Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: installing statue in Subhash Chand vs The State The N.C.T.Of Delhi on 4 September, 2018Matching Fragments
8. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined eight witnesses. All the incriminating evidence was put to the appellant/accused CA no. 17/18 Subhash Chand Vs State 3/10 persons while recording their statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. Their case is one of denial simplicitor by stating that they have been falsely implicated in this case as the appellant no. 1/accused had got constructed one temple near house and there was dispute on installation of statue in the same with the complainant as the complainant wanted to install statue of Dr. Ambedkar and the appellant/accused wanted to install statue of Lord Hanuman. No defence evidence was led by the appellant. After minutely going through the testimony of witnesses, vide impugned order, the appellants were held guilty for offence u/s 323/341/506/34 IPC and sentenced as stated above.
20. Besides the abovesaid defence taken by the appellant/accused persons that they have been falsely implicated in this case as the appellant no. 1/accused had got constructed one temple near house and there was dispute on installation of statue in the same with the complainant as the complainant wanted to install statue of Dr. Ambedkar and the appellant/accused wanted to install statue of Lord Hanuman. But, the appellants have not put their aforesaid defence to the PW1 during his cross examination, even neither any question has been put on this aspect nor any suggestion has been given on this aspect, therefore, the aforesaid stand of the appellants stands falsified.