Delhi District Court
State vs . Narender Singh & Ors. on 24 January, 2015
IN THE COURT OF Ms. CHETNA SINGH:MM-02(SOUTH DISTRICT)
SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
STATE Vs. Narender Singh & Ors.
FIR No.929/98
U/s : 279/324/341/34 IPC
P.S. : Malviya Nagar
Date of institution of case : 09.03.1999
Date on which case reserved for judgment : 16.01.2015
Date of judgment : 24.01.2015
JUDGMENT
1. FIR No. of the case : 929/98 2.Date of the Commission : 27.09.199 of the offence
3.Name of the accused : 1. Narender Singh S/o Sh. Rajbir
: Singh R/o Gali No. 3, Gaon Neb Sarai,
: New Delhi.
: 2. Hari S/o Sh. Puran Chand R/o Gali
: No. 3, Gaon Neb Sarai, New Delhi.
: 3. Sunil S/o Sh. Rajbir Singh R/o Gali
: No. 3, Gaon Neb Sarai, New Delhi.
4.Name of the complainant : Sh. Balikram Gautam S/o Sh. Ami
: Chand R/o H. No. 124/2, Sector 1,
: Pushp Vihar, New Delhi.
FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 1/15
5.Offence complained of : 279/324/341/34 IPC
6.Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
7.Final order : Convicted
BRIEF FACTS
1. The story of the prosecution is that on 27.09.1998 at about 9.45am at Aurobindo Marg near PTS, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Malviya Nagar, accused persons namely Narender Singh, Sunil and Hari in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained the complainant Balikram Gautam and Devender Kumar Gupta and voluntarily caused simple injury with sharp object on the person of complainant Devender Kr. Gupta and thereby committed offences punishable u/s 341/324/34 IPC. It is further alleged that the accused Hari was driving a vehicle i.e. Metadore Tempo bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others and struck against two wheeler scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189 of complainant Balik Ram Gautam and also committed offence punishable u/s 279 IPC.
2. On the basis of the said allegations and on the basis of the complaint of the complainant, an FIR bearing number 929/98 under section 279/324/341/34 IPC was lodged at Police Station Malviya Nagar.
3. After investigation, charge-sheet under section 173 Cr.P.C was filed on 09.03.1999.
4. On the basis of the charge-sheet, a charge for the offence punishable under section 279/324/341/34 IPC was framed against the accused Hari and section 324/341/34 IPC was framed against the accused FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 2/15 persons namely Narender Singh and Sunil and read out to the said accused person, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial on 07.04.2005.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE
5. To prove its case, prosecution examined the following witnesses:
6. PW-1 Ct. Vir Singh was examined on 16.08.2002 and deposed that on 27.09.98 he was posted at PP Saket and on receipt of DD no. 11, he along with IO ASI Puran Mal reached at AIIMS Hospital and IO obtained MLC of injured and IO recorded the statement of injured and gave him rukka. He further deposed that he got the FIR registered and came back to PP and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR.
7. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
8. PW-2 Suresh Kumar was examined on 16.08.2002 and deposed that he cannot tell the date and year but he was present at his Juice Corner and saw a tempo and scooter were standing on the road and huge crowd was present. He further deposed that the scooterist gave the injury on the person of driver of tempo. He further deposed that he cannot identify the person who had gave the injury to the tempo driver.
9. On resiling from his earlier statement, this witness was cross examined by Ld. APP for State wherein he stated that his statement was recorded by the IO. The contents of statement Ex. PW-1/A was read over to the witness to which he denied having made to police from point A to A. He denied the suggestion that the person i.e. accused present in the court were in the tempo and had gave the injury on the person of scooterist. He also denied the suggestion that he was won over by the accused persons and FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 3/15 that is why he was not intentionally identifying the accused or that he was deposing falsely.
10. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
11. PW-3 Sh. Vijay Kumar was examined on 16.08.2002 and deposed that about few years ago he had crossed the red light on PTS road and about 9.30/10.00am a scooterist had stopped his scooter in front of the tempo as quarrel had taken place between the scooterist and persons who were travelling in the tempo that is all the accused present in the court (correctly identified). He further deposed that he cannot tell why the quarrel had taken place due to this traffic was blocked. He further deposed that he was present at his shop at that time which was at a distance of 10 meter from the spot. He further deposed that the scooterist went towards PTS and accused persons present in the court went towards the Mehrauli and he was interrogated by the police and his statement was recorded.
12. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
13. PW-4 Balikram Gautam was examined on 03.03.2008 and deposed that he was working as Store Incharge in CGHC, Dispensary and on 27.09.98 he along with his friend Sh. Devender Kr. Gupta was going from Pushp Vihar to Kishangarh, Aditya College of Pharmacy by his scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189. He further deposed that he was driving the scooter and his friend was sitting on the back seat and when they reached near Press Enclave at about 9.45am, one Tempo came from back side at a fast speed and tried to overtake their scooter and in this process hit their scooter. He further deposed that his friend namely Devender Kumar Gupta asked the accused persons o drive the tempo in a proper manner at which FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 4/15 the accused persons became furious and said that they will show him that how the tempo is driven and therefore they started driving the tempo rashly and stopped the tempo in front of his scooter at Mehrauli road and they came out of the tempo and started beating him and his friend Devender Kr. Gupta and they also attacked Devender Kr. Gupta with some sharp edge weapon due to which he sustained injuries. He further deposed that during the said incident Rs. 23,500/- which were kept in the pocket of his shirt were lost and same could not be located and he was carrying the said amount for the purpose of admission of his sister in Aditya Institute of Pharmacy and Technology, Kishangarh. He further identified the three accused persons present in the court and he said that he can also identify the fourth one if shown to him. So far he remembered the number of the tempo was 5421 and he does not recollect the complete number. In this regard, he made a complaint to the police vide memo Ex. PW-4/A bearing his signature at point A.
14. This witness was cross examined by Ld. defence counsel wherein he stated that probably it was Sunday on 27.09.98. He denied the suggestion that the accused persons were not involved in the incident on the said day or that they had been falsely implicated at the instance of Devender Gupta who was a police inspector. He further deposed that police had recorded his statement. He denied the suggestion that injury was caused by accused persons to him and Sh. Devender Gupta or that he was deposing falsely or that no money was lost in the said incident.
15. PW-5 Sh. R.K. Wadhwa being CMO was examined on 03.03.2008 and deposed that he had seen on record the MLC no. 10085 pertaining to inujred Devender Kr. Gupta and as per the record, injured was brought to S.J. Hospital by his friend namely B.R. Gautam on 27.09.98 at FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 5/15 about 11.15am and was medically examined by Dr. Atul Gulati who prepared the MLC in his own hand writing. Same is on record Ex. PW-5/A bearing the signature of Dr. Atul Gulati at point A. He further identified the hand writing and signature of Dr. Atul Gulati as he had seen him writing and signing in the course of his official duty. He further deposed that Dr. Atul Gulati has left the services of the hospital.
16. This witness was cross examined by Ld. defence counsel wherein he stated that Dr. Atul Gulati did not sign on MLC before him and he had no personal knowledge of the case. He further deposed that Dr. Atul Gulati did not prepare and sign the MLC in his presence.
17. PW-6 Devender Kr. Gupta being injured was examined on 05.02.2009 and deposed that on 27.09.98 he along with his friend Sh. Balak Ram Gautam was going from Pushp Vihar to Kishangarh by scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189 and at about 9.45am when they reached near Press Enclave, PTS, one Metador bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 came in a rash and negligent manner and while overtaking them the driver of Metador struck them from their right side. He further deposed that he shouted and asked to a tempo driver to drive the tempo in controlled manner at which he abused him. Thereafter, they turned towards Aurobindo Marg but the tempo driver again tried to hit them and stopped them by putting his tempo in their side. He further deposed that all four boys i.e. accused persons came out of the tempo and started beating him and his friend Balak Ram Gautam. He further deposed that he sustained injuries on his right eyebrow and the injury upon him was caused by some sharp weapon and he was medically examined and the IO recorded his statement in this record. He further identified three accused persons present in the court but fourth one was not present.
FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 6/15
18. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
19. PW-7 Ct. Virender was examined on 05.02.2009 and deposed that on 02.10.98 he was posted at PP Saket, PS Malviya Nagar and on that day he joined the investigation of this case along with ASI Puranmal and in pursuant of it they reached at Village Neb Sarai where the accused persons Sunil, Hari and Narender Singh were arrested by the IO vide memos Ex. PW-7/A to PW-7/C and their personal search were also conducted vide memos Ex. PW-7/D to PW-7/F. The Tempo bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 was also seized by the IO vide memo Ex. PW-7/G.
20. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
21. PW-8 Dr. Pramod Saini was examined on 25.06.2012 and deposed that he was working at AIIMS Hospital from August, 2011 and he brought the record pertaining to MLC no. 8973/98 prepared by Dr. Kintu Krishan and as per the MLC, the result is simple in nature. The detailed report of MLC prepared by Dr. Kintu Krishan is Ex. PW-8/A. He further deposed that as per the record, he can identify the signature of Dr. Kintu Krishan.
22. This witness was not cross examined by accused despite opportunity given.
23. PW-9 SI Puranmal being IO was examined on 13.09.2012 and deposed that on 27.09.98 he was posted as ASI at PS Malviya Nagar and on that day on receiving of DD no. 11 at PP Saket, he along with Ct. Veer Singh reached Safdarjung Hospital where Balak Ram Gautam met who gave his statement recorded by him vide memo Ex. PW-4/A which bears his attestation at point B and his companion Devender Kr. Gupta was admitted FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 7/15 in the hospital and on the basis of his statement, he prepared Tehrir same is Ex. PW-9/A bearing his signature at point A and present case was got registered through Ct. Vir Sngh. After registration of the case, investigation was marked to him. During the course of investigation he prepared site plan which is Ex. PW-9/B bearing his signature at point A. Thereafter notice u/s 133 M.V. Act was given to the owner of offending vehicle bearing registration no. DL-1LA-5421 vide memo Ex. PW-9/A. However, the reply of notice u/s 133 M.V. Act was neither on judicial record nor it was with him. He further deposed that he prepared charge sheet in the present matter and filed before this court.
24. This witness was cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel for all the accused persons wherein he stated that he had received DD no. 11 through Ct. Hari Ram. However, he did not remember the place where he was present at the time. He voluntarily stated that it was around 1.00pm. He admitted that in said DD, it was mentioned that injured Devender Gupta took at S.J. Hospital from T-point opposite T.B. Hospital. He further admitted that he inquired from juice wala and chai wala who were present there. He further deposed that he had not cited Chowkidar of T B Hospital as PW and he reached at SJ Hospital at around 1.30pm and met with injured Devender Kumar and had inquired about the incident with Devender Kumar. However, he had not recorded his detail statement. He voluntarily stated that he had recorded the statement u/s 161 Cr. P.C. of Devender Kumar. He denied the suggestion that he never met with Devender Kumar in the hospital on the said date. He further deposed that he had seized Scooter in question after one months of the incident. He denied the suggestion that no such incident happened and he had conducted all the proceeding in the PS and therefore there is no public witness involved in the matter or that he was deposing FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 8/15 falsely.
25. As all witnesses were examined by the prosecution, PE was ordered to be closed on 19.11.2014. The statement of accused persons under section 313 r/w section 281 Cr.P.C was recorded on 11.12.2014 wherein they stated that they have been falsely implicated in the present case and they do not want to lead any defence evidence.
26. Final arguments were advanced by Ld. APP for State and Ld. Counsel for accused. Heard.
Reasons for Decision
27. Prosecution has examined nine witnesses in total and it has been alleged that accused persons namely Narender Singh, Sunil and Hari in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained the complainant Balikram Gautam and Devender Kumar Gupta and caused simple injury with sharp object on the person of complainant Devender Kr. Gupta and thereby committed offences punishable u/s 341/324/34 IPC. It is further alleged that the accused Hari was driving a vehicle i.e. Metadore Tempo bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 in a rash and negligent manner and struck against two wheeler scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189 of complainant Balik Ram Gautam and also committed offence punishable u/s 279 IPC.
