2016 Supreme(Del) 2223
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUNITA GUPTA, J.
T. RAMESH - Appellant
versus
STATE - Respondent
CRL.A. 718, 1597 of 2014
Decided On : 8-07-2016
For the Appellant :Mr.Jatin Rajput and Mr Anupam Dubey, Advocates
For the Respondent: Ms Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Ss.452/394/397 IPC in a case involving robbery and grievous hurt, and the court's emphasis on the minimum sentence prescribed under S.397 IPC.
Headnote:
Robbery - Criminal Law - Ss.452/392/394/397/34 IPC - The judgment discusses the application of Ss.452/394/397/34 IPC in a case involving a robbery and grievous hurt. The court analyzed the evidence and concluded that the appellants were rightly convicted for the mentioned offences.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a robbery at the house of the complainant, where the accused, A1 and A2, inflicted grievous hurt on the complainant and her mother-in-law. The accused were convicted and sentenced for offences under Ss.452/34, 394/397 IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence and testimonies supported the conviction of the appellants for the mentioned offences. The court also noted that the minimum sentence prescribed under S.397 IPC is seven years, and therefore, the appeals were dismissed with a modification in the default sentence of fine.
Issues: The issues involved the conviction and sentencing of the appellants for offences under Ss.452/34, 394/397 IPC, and the application of the minimum sentence prescribed under S.397 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the evidence, including the testimonies of the witnesses and the medical evidence, to establish the commission of the offences under Ss.452/394/397 IPC. The court also emphasized the minimum sentence prescribed under S.397 IPC and its application in the case.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the substantive sentence for the offence under S.452 IPC was maintained. The default sentence of fine was reduced, and the separate sentence awarded under S.394 IPC was set aside, with the sentence being under S.394 read with S.397 IPC for seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for one month.
SUNITA GUPTA, J.
1. The challenge in the aforesaid two appeals filed by the appellants is to the judgment dated 28.02.2014 and order on sentence dated 05.04.2014 in Sessions Case No.69/11 arising out of FIR No.273/2011 Police Station Saraswati Vihar, Delhi under Ss.452/392/394/397/34 IPC vide which the appellants were convicted for offences punishable under S.452/34 IPC and 394/397 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years under S. 452/34 IPC with fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month; sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment under S. 394 IPC with fine of Rs.2,000/-; in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under S. 397 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Both the appellants were granted benefit of S. 428 of Cr.PC.
2. A2 – Radhika worked as a domestic maid in the house of PW2 – Smt Veena Guglani at House No. A- 35, Lok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi for one month.On 11.07.2011 at about 12 pm, she came alongwith her daughter Laxmi and requested her to keep her daughter for some work. When complainant refused, she went away. Again at about 2.30 pm, she came along with her daughter and asked for drinking water. However, she was sent back as complainant had some work to do. At about 3:30 pm, again she visited her house and said that she had forgotten her mobile in the house. After taking mobile and drinking water, she went back. At about 6:15pm, she again rang the door bell of complainant and asked for water. The complainant went in kitchen to bring water and when the complainant brought water, Radhika had come inside the house accompanied by her husband – T. Ramesh (A-1) and asked water for him as well. She asked the complainant to employ her husband (A-1 – T. Ramesh) in the factory whereupon the complainant told A2 that she will talk to her husband. Instead of going, A1 pulled complainant towards the puja room and pushed her head on the floor and gave her beatings and pressed her neck. Despite her resistant, A-1 continued to beat her. In the meantime, complainant heard the screams of her mother-in-law. A1 came to the complainant and started giving her beatings with the walking stick of her mother-in-law. In the mean time, after hearing the screams of her mother-in-law, neighbours raised alarm. Both the accused ran towards the back door. When complainant rescued herself, she saw her mother in law lying in the lobby in a pool of blood. She bolted the inside doors and raised alarm through jalidar door and dialled at 100 number. The police and neighbour came. In the mean time, both the accused broke the lock of back door and managed to escape. However, A2 was apprehended near the under-construction house while A1 managed to flee away. On receipt of DD No.68B, Sub Inspector Surender Kumar (PW17) alongwith Constable Kuldeep Singh (PW14) reached the spot where Constable Sri Krishan (PW8) and HC Praveen (PW12) (beat staff) met him there. Public persons with the help of beat officers were bringing two ladies in injured condition out of the house. One QRT and PCR van also reached at the spot. Both the injured – Smt Veena (PW2) and Smt. Shanti (PW1) were shifted to hospital. Smt Veena was found fit for making statement as such her statement Ex.PW12/A was recorded which resulted in registration of FIR by ASI Tej Singh (PW3) Ex.PW3/A. Crime team was called at the spot. Sub Inspector Matadin Meena (PW4) alongwith the team consisting of the photographer – Constable Parvinder (PW5), finger print proficient Constable Ramesh reached the spot and found blood stained mark on the main gate of the house up to door of living room. Blood in huge quantity was found at two places in the drawing room and blood stains on the floor of the house. On the sofa, one blood stained stick was also found. Blood was also found on the table and TV rack. One lead glass was f