HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SUNITA GUPTA, J.
Wasim Pahari
Versus
State
Crl.A. 588 of 2012
Decided on: 05-09-2013
Identification - Criminal Law - IPC 392/394/397 - The court discussed the identification of the accused, the recovery of the weapon of offence and the robbed amount, and the medical evidence. The court emphasized that the evidence of a prosecution witness cannot be rejected in toto merely because the prosecution treated him as hostile. The court also highlighted that minor discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence of the witnesses should not affect the core of the prosecution case.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offences under IPC Sections 392/394/397 based on the prosecution's case that he robbed and inflicted injuries on the victim. The victim's identification of the accused and the recovery of the weapon and robbed amount were crucial to the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the identification of the accused by the victim and the recovery of the weapon and robbed amount were established. The court also emphasized that minor discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence of the witnesses should not affect the core of the prosecution case.
Issues: The issues revolved around the identification of the accused, the recovery of the weapon and robbed amount, and the medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The evidence of a prosecution witness cannot be rejected in toto merely because the prosecution treated him as hostile. Minor discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence of the witnesses should not affect the core of the prosecution case.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's conviction under IPC Sections 392/394/397 was upheld.
Sunita Gupta, J.
1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant Wasim @ Pahari who has been convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 124/2008 arising out of FIR No. 276/2008, PS Welcome for offence under Section 392/394/397 IPC vide impugned order dated 10th March, 2011 and sentenced as under vide order on sentence dated 15th March, 2011: (i) rigorous imprisonment for seven years for offence under Section 394 IPC and fine of Rs.3000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for six months, (ii) seven years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 392 IPC and fine of Rs.3000/-in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for six months and (iii) seven years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 397 IPC. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C was given. All the sentences were to run concurrently.
2. The facts leading to this appeal, briefly stated, are that on receipt of DD No. 28A, Ex.PW8/A regarding assault to a boy at Kabir Nagar, 33 Foota Road and he is being taken to G.T.B. hospital Head Constable Birender (PW1) along with Constable Chaman (PW4) reached 33 ft. Road, Gali No. 1, Kabir Nagar where they came to know that injured had been shifted to hospital. As such, they reached hospital where PW-2 Mehraj met them while his brother PW3 Vikar @ Vicky was getting treatment. He recorded statement of Mehraj, Ex.PW2/A wherein he unfolded that on 26th July, 2008 at about 11:00 pm, he along with his brother Vikar @ Vicky was returning back to his tenanted room after finishing the work in the factory. His brother Vikar @ Vicky was ahead of him. When they took a turn towards their street, then one person stopped his brother and tried to remove money from his pocket. When his brother protested, then that person inflicted some pointed object on left portion of his face. As a result of which, blood started oozing out. In the meantime, he reached near his brother and caught his brother who was about to fall on the ground. That person removed Rs.5000/- from the upper pocket of his brother. While he was managing his brother, then he saw that, that person was resident of Gali No.1, named as Wasim @ Pahari, S/o Zamir, who had inflicted injuries on his brother by some pointed object and had robbed him of money. He removed his brother to GTB Hospital where he was receiving treatment and was not in a position to make a statement. On the basis of this statement, Rukka, Ex.PW-1/A was prepared and was sent to Police Station for registration of the case on the basis of which, FIR Ex.PW8/B was recorded by ASI Vijay Kumar (PW8).
3. It is further the case of prosecution that on 27th July, 2008, accused was apprehended at Kabir Nagar Shamshan Ghat Pulia on the identification of Mehraj. He was arrested and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/C. The accused made a disclosure statement Ex.PW1/D pursuant to which one ‘ustra’ was recovered from the side of wall of nala. Sketch of the ‘ustra’, Ex.PW1/E was prepared and it was taken possession vide memo Ex.PW1/F. During the course of investigation, blood stained shirt of injured Vikar @ Vicky was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/G. The accused pointed out the place of incident vide Ex.PW1/G-1. During search of accused, Rs.2,200/- in cash out of robbed amount of Rs.5000/-was recovered which were seized vide memo Ex.PW1/H. After completing investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused.
4. Charge for offence under Sections 392/394/397 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined eight witnesses. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused while recording his statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. wherein he denied the case of prosecution and pleaded innocence. According to him, he was lifted from his house when he was sleeping. Police obtained his signatures on blank papers. Alleged recovery was planted upon him. Alth
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.