28. Primarily the prosecution has examined PW-2 Sunesh and PW-3 Vijay Kumar as independent witnesses, PW-4 Balik Ram Gautam and PW-6 Devender Kr. Gupta as the complainant and the injured.
29. PW-1 is the duty officer Ct. Vir Singh who deposed as regards an FIR being registered on the basis of rukka on 27.09.98 after having received DD no. 11. He further deposed that he along with ASI FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 9/15 Puranmal reached AIIMS Hospital and the MLC of the injured as well as the statement of the injured was recorded by the IO.
30. This witness was not cross examined despite opportunity given.
31. PW-2 Suresh was examined as an independent witness who deposed that he cannot tell the date and year of the incident. However, he was present at Juice Corner and he saw tempo and scooter on the road and a number of persons had gathered there. He further deposed that the scooterist had given injury on the person of driver of the tempo. He further deposed that he cannot identify the person who had gave the injury.
32. This witness is resiling from his original statement and was accordingly cross examined by Ld. APP for State who deposed during his cross examination that his statement was recorded by the IO and having being confronted with statement Ex. PW-1/A from point A to A he denied having made the same to the police.
33. Another witness namely Vijay Kumar was examined as PW-3 who deposed that he was present at his shop at the time when incident took place and his shop was around 10 meter away from the spot. He further identified the accused persons present in the court and stated that he went towards the Mehrauli and he also deposed as regards some incident having taken place between Scooter and Tempo driver around 9.30am near the red light on PTS road. He further deposed that he cannot tell the reasons for the quarrel and correctly identified all the persons travelling in the Tempo being accused persons present in the court.
34. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel for the accused persons despite opportunity being given.
35. PW-4 Balikram Gautam was examined as the complainant in the present matter who deposed that he was working as Store In-charge in FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 10/15 CGHC, Dispensary and on 27.09.98 he along with his friend Sh. Devender Kr. Gupta were going from Pushp Vihar to Kishangarh, Aditya College of Pharmacy by his scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189. He further deposed that he was driving the scooter and his friend was sitting as pillion rider and when they reached near Press Enclave Road at about 9.45am, one Tempo coming from behind tried to overtake their scooter and as it was in a very fast speed, it brushed/hit their scooter. He further deposed that his friend namely Devender Kumar Gupta asked the accused persons being driver and the rider in the tempo to drive the Tempo in a proper manner at which the accused persons became furious and they said that they will show him that how the tempo is driven and thereafter they started driving the tempo rashly and stopped the tempo in front of his scooter at Mehrauli road and thereafter came out of the tempo and started beating him and his friend Devender Kr. Gupta. He further deposed that his friend namely Devender Kr. Gupta was attacked with some sharp edge weapon due to which he sustained injuries and they also lost a sum of Rs. 23,500/- which he was carrying in his pocket for the purpose of admission of his sister in Aditya Institute of Pharmacy and Technology, Kishangarh. He further correctly identified the accused persons present in the court and identified his complaint Ex. PW-4/A bearing his signature at point A.
36. This witness was cross examined by Ld. defence counsel wherein no material contradictions were found in his cross examination.
37. Corroborating the version of PW-4, the prosecution examined Devender Kr. Gupta as PW-6 who deposed on similar lines as PW-4 and stated that on 27.09.98 he along with his friend Sh. Balak Ram Gautam was going from Pushp Vihar to Kishangarh by scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189 and at about 9.45am they reached at Press Enclave Road, PTS. He further FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 11/15 deposed that one Metador bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 came in a rash and negligent manner and while overtaking their scooter the driver of Metador struck the scooter from their right side and accordingly he shouted and asked tempo driver to drive the tempo in controlled manner. He further deposed that the driver of the Tempo abused him and thereafter when he along with his friend turned towards Aurobindo Marg, the tempo driver again tried to hit him and stopped them by putting his tempo beside them. He further deposed that all four persons came out of the tempo and started beating him and his friend Balak Ram Gautam and he also identified accused persons present in the court and not the fourth one who was not present. He further deposed that he sustained injuries on his right eyebrow which is caused by some sharp weapon and he was medically examined and his statement was recorded.
