the view that the interest of justice would be served by awarding a sentence of three years. Accordingly I sentence both the convicts Mashroof Ahmed and Mansoor Ahmed to RI of three years and fine of Rs 1000/- each for the offence u/s 307 read with Section 34 IPC. In case of default in payment of fine they shall both suffer SI for 15 days. Both convicts shall be entitled to the benefit of Section 428 Cr.PC.
6. A copy of the judgment dated 27.04.2010 and of this order on sentence be supplied to the convicts. Both convicts have been apprised that they have a right to appeal against this judgement and sentence before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Also they have been apprised that for engaging a counsel they can approach the Legal Aid Cell functioning in Tihar Jail or write to the Secretary Delhi High Court Legal Aid Cell functioning in Tihar Jail or write to the Secretary, Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. File be consigned to Record Room.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT THIS THE 30th DAY OF APRIL, 2010.
(ADITI CHOUDHARY) ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE-03 WEST DISTRICT DELHI.
Page 29/28