Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: uncontroverted in State vs . Rajesh Kumar on 14 December, 2013Matching Fragments
Witnesses of Medical Record:
(21) PW11 Dr. Prem has deposed that on 28.05.2012 at about 2:10 PM Manohar Lal, S/o Bishan Dass, male 62 years was brought at the casualty of the BJRM hospital by Ct. Jitender with alleged history of physical assault and Dr. Gagan JR medically examined above said Manohar Lal under his supervision at the casualty. The witness has deposed that Dr. Gagan prepared the MLC No. 42021 after his medical examination which is Ex.PW11/A bearing signatures of Dr. Gagan at point A which the witness has duly identified. According to the witness they found abrasions on right thumb dorsal surface and abrasions on right forearm dorsal surface in the local examination and the above said injuries are simple in nature and caused by blunt object. He has proved his opinion at point X on the Ex.PW11/A bearing his signatures at point B. This witness has further deposed that on the same day at the same time Dr. Gagan also medically examined Vinod Bohra S/o Purna Kant Bohra, male 40 years who was also brought at the hospital by Ct. Jitender with alleged history of physical assault and after his medical examination Dr. Gagan prepared the MLC No. 42022 which is Ex.PW11/B bearing signatures of Dr. Gagan at point A which the witness has duly identified. According to the witness in the local examination they found minor abrasions inner surface of upper lip and states that the above said injuries are simple in nature and caused by blunt object. The witness has proved his opinion at point X on Ex.PW11/B bearing his signatures at point B. (22) The witness has further proved that on 17.10.2012 at about 12:45 PM the patient Manohar Lal S/o Bishan Dass was brought in the Casualty of BJRM Hospital by the police for medical examination and collection of blood sample when Dr. Azia Manzoor medically examined the above patient and prepared the MLC No. 45786 which is Ex.PW14/A (in the main case which has already been decided). According to the witness, the blood sample of Manohar Lal was collected and handed over to the Investigating Officer in sealed condition. This witness has not been cross examined on behalf of the accused and the entire testimony has gone uncontroverted.
(24) He has also identified another country made pistol along with one test fired cartridge case which are Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 respectively. This witness has not been cross examined on behalf of the accused and the entire testimony has gone uncontroverted.
Police Witnesses:
(25) PW1 HC Naresh Kumar is formal witness being MHC (M).
He has been examinedinchief by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW1/1. He has proved the relevant entries of Register No. 19 and 21 vide S. No. 2846/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/A (five pages) and S.No. 3031/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/B, entry in register no.21 vide RC 59/21/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/C, RC No. 85/21/12 copy of which is Ex.PW1/D and the receipts issued by FSL copy of which are Ex.PW1/E and Ex.PW1/F. In his cross examination the witness has denied that the case property was tampered with during its possession with him.
(28) PW4 SI Ramesh Chand is formal witness and has tendered his examinationinchief by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW4/1 bearing his signatures at points A and B. He has proved that Crime Team Report which is Ex.PW4/A bearing his signatures at point A. This witness has not been cross examined on behalf of the accused and the entire testimony has gone uncontroverted.
(29) PW5 Ct. Parvinder is also a formal witness and has tendered his examinationinchief by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW5/1 bearing his signatures at points A and B. He has proved having taken the photographs of the spot of incident which photographs are Ex.PW5/A1 to Ex.PW5/A7 and the CD containing the photographs is Ex.PW5/B. This witness has not been cross examined on behalf of the accused and the entire testimony has gone uncontroverted.
(41) The witness has deposed that during his investigations he collected the Ballistic expert report which is Ex.PW8/A and obtained the Sanction under Section 39 Arms Act from the concerned DCP which is Ex.PX1 and submitted the supplementary charge sheet against the accused. The witness has further deposed that on 06.09.2012 process U/s 82 Cr. PC was issued against the accused Rajesh and on 17.11.2012 he was declared as PO by the hon'ble court of Ld. MM. He has deposed that he also collected the FSL result in respect of blood sample which is Ex.PX2 (two pages collectively) and he submitted further supplementary charge sheet in this case. He has not been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsel despite opportunity in this regard and hence his testimony has gone uncontroverted. (42) PW18 HC Jaipal Singh is a formal witness being the Duty Officer who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW18/1 (as per the provisions of Section 196 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved the DD No. 23 dated 12.3.2013 copy of which is Ex.PW18/A, copy of FIR no. 47/13 PC Crime Branch, under Section 25/27 of Arms Act which is Ex.PW18/B. He has not been crossexamined by the Ld. Defence Counsel despite opportunity in this regard and hence his testimony has gone uncontroverted.