38. This witness was also not cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel despite opportunity being given.
39. It is clear from the testimonies of the witnesses on the spot i.e. PW-1 and PW-2 that the incident as alleged took place at Press Enclave Road PTS and some quarrel took place between the driver of the Metador bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 and the driver of the scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189. The time of the incident has also been corroborated by PW-1 and PW-2. PW-4 and PW-6 are the complainant and the injured respectively who were driving and riding on the scooter bearing no. DL-3SL-3189 which was hit by offending vehicle of the accused being Metador bearing no. DL-1LA-5421. PW-4 and PW-6 have been corroborated each other in material particulars as regards the Metador being driven in high speed, in rash and negligent manner and thereby hitting the scooter which resulted into the pillion rider of the scooter having abused the driver of the Metador. It FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 12/15 is clear that the abuse hurled by pillion rider of the scooter incited the driver of the Metador and he in order to take revenge again overtook the scooterist and forced him to stop the scooter after being the Metador in front of the scooter. Thereafter, the rider of the Metador as well as the driver gave beatings to the complainant as well as pillion rider of the scooter thereby causing injuries upon PW Devender Kr. Gupta.
40. The injuries on the person of PW-6 Devender Kr. Gupta have further been proved by testimony of the PW-5 Sh. R.K. Wadhwa being CMO, Safdarjung Hospital who deposed that on 27.09.98 at about 11.15am injured Devender Kr. Gupta was examined vide MLC bearing no. 10085 by Dr. Atul Gulati who prepared the MLC in his own hand writing vide Ex. PW-5/A bearing his signature at point A. He further identified the hand writing and signature of Dr. Atul Gulati as he had seen him writing and signing in the course of his official duty. He further deposed that Dr. Atul Gulati has left the services of the hospital.
41. This witness was also cross examined by Ld. defence counsel wherein he admitted that MLC was not prepared in his presence.
42. Another witness for proving the MLC has been examined as PW-8 Dr. Pramod Saini who deposed that he has brought the record pertaining to MLC no. 8973/98 prepared by Dr. Kintu Krishan and as per the MLC, the result has been stated to be simple and the detailed report of MLC is Ex. PW-8/A bearing his signature at point A. He further deposed that as per the record, he could identify the signature of Dr. Kintu Krishan.
43. The MLC Ex. PW-5/A mentions the injuries to be simple caused by sharp object and has been prepared on 27.09.98 at about 11.15am. The name of the patient has been stated to be the Devender Kr. Gupta and the name of the relative or friend accompanying the injured has been stated to FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 13/15 be B. R. Gautam. Thus, corroborating the version of PW-4 and PW-6 that they were both together at the time of incident. The MLC further corroborates the time and date of the incident. The MLC states the history of assault on the patient being hit by sharp object on his head/right eye. It further states the injuries to be (1) clean incised wound over right eyelid, (2) soft swelling over right temporal region, (3) some other injury on the right eye.
44. Apart from the MLC corroborating the testimonies of the witnesses being PW-4 and PW-6, IO SI Puran Mal has been examined as PW-9 who has reiterated the sequence of events and the investigation carried out. Another witness corroborating the version of the prosecution is PW-7 Ct. Virender who had joined the investigation of the case along with IO SI Puranmal wherein accused Sunil, Hari and Narender present in the court were arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex. PW-7/A to PW-7/C bearing his signature at point A and their personal search memo Ex. PW-7/D to PW-7/F bearing his signature at point A. He identified all the accused persons present in the court and also stated that the Tempo bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 was seized by the IO vide memo Ex. PW-7/G bearing his signature at point A and that IO also recorded his statement. There are other documents proved by the IO being Tehrir Ex. PW-9/A, site plan Ex. PW-9/B, notice u/s 133 M.V. Act Ex. PW-9/A. The seizure memo of the Tempo and the scooter further corroborate the fact that the incident took place between the scooter and Metador. The MLC corroborates the injuries caused on the person of injured Devender Kr. Gupta.
45. Thus, it is clear from the testimonies of the witnesses and the documents on record that the vehicle being Metador bearing no. DL-1LA-5421 was being driven in a fast speed and in a rash and negligent FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 14/15 manner by the driver namely Hari thereby committing offence punishable u/s 279 of IPC.
