Delhi District Court
State vs . John Dass Etc. on 23 August, 2010
IN THE COURT OF SH. VISHAL SINGH : MM : DELHI
State Vs. John Dass etc.
FIR No. 1083/95.
U/s. 341/323/34 IPC.
PS Mangol Puri, Delhi.
JUDGMENT
a) The sl. no. of the case : 63/96.
b) The Unique ID No. of the case : 02401R0046761996.
c) The date of commission of the : 15/10/1995.
offence
d) The date of institution of case : 01/02/1996.
e) The name of the complainant : Ram Kumar.
f) The name & address of accused :1John Dass, S/o. Arun Dass,
R/o. D-420, Mangol Puri,
Delhi.
2David Lal, S/o. Shri Ram Lal,
R/o. G-86, Vijay Vihar,
Phase-II, Delhi.
g) The offence complained of : U/s. 341/323/34 IPC.
h) The plea of the accused : pleaded not guilty.
i) The date of reserving the order : 10/08/2010.
j) The final order : Convicted.
k) The date of such order : 19/08/2010.
THE BRIEF REASONS FOR THE JUDGMENT :
1. Brief resume of facts of the present case are that on 15/10/1995, at about 6:05 FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 1 pm, at shop of R. K. Tailors, F-38, Vijay Vihar, Phase-II, Delhi, both accused persons in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained the complainant Ram Kumar and one Sanjay and voluntarily caused simple hurt on their person. The complaint was made to the police and after investigation, the challan was filed by the police.
2. Complete set of copies were supplied to the accused persons and after hearing arguments, charge was framed against both the accused persons for trial of offence U/s. 341/323/34 IPC by my Ld. Predecessor to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Prosecution in support of present case examined PW.1 Ram Kumar, complainant in this case, who has proved his complaint Ex. PW1/A given to the police. PW.2 is Sanjay, one of the victim in this case. PW.3 is J. C. Vashisht, Record Clerk, DDU Hospital, who has proved the MLCs of both the injured vide Ex. PW3/A and PW3/B respectively. PW.4 Lady Ct. Kavita is a formal witness. PW.5 is ASI Sahab Singh, IO, who has proved the copy of DD entry no. 19 vide Ex. PW5/A, rukka Ex. PW5/B, site plan Ex. PW5/C and other memos on the record. PW.6 is HC Kapil Dev, who had joined the investigation along with IO ASI Sahab Singh and visited the spot.
4. Statement of accused persons was recorded separately U/s. 313 CrPC, FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 2 wherein they pleaded innocence and false implication in this case. However, they did not wish to examine any witness in support of their defence.
5. I have heard arguments from Ld. APP for State, accused in person and also gone through the evidence and documents on record carefully.
6. To prove the offence U/s. 341/323/34 IPC, the prosecution has to prove that accused persons had committed the above alleged offences. The prosecution in this case has examined six witnesses in total. Regarding the incident, the prosecution has examined PW.1 Ram Kumar, injured/complainant in this case. He has deposed that he was running a tailoring shop in the name of R. K. Tailors at Vijay Vihar, Delhi. He further deposed that on 15/10/95, he was working at the shop along with Sanjay. He further deposed that at about 7:00 or 7:30 pm, accused John, present in court today, came to his shop and put one liquor bottle at the counter of his shop to which he objected, but he started abusing to him and went away. He further deposed that after about half an hour, accused John came along with the accused David and two other persons and starting quarreling with him. He further deposed that accused John gave a blow on his waist and head and accused David gave a blow of scissor to Sanjay at his head due to which they sustained injury. He further deposed that he was unconscious and regained his consciousness in DDU FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 3 hospital. He further deposed that his statement was recorded at the hospital vide Ex. PW1/A. The statement of PW.1 Ram Kumar has been corroborated by PW.2 Sanjay, who is also one of the injured in this case. He has deposed on the same line and length and fully corroborated the version of PW.1. Both these witnesses have fully supported the prosecution case and have proved the causing of wrongful restraint and infliction of injuries upon them by the accused persons. There is no reason to disbelieve their statement. They have also identified both the accused persons correctly in the court. They have not been cross-examined by the accused persons despite the opportunity was given to them to cross-examine these witnesses.
7. To prove the police proceedings, the prosecution has examined PW.5 ASI Sahab Singh, who has deposed that on 15/10/95, on receipt of DD No. 19, Ex. PW5/A, he along with Ct. Kapil Dev went to R. K. Tailors, shop no. F-38, Vijay Vihar, Phase-II, where he came to know that the injured persons were already removed to DDU Hospital by the PCR van. He further deposed that he left Ct. Kapil Dev at the spot and went to DDU Hospital, where he obtained the MLC of injured Ram Kumar and Sanjay. He further deposed that he had recorded the statement of injured Ram Kumar vide Ex. PW1/A and made endorsement on the same vide Ex. PW5/B and got the case FIR registered at PS through Ct. Kapil Dev. He has proved the site plan Ex. FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 4 PW5/C and arrest of both the accused persons vide memo Ex. PW5/D and PW5/E respectively. The witnesses examined by the prosecution on record are corroborating each other on all the material aspects. There is no inconsistency or inherent contradiction in their statement.
