Delhi District Court
State vs Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page ... on 24 March, 2015
FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 IN THE COURT OF SH. POORAN CHAND: CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: CENTRAL DISTRICT: TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI FIR No.: 105/00 PS: Desh Bandhu Gupta Road U/s : 186/332/353/34 IPC Unique ID No.: 02401R0260392001 J U D G M E N T:
______________________________________________________________
(a) S. No. of the case : 177/2
(b) Name of complainant : Ct. Dheeraj Singh No. 2639T, Traffic Circle, Patel Nagar, New Delhi.
(c) Date of commission of offence : 20.05.2000
(d) Name of the accused : 1) Dr. Atul Bhasin S/o Col. Dr. N
P Bhasin, R/o 1 C22, New
Rohtak Road, Delhi.
2) Col. Dr. N P Bhasin, S/o Late
Sh. K C Bhasin, R/o 1 C22, New
Rohtak Road, Delhi.
(e) Offence complained of : U/s :186/332/353/34 IPC
(f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final arguments heard on : 10.03.2015
(h) Final Order : Acquitted
(i) Date of such order : 24.03.2015
State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 1 of 15
FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015
BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
1. The facts of the case as borne out from the record are that on 20.05.2000 at about 9.30 am at New Rohtak Road, I C Block Cut, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station DBG Road, both accused in furtherance of common intention voluntarily obstructed Constable Dhiraj Singh No. 2639 (Traffic), when he was performing his duty at the spot and was regulating the traffic and he signaled to stop accused Atul Bhasin to stop his car bearing number DL1CD4137, as there was one way traffic at that time and the accused Atul Bhasin was advised to turn left but accused came down from the car and started abusing Constable Dhiraj and held him from his uniform and after some time accused N P Bhasin also joined the accused Atul Bhasin and both accused started manhandling the Constable and accused N P Bhasin gave a fist blow to Constable near his abdomen and during the man handling two buttons of his uniform was also broken. Further, both accused persons also assaulted Constable Dhiraj a public servant, while he was executing his duty and prevented Constable Dhiraj from exercising his duty and voluntarily caused simple hurt to Constable Dhiraj, while he was discharging his duty as a public servant. During investigation, complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. was received from the concerned government authority. On the statement of Ct. Dheeraj present FIR was registered. Accused persons were arrested in the matter, site plan was prepared and after completion of investigation, both accused persons stood chargesheeted for offences punishable U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC.
State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 2 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015
2. After filing of the charge sheet in the case, both accused were supplied the documents in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C and after hearing arguments on charge vide order dated 19.03.2005, charge U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC was framed against both the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to bring home the guilt of both accused persons, prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses, whereafter the PE in the matter was closed and statements of both the accused persons U/s 313 Cr.P.C were recorded, wherein they pleaded innocence and claimed that they have been falsely implicated in this case. However, they lead evidence in their defense and examined two defense witnesses.
Evidence Held:
4. In all total eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution in support of its case. A brief scrutiny of the evidence recorded in the matter is as under.
5. PW1 SI Inder Rani is the duty officer who deposed that on 20.05.2000, he was working as duty officer from 8.00 am to 4.00 pm. On that day, at about 1.20 pm, Ct. Raj Kumar came with a rukka sent by HC Vikram Singh for registration of FIR. On the basis of rukka, he registered the FIR, copy of which is Ex. PW1/A. He made endorsement on the rukka Ex. PW1/B. He State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 3 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 handed over the copy of FIR and rukka in original to Ct. Raj Kumar to be sent to SI Tarkeshwar for investigation.
6. PW2 Ct. Dheeraj Kumar is the eye witness/injured/complainant who deposed that on 20.05.2000 he was on duty at cut number 2, on New Rohtak Road. Accused came driving in a maruti 800 from the side of blood bank road, DBG Road. That road is one way road. He asked the accused not to enter in that direction. But he did not stop his car and came in the middle of crossing. He came in front of his car and he started abusing him and after this he went to his clinic after saying that "abi dekhta hoon". After about five minutes accused alongwith one Col. Dr. N P Bhasin, came there and started beating him. As a result of which his uniform was torn and he sustain injuries in his stomach. Thereafter, he dialed 100 number and police came at the spot. At the time accused was also there and threatened him as "main tumhei dismiss kara doonga, main pehle bhi kaie police walon ko dismiss karwaya hai". Police recorded his statement Ex. PW2/A at the spot. Thereafter, he was taken to hospital. After that, he came back at the spot. IO took his torn shirt in possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW2/B. Thereafter, this witness was cross examined at length on behalf of accused persons.