46. It is also clear that the accused Hari along with other accused riders of Tempo being Narender and Sunil in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained the scooterist and pillion rider by forcing them to stop the scooter by getting in their way after having followed them for taking revenge of the abuse hurled by pillion rider of the scooterist. The fact that the scooterist and the pillion rider were beaten by the accused persons is further corroborated by MLC and the testimonies of the injured and the complainant. It has further been proved that the accused persons acted in furtherance of their common intention while wrongfully restraining the scooterist and thereby beating him and the pillion rider. Thus, accused Hari is convicted for the offence u/s 279/341/324/34 IPC and both accused persons namely Narender Singh and Sunil are convicted for the offence u/s 341/324/34 IPC.
Matter be listed for arguments on sentence on 31.01.2015 at 2.00pm.
Announced in the Court
on 24.01.2015 (CHETNA SINGH)
MM-02(SD)/24.01.2015
Certified that this judgment contains 15 pages and each page bears my signatures.
(CHETNA SINGH) MM-02(SD)/24.01.2015 FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 15/15 State Vs Narender Singh FIR No.929/98 u/s 279/324/341/34 IPC PS Malviya Nagar 09.03.2015 ORDER ON SENTENCE Present: Ld. APP for the State.
All three convicts are present in person with Ld. Counsel Sh.
Tajender Singh.
Complainant/injured Balik Ram Gautam is also present and his statement as regards settlement recorded separately and submissions on sentence have been taken on record.
B/W qua injured Devender Kumar Gupta received back unexecuted with the report that he is not traceable.
Arguments on sentence advanced.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel that the convicts are the first time offender and have clean antecedents and are the sole bread earner of their family.
Hence, it is prayed that they be released on probation of good conduct.
On the other hand, Ld. APP for the State has argued for maximum punishment, as he states that the offence has been proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt and the convicts do not deserve any leniency as they caused simple injuries to Devender Kumar Gupta.
FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 16/15 Heard.
Aggravating Circumstances:
Facts leading to the conviction of the convicts clearly reveal that the convict Hari was found driving his vehicle i.e. Metadore Tempo bearing no. DL1LA5421 in a rash and negligent manner and convicts caused simple injuries to Devender Kr. Gupta. Thus, his guilt has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Mitigating Circumstances:
(1)That the convicts are the sole bread earner. (2)That they are the first time offender. (3) That the trial has been dragged for 17 long years.
Considering all the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and on account of submissions made by Ld. Counsel for the convicts on sentence, this court is of the considered opinion that convicts are released on Probation of good conduct u/s 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 however, they are directed to deposit compensation of Rs. 10,000/ each u/s 5 (1)(a) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to be paid to the injured Devender Kumar Gupta.
Compensation of Rs. 10,000/ each has been deposited by convicts namely Narender Singh and Sunil Kumar vide receipt no. 387649 and 387650 in the treasury. Injured person namely Devender Kr. Gupta is at liberty to withdraw the same within six month from today failing which the compensation amount shall stand forfeited to the State.
In view of the same, sureties of the convicts namely Narender Singha FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 17/15 and Sunil are discharged. Endorsement if any, be cancelled. Original documents if any, be returned to the sureties.
Further, convict Hari seeks time to deposit compensation amount of Rs. 10,000/.
Be listed for payment of compensation amount of Rs. 10,000/ to be paid by convict Hari to injured Devender Kr. Gupta for 10.03.2015 at 12.30pm.
(Chetna Singh) MM02/SD/09.03.2015 FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 18/15 FIR No. 929/98 PS Malviya Nagar 28.04.2015 Lawyers are on strike.
Present: Ld. Substitute APP for state.
Convict Hari is present.
He has deposited the compensation amount of Rs. 10,000/ vide receipt no.
387721 as per order dated 09.03.2015 Hence, nothing further remains to be done in the present matter.
File be consigned to record room after necessary compliance.
(Chetna Singh) MM02/SD/28.04.2015 FIR No. 929/98 State Vs Narender Singh & Ors. 19/15