8. Regarding the injuries, the prosecution has examined PW.3 J. C. Vashisht, Record Clerk, DDU Hospital, who has proved the MLC of injured Ram Kumar vide Ex. PW3/A and of injured Sanjay vide Ex. PW3/B. He has deposed that both the injured were examined by Dr. Shikha Chawla and Dr. Ritu respectively, who have opined the nature of injuries received by injured Ram Kumar as simple sharp and by Sanjay as simple blunt. Though, the prosecution has not examined the concerned doctors in this case due to their non-availability in the hospital, however, in my opinion from the statements of PW.1 Ram Kumar and PW.2 Sanjay and the MLCs Ex. PW3/A and PW3/B, it is crystal clear that PW.1 and PW.2 have received simple injuries on their bodies, which were caused by the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention. Although, the nature and gravity of injuries sustained by injured Ram Kumar and Sanjay cannot be proved by Record Clerk PW.3 J. C. Vashisht, but the factum of infliction of injury upon the person of Ram Kumar and Sanjay stands proved through MLCs Ex. PW3/A and PW3/B. FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 5
9. The accused persons have stated in their statement recorded U/s. 313 CrPC that they have falsely been implicated in this case. However, the accused persons have not put forward any defence to show that they have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant nor have they examined any witness in support of their defence in court. They also could not prove on record the enmity, if any either with the complainant or the police officials for their false implication in this case. The statement of witnesses and MLCs on record belies the limited defence taken by the accused persons that they have falsely been implicated in this case. Thus, all the witnesses examined by the prosecution are supporting the case of prosecution. The statement of all the witnesses on record is found to be cogent, coherent and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. The witnesses examined by the prosecution on record are corroborating each other on all the material aspects. There is no inconsistency or inherent contradiction in their statement.
10.Hence, in view of the above observation and discussion and the evidence on record, in my opinion, the prosecution has successfully proved the case against both the accused persons beyond all shadows of reasonable doubt for the offence U/s. 341/323/34 IPC. Therefore, I hereby FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 6 hold both the accused persons guilty for the offence U/s. 341/323/34 IPC and convict them accordingly. Order on sentence shall be announced after hearing the accused.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN
COURT ON 19/08/2010. (VISHAL SINGH)
Metropolitan Magistrate
(Copies 1 + 1) Delhi
FIR No. 1083/95
PS Mangol Puri 7
IN THE COURT OF SH. VISHAL SINGH : MM : DELHI
State Vs. John Dass etc.
FIR No. 1083/95.
U/s. 341/323/34 IPC.
PS Mangol Puri, Delhi.
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Present: Ld APP for State.
Accused/convicted persons are present on bail with Counsel. I have heard arguments on the point of sentence from the Ld. APP for State and the accused persons. It is stated by the accused persons that they are facing trial from last 15 years. It is further stated that the age of accused John Dass is around 40 years, whereas, accused David Lal is around 33 years of age. It is further stated that accused persons are the only bread earners of their respective families. It is further stated that they belong to a poor family and there is no record of any previous conviction against them and prayed for their release on the benefit of probation of good conduct.
On the other hand, it is stated by Ld. APP that the only fact that is is an old case does not entitle the convicted persons for any lenient view. It is further stated by Ld. APP that convicted persons deserves maximum punishment.
FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 8
It is true that there is no record of previous conviction against the accused persons and they are facing trial since 1995. In my view, when the accused persons have already faced such a long trial, it will not be justified to send them behind the bars in the company of criminals, especially when both are of considerable age now. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the accused persons and to make harmonizing relations between the parties, I deem it a fit case where the benefit of probation can be granted to the accused persons. Hence, I grant benefit of probation to both the accused persons. They are released on the bond of probation on furnishing PB in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety of like amount for a period of one year subject to the condition that they will keep peace and be of good behaviour during such period and they can be called to receive sentence in breach of the same. The bonds have been furnished today and same are considered and accepted. File be consigned to Record Room.
Copy of Judgment and order on sentence be provided to the convicted persons free of cost.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN
COURT ON 23/08/2010. (VISHAL SINGH)
Metropolitan Magistrate
(Copies 1 +2) Delhi
FIR No. 1083/95
PS Mangol Puri 9
John Dass etc.
FIR No. 1083/95.
U/s. 323/341/34 IPC.
PS Mangol Puri, Delhi.
23/08/2010
Ld. APP for State.
Accused/convicted persons on bail with counsel.
Heard. Vide separate order, order on sentence announced in the open court. The accused persons are released on the bond of probation on furnishing PB in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety of like amount for a period of one year subject to the condition that they will keep peace and be of good behaviour during such period and they can be called to receive sentence in breach of the same. The bonds have been furnished today and same are considered and accepted. The State is directed to appoint a Probationary Officer to keep a check on the activities of the convicted persons. The Probationary Officer shall give his report at the end of the probation period. File be consigned to Record Room.
Probation bonds of accused/convicted persons be put up on 23/08/2011.
MM:DELHI 23/08/2010 FIR No. 1083/95 PS Mangol Puri 10