Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S.P. GARG, J.
MANOJ KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRL.A. 61 of 2016
Decided On : 29-09-2016
IPC - Offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt by a blunt object - Section 325 IPC - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the prosecution's case under Section 308 IPC and concluded that the appellant's actions fell under Section 325 IPC instead. The court considered the lack of intention to commit culpable homicide and the absence of pre-planning or use of deadly weapons, leading to the alteration of the conviction.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for committing an offence under Section 308 IPC for inflicting injuries on the victim. The victim's statement and medical evidence supported the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's actions did not meet the requirements of Section 308 IPC and altered the conviction to Section 325 IPC. The court also modified the appellant's sentence considering mitigating circumstances.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant's actions constituted an offence under Section 308 IPC or Section 325 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of intention to commit culpable homicide, absence of pre-planning, and the nature of the injuries inflicted, leading to the alteration of the conviction and modification of the sentence.
Final Decision: The appellant's conviction was altered to Section 325 IPC, and the sentence was modified to three years of Simple Imprisonment with a fine. The appellant was also directed to deposit compensation for the victim.
S.P. GARG, J.
1. Present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 08.12.2015 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.06/15 arising out of FIR No.705/14 registered at Police Station Welcome whereby the appellant-Manoj Kumar was held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 308 IPC. By an order dated 9.12.2015, he was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for five years with fine Rs. 25,000/-.
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case, as set up in the charge-sheet, was that on 4.12.2014, at about 10.15 p.m. at Gali No.2, Subhash Park, near Namkeen Chowk, the appellant inflicted injuries to Manish with an intention to commit the offence of culpable homicide. On receipt of information, Daily Diary (DD) No.53B (Ex.PW8/E) came into existence at 10.32 p.m. at Police Station Welcome. The Investigating Officer after recording statement of the victim’s brother Manoj Kumar (Ex.PW-1/A) lodged First Information Report. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The victim Manish was taken to Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Shahdara, for medical examination. The accused was arrested. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against him for committing offence punishable under Section 308 IPC. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined eight witnesses in all. In 313 statement, the accused denied his involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. He examined himself as DW-1. The trial resulted in conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Injuries sustained by the victim are not under challenge. The appellant’s plea is that he was not the author of the injuries and these were inflicted by ‘someone’ else. Soon after the incidence, the victim was taken to GTB Hospital. MLC (Ex.PW4/A) records arrival time of the patient at 10.50 p.m. on 4.12.2014. PW-4 (Dr.Deovrat Kumar) examined the victim vide MLC (