Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
STATE (NCT) OF DELHI - Petitioner
Versus
VIJAY AND ORS. - Respondents
CRL. A.231/2015
Decided on : 26.08.2015
IPC - Assault - Section 325/34 - Summary: The court dismissed the appeal against the conviction and order of imprisonment under Section 325/34 of the IPC. The judgment highlighted the assault on the deceased, leading to her injury and subsequent death due to septicaemia. The court found no interference with the reasoning and evidence presented by the Trial Court.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an appeal against the conviction and order of imprisonment under Section 325/34 of the IPC, relating to an assault on the deceased resulting in her injury and subsequent death due to septicaemia.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no fault with the reasoning, logic, and evidence presented by the Trial Court, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: The issues revolved around the assault on the deceased, the cause of her injury and subsequent death, the delay in FIR registration, and the recovery of the assault weapon.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on medical evidence to establish the assault and injury to the deceased, leading to the conviction under Section 325/34 of the IPC. The court also considered the cause of the deceased's death and found no interference with the Trial Court's decision.
Final Decision: The appeal against the conviction and order of imprisonment under Section 325/34 of the IPC was dismissed.
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A No.2503/2015
For the grounds taken in the petition, the delay of 46 days is condoned. Application is disposed of. CRL.A.231/2015
1. The present appeal on behalf of the State is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 16.10.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-04 (North), Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.32/1/14 (FIR No.145/2008, P.S. Kanjhawala) whereby the respondents have been convicted only under Section 325/34 of the IPC and have been sentenced for imprisonment which they have already undergone during investigation/trial and a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, with the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C.
2. The respondent No.1 was charged for offence under Section 304/34 and Section 509 of the IPC whereas respondent Nos.2 & 3 were charged for the offences under Section 304/34 of the IPC.
3. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are as hereunder.
4. While Smt. Shivpati (deceased) and Ms. Roshni (PW-7) were sitting outside their house No.B-26, Sukhbir Nagar, Karala, Delhi on 12.9.2008, they heard somebody crying inside the house of respondent No.1. Since the house of respondent No.1is adjacent to the house of the deceased, an enquiry was made from respondent No.1 as to who was weeping in the house. This infuriated respondent No.1, and he started abusing the deceased and also threatened Ms.Roshni (PW-7). The deceased and Ms. Roshni, in order to avoid any further embarrassment, came inside their house. After sometime Ghanshyam (PW-1), son of the deceased came home from his duty and was informed by Ms. Roshni (PW-7) about the occurrence. Ghanshyam thereafter accosted respondent No.1 and tried to know from him as to why he had abused Shivpati (deceased) and Roshni. The respondents are thereafter alleged to have grappled with Ghanshyam and assaulted him. The respondents also assaulted Govind Gupta (PW-4). When Shivpati (deceased) came to the rescue of Ghanshyam, respondent No.1 went inside his house, procured one ‘thapi’ a wooden rod and assaulted Shivpati (deceased) with the aforesaid weapon. Shivpati (deceased) received injuries on her thigh and leg. The respondents thereafter made good their escape.
5. Smt. Shivpati (deceased) was taken by Ghanshyam to BSA Hospital, Rohini. She was thereafter referred to Senior Resident, Orthopaedic for opinion and management. The X-Ray of Smt.Shivpati disclosed that her left femur had fractured.
6. The intimation regarding the aforesaid occurrence was received in Kanjhawala police station and thereafter Head Constable Rajkumar (PW-7) reached the spot. After having come to know that the injured has been taken to BSA Hospital, the MLC of the injured (Smt.Shivpati) was obtained. Since she was not in a position to give any statement regarding the accident because of pain, the aforesaid Head Constable Rajkumar came back to the police station.
7. The further case of prosecution is that the respondents, feeling penitent about the occurrence met Ghanshyam (PW-1) and offered to bear all medical expenses incurred on the treatment of Shivpati (deceased). Because of such an offer, no report was made to the police on the date of the accident. Only when the respondents refused to pay the expenses, Smt.Manju (PW-3), wife of Ghanshyam (PW-1) went to the police station on 7.10.2008 and gave her statement (Ex.PW-3/A) before Head Constable Rajkumar (PW-7). On the basis of such statement, FIR No.145/08 was instituted under Section 323/509 and 34 of the IPC.
8. Smt.Shivpati died on 1.1.2009 at her house. On being informed, the local police arrived at the house of Shivpati and sent the dead body for post mortem.
9. Dr.Manoj Kumar (PW-10) conducted the post mortem over the dead body of Shivpati and prepared a report (Ex.PW-10/A). In his opinion the death was caused due to septicaemia.
10. Section 304 IPC was thereafter added on 14.11.2010.
11. At the trial the prosecution examined 17 witnesses on behalf of the prosecution. One w
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
