The Supreme Court upholds the conviction for acid attack under Section 326A IPC, emphasizing the limited scope for interference in concurrent findings and the requirement of substantial evidence for conviction.

JUDGMENT :

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.

1. These two appeals i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 5304 of 2024 and Criminal Appeal No. 5303 of 2024 assail concurrent findings of conviction under Section 326A of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (“IPC 1860”) and sentence thereof against Hakim (“Accused No. 1”) and Umesh (“Accused No. 2”) respectively Appellants herein, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, Delhi vide Order dated 29.01.2020 and by the High Court of Delhi vide Judgment dated 13.10.2022 (“Impugned Judgment”). The Appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, and a fine of INR 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and in default, simple imprisonment for a period of one year.

2. Appellants, initially moved Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) Nos. 5874 of 2023 and 11118 of 2023 respectively, and delay was condoned in both the said petitions, albeit separately, and this Court issued notice only on the quantum of sentence. As the proceedings progressed, it was directed that the victim in the instant case, be also made a party and was accordingly impleaded as Respondent No. 2 (“Respondent-Victim”). However, as the said petitions were taken up on 14.05.2024, the assertions made by the erstwhile petitioners implied that they intended to even dispute the injuries caused to the Respondent-Victim. Thereafter, while reserving the judgments, leave to appeal was granted.

3. The incident, as alleged by the prosecution, is that on 08.06.2014, at about 11:30 p.m., Bablu (“Complainant”) husband of the Respondent-Victim, gave a written complaint at the Govind Nagar Police Station, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh which resulted into registration of FIR No. 130 of 2014 dated 08.06.2014 (“FIR”) bearing Crime No. 228 of 2014.

4. As per the complaint, at 08:00 p.m. on 08.06.2014 the Respondent-Victim (PW-4) was heading back home, subsequent to her visit to the temple of Galteshwar Mahadev, along with his sister-in-law, Rajjo Devi (PW-6). It is stated that the sister-in-law was a few steps behind the Respondent-Victim when both the Appellants along with Gyani (“Accused No. 3”) to take revenge blocked the way of the Respondent-Victim near the Govind Nagar railway crossing and told her that on account of she having moved a complaint against them to the police authorities earlier, she will face the consequences. Accused No. 1-Appellant and Accused No. 3 held the Respondent-Victim while Accused No. 2-Appellant, poured acid over her and then ran away from the spot. Respondent-Victim started screaming in agony instantly. Rajjo Devi (PW-6) who was following the Victim took her to hospital and got her admitted. All the accused being their neighbours at Laxmi Nagar under the jurisdiction of Krishna Nagar Police Chowki of Kotwali Police Station, Mathura were known to each other.

5. Having recorded the statements of the Respondent-Victim (PW-4) and Rajjo Devi (PW-6) on 09.06.2014 and 11.06.2014 respectively, the Investigating Officer on completion of investigation filed the Final Report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C. 1973”). Subsequent to the cognizance having been taken and on account of all the accused claiming to be not guilty, case was moved for trial before the District and Sessions Court, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh for offences under section 326A read with 34 IPC 1860.

6. During the pendency of the trial, at the behest of the Complainant, Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 176 of 2015 was moved before this Court