7. PW3 HC Raj Kumar has deposed that on 20.05.2000, he was posted at PP Dev Nagar, Police Station DBG Road. On that day, on receipt of DD No. 18 at PP, he accompanied HC Vikram Singh to the spot situated at 1/C block State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 4 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 cut, New Rohtak Road, Delhi where Ct. Dheeraj and TI R K Ojha were present. They told the IO about the incident and requested for their medical examination. On the direction of IO, he took Ct. Dheeraj to J P N Hospital and got his medical examination conducted. Thereafter, they returned back to the spot. IO recorded statement of Ct. Dheeraj and prepared rukka on it. He took the same to Police Station DBG Road and got the FIR registered in the matter. Thereafter, he went to PP and handed over copy of FIR with original rukka to I/C PP namely SI Tarkeshwar Singh for investigation of the case. He alognwith IO went to the spot. IO made inquiry from Ct. Dheeraj at the spot and prepared the site plan on his pointing out. IO also seized the uniform shirt of Ct.Dheeraj vide seizure memo Ex. PW2/B. He accompanied IO to the clinic of accused named in the FIR which was found to be locked. IO made inquiry from the neighbourhood but no clue of accused was found. Thereafter, they returned to PP Dev Nagar. IO had recorded his statement at the spot. Thereafter, this witness was cross examined by the accused persons at length.
8. PW4 ASI Vikram Singh deposed that on 20.05.2000, on receipt of DD No. 18 at PP, he alongwith Ct. Raj Kumar to the spot situated at 1/C block cut, new Rohtak Road, Delhi where Ct. Dheeraj and TI R K Ojha were present. They told him about the incident and requested for their medical examination. On his direction, Ct. Raj Kumar took Ct. Dheeraj to J P N Hospital and got his medical examination conducted. Thereafter, they returned back to the spot. He recorded statement of Ct. Dheeraj and prepared rukka on it vide Ex. PW4/A. State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 5 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 Ct. Raj Kumar took the same to Police Station DBG Road and got the FIR registered in the matter. Thereafter, Ct. Raj Kumar with SI Tarkeshwar Singh came to the spot as further investigation of the case was marked to SI Tarkeshwar. He handed over copy of rukka and MLC of Ct. Dheeraj to him. IO made inquiry from Ct. Dheeraj at the spot and prepared the site plan on his pointing out. IO also seized the uniform shit of Ct. Dheeraj. He and Ct. Raj Kumar accompanied IO to the clinic of accused named in the FIR which was found to be locked. IO made inquiry from the neighbourhood but no clue of accused was found. Thereafter, they returned to PP Dev Nagar. The uniform shirt of Ct. Dheeraj is Ex. P1. Thereafter, this witness was cross examined by the accused persons at length.
9. PW5 ACP R K Ojha deposed that on 20.05.2000 in the morning he received wireless message that a quarrel had taken place with Ct. Dheeraj while performing duty at cut No. 2 Anand Parbat. He went to the spot. Local police also arrived there and started legal proceedings. He left the spot.
10. PW6 Inspector Tarkeshwar Singh is the IO who deposed that on 20.05.2000, investigation of the case was marked to him at the time of registration of the FIR. Ct. Raj Kumar came to him at PP Dev Nagar and gave the copy of FIR with original rukka to him. He alongwith him went to the spot situated at cut 1C Block New Rohtak Road near Blood Bank. The complainant, Ct. Dheeraj of traffic alongwith HC Vikram and TI Ojha were State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 6 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 present there. He prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence on instance of Ct. Dheeraj which is Ex. PW6/A. He also seized the uniform shirt of Ct. Dheeraj from him vide seizure memo Ex. PW2/B. He searched for the independent eye witnesses near by the spot but none was found. Thereafter, he recorded statements of the witnesses present at the spot. He also obtained the copy of medical examination report of Ct. Dheeraj from HC Vikram and place the same on record. Thereafter, he went to the clinic of accused Atul Bhasin and Dr. N P Bhasin were found there. After few visits at the clinic Dr. Atul Bhasin and Dr. N P Bhasin were found there. He made inquiry from them and arrested them in this case. He had not prepared their arrest memos and had released them on personal bond and bail bond as the offences against them were of bailable nature. The said bonds are Ex. PW6/B1 to Ex. PW6/B4. During investigation, he had collected the complaint u/s 195 Cr.PC from DCP Traffic which was filed in the court. After completion of the investigation chargesheet was prepared. Witness has correctly identified the accused Dr. Atul Bhasin. Identity of Dr. N P Bhasin is not disputed as he is exempted from appearance in the Court till further orders.
11. PW7 Sh. B S Bhati is the medical record clerk who deposed that he has been deputed by MOIC, MRD to appear before this Court in pursuant to receipt of summons in the name of Dr. Grover. He has seen the MLC No. 042917 of injured Ct. Dheeraj Singh prepared by some doctor. However, he cannot identify the signature of the examining doctor appearing on this DD State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 7 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 MLC as the paper is torn at that place.
