Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3 Copies of charge sheet were supplied to the accused in compliance of section 207 cr.p.c. Notice u/s 279/337/338 IPC was framed on 04.09.02 by my ld. predecessor against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty. 4 In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined five pws. On 01.06.2011 complainant injured Harinder Kumar and Savitri Devi appeared and deposed that they have forgiven the accused as they came to know that the accused is suffering from paralysis. On the other hand, accused pleaded guilty for the commission of offences and prayed for lenient view as he is suffering from paralysis in the lower part of his body. His statement was also recorded to this effect on 01.6.2011.

5 In view of the submissions of the complainant and injured that they have forgiven the accused as the accused is suffering with paralysis, the offeice U/S 337 & 338 IPC were compounded. Accordingly the accused is acquitted of aforesaid charges.

6 However, in view of statement of accused wherein he has pleaded guilty voluntarily, the accused is convicted u/s 279 IPC. Let he be heard on quantum of sentence. Let he be heard on quantum of sentence. Announced in open court (Sushant Changotra) On 1st June, 2011 Metropolitan Magistrate Dwarka Courts, New Delhi IN THE COURT OF SH. SUSHANT CHANGOTRA METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI.

STATE Vs. Charan singh P.S.: J P Kalan U/s: 279/337/338 IPC 01.07.2011 Order on sentence.

Present.        APP for the state
                Accused with counsel.
               Heard on the point of sentence.

Ld. APP has argued that as the accused has pleaded his guilt voluntarily for the offences, therefore, maximum punishment should be awarded to him. On the other hand, accused states that he is facing trial since 2000 and is suffering from paralysis and prays for lenient view.