12. PW8 Sh. Sanjay Beniwal, Joint CP deposed that on 20.05.2000, Ct. Dheeraj was performing his duties at Cut No. 2, New Rohtak Road from 8.00 am for regulating traffic. At about 9.30 am, one maruti car bearing No. DL1CD4137 driven by Dr. Atul Bhasin came one way in No entry Zone from Dev Nagar side to Cut No. 2, New Rohtak Road. When Ct. Dheeraj Singh signaled the driver of the car to turn left, he disobeyed his directions and stopped the car in the centre on the road near Ct. Dheeraj. The above said driver of the car came down from the car and started abusing Ct. Dheeraj Singh and held him from his uniform shirt and threatened with dire consequences. Thereafter, the abovesaid car driver went to his clinic and parked his car and came back with his father Dr. N P Bhasin and thereafter both the said persons started abusing and manhandling with Ct. Dheeraj Singh and Dr. N P Bhasin gave fist blow to the said Constable near his abdomen. During manhandling two buttons of the uniform shirt of Ct. Dheeraj was broken and they also torn his uniform shirt as a result Ct. Dheeraj Singh sustained injuries and thereafter he was got medically examined at LNJP Hospital vide his MLC. Ct. Dheeraj Singh gave a message to PCR and local police on which a DD was lodged and the police officials reached at the spot and after making enquiries recorded the statement of Ct. Dheeraj Singh and got the FIR of the present case registered at Police Station DBG Road on the basis of above statement of Ct. Dheeraj Singh. During State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 8 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 investigation, statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and filed in the Court. File of the present case was put up before him. He has gone through the above said file, MLC of Ct. Dheeraj, statement of witnesses, FIR and site plan etc. and found that it was clear from the abovesaid facts that on 20.05.2000 at about 9.30 am, when the Constable being the government servant was on duty there, Dr. Atul Bhasin and Dr. N P Bhasin intentionally and deliberately assaulted Ct. Dheeraj Singh and obstructed him in discharge of his officials duties and caused injuries to him. Hence, both the abovesaid persons are liable for trial for the offences u/s 186/332/353 IPC. The abovesaid Constable was on duty under his administrative control and being the head of the office of Traffic Unit, he was competent to file the complaint u/s 195 Cr.PC. So, he made a complaint u/s 195 Cr.PC which was filed in the Court of Ld. CMM, which is Ex. PW8/A which runs into three pages. Thereafter the said witness was cross examined on behalf of accused persons at length.
13. This is all as far as prosecution evidence in the matter is concerned.
Defence evidence
14. Accused persons in their defence adduced two defence witnesses.
15. DW1 SI Sudesh Nain, deposed that the required documents i.e. original complaint No. 1769 of the year 2000 dated 20.05.2000 made on traffic help line number is not traceable in their office. He cannot say whether State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 9 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 the said documents has already been destroyed or not.
17. DW2 Ct. Dinesh Kumar, deposed that he has brought the report prepared by ACP, Traffic, West District Ms. Pratima Sharma. Copy of the same is mark X1.
Arguments advanced and case law relied upon :
18. I have heard arguments advanced by both the sides and have also perused the evidences led by both the parties.
19. Accused Atul Bhasin and N P Bhasin were charged for having committed the offences u/s 186/332/353/34 IPC on the allegations that both the accused in furtherance of their common intention voluntarily obstructed Ct. Dheeraj Singh No. 2639 (Traffic), while he was performing his duty at the spot and was regulating the traffic and he signaled to stop the accused Atul Bhasin to stop his car bearing registration number DL1CD4137, as there was one way traffic at that time and accused Atul Bhasin was advised to turn left but he came from the car and started abusing Ct. Dheeraj Singh and held him from his uniform and after sometime coaccused N P Bhasin, father of accused Atul Bhasin also joined the accused and both started manhandling the Constable and accused N P Bhasin gave a fist blow to Constable near his abdomen and during the manhandling two buttons of his uniform were State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 10 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 broken. Ct. Dheeraj by dialing 100 number called the police and he was taken to the hospital where his medical examination was conducted.
20. In order to prove the charge, prosecution examined as much as eight witnesses, out of which PW2 Ct. Dheeraj Singh, complainant is the only eye witness examined to prove the charge against the accused persons. Other witnesses though, participating during the investigation of this case but they are not the eye witnesses to the occurrence. I have gone through the testimony of Ct. Dheeraj Singh wherein he deposed that "accused present in the court today came driving in a maruti 800 from the side of blood bank road, DBG Road. That road is one way road. I asked the accused not to enter in that direction. But he did not stop his car and came in the middle of crossing. I came in front of his car and he started abusing me and after this he went to his clinic after saying that "abi dekhta hoon". After about five minutes accused alongwith one Col. Dr. N P Bhasin, today present in the Court, came there and started beating me. As a result of which my uniform was torn and I sustain injuries in my stomach. Thereafter, I dialed 100 number and police came at the spot. At the time accused was also there and threatened me as "main tumhei dismiss kara doonga, maine pehle bhi kaie police walon ka dismiss karwaya hai". Police recorded my statement Ex. PW2/A at the spot. Thereafter, I was taken to hospital but I do not remember the name of that hospital. After that, I came back at the spot".
State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 11 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015
21. From the perusal of the testimony of this witness the first question which is material for the just decision of the case arose from the facts whether there was one way traffic on the road in question and traffic from Blood Bank side was not allowed. Except the testimony of PW2 there is no other evidence on record to prove that there was one way traffic on the service road mentioned in the site plan Ex. PW6/A and the traffic entry from the Blood Bank site to New Rohtak Road was not allowed. Both the accused persons have been charged for voluntarily obstructing Ct. Dheeraj Singh in performing of his public duty. No doubt complainant was on duty and regulating the traffic at Cut No. 2 of New Rohtak Road and accused Atul Bhasin was coming from the service road to the New Rohtak Road and he was asked not to enter in that directions as the road is one way. Accused did not follow the instructions of complainant stating that there was two way entry on the service road. Therefore onus to prove the fact that there was one way traffic on the road is on the prosecution. Admittedly, no PW from the office of DCP (Traffic) is examined to prove the fact that either by the order of DCP (Traffic) or any other higher officers there was one way traffic on the service road. Even photograph of any sign board or any notification is proved on record to corroborate the testimony of PW2. This fact has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution by leading cogent evidence that the road is one way road. Oral evidence is not sufficient to prove this fact. Now the second question which arises is whether in the absence of any order or sign board, Ct. Dheeraj by directing the accused not to enter the New State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 12 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 Rohtak Road from the service road on the pretext that there was one way traffic can be termed as direction in discharge of his public duty. To my mind answer is no. In the absence of any specific order or sign board any such direction is not permissible under the law. Therefore this Court hold that in the absence of any specific order/notification the directions of complaint to accused not to enter the main road was not part of performing/discharging public duty.
22. Now, I take up the allegation of causing simple hurt and torn of uniform of Ct. Dheeraj. As per the case of the prosecution Ct. Dheeraj sustained injuries in his stomach and he was taken to the hospital where his medical examination was conducted but this witness has failed to tell the name of the hospital where his medical examination was conducted. Even he has not tell the name of the policeman who accompany him to hospital. Moreover PW7 B S Bhati, medical record clerk from LNJP Hospital is examined where he has refused to identify the signatures of Dr. Grover on the MLC bearing No. 042917 as the signatures of the concern doctor on the DD is not visible. He also stated that record of the said MLC is not available in the hospital record. Therefore it create doubt whether complainant was medically examined or not as no record of MLC No. 042917 exist in the hospital. The uniform is also produced in the witness box which is identified by the witness but the buttons of the said uniform neither seized by the IO nor produced in the Court. As Ct. Dheeraj himself has admitted during the cross examination that area in State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 13 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 question is a residential one. No public persons is examined by the IO in this case. Even the testimony of IO on these count is also not corroborative.
23. Moreover accused persons have not denied the incident. What they have denied is the incident of beating and torn off uniform. As per the defence of accused Ct. Dheeraj demanded money on the pretext of one way traffic and accused did not succumb to his demand rather asked him to complaint to his higher ups. Not only this accused made complaint Ex. PW8/D1 to the DCP Traffic. But no action was taken on the complaint. Even accused lodged complaint on traffic helpline. Accused persons examined DW1 and DW2 in their defence. Perusal of testimony of both these police witness shows that no action is taken on both the complaint of accused. It is very strange that even record of these complaint are not available in the concern department.
24. Further more it is settled proposition of law that investigating officer is duty bound to conduct fair investigation and brought the truth on record. But it is very strange that IO has also not conducted any investigation on these two complaint lodged on the same date. Even IO has shows ignorance of lodging two complaints by the accused. Not only this PW8 Sh. Sanjay Beniwal, the then DCP (Traffic) has not taken into account the complaint Ex. PW8/D1 while giving sanction u/s 195 Cr.PC. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that IO has not conducted the fair investigation and present case is the counter blast of the complaint of accused persons against the conduct of State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 14 of 15 FIR No. 105/00: U/s 186/332/353/34 IPC: PS : DBG Road DOD: 24.03.2015 Ct. Dheeraj.
25. In view of my above reasons, I am of the considered view that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against both the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, both accused persons are entitled for acquittal. I order accordingly. File be consigned to record room after compliance of necessary formalities.
Announced in the open court (Pooran Chand)
on 24.03.2015 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Central District:Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi
State V/s Dr. Atul Bhasin Etc. ("Acquitted") Page 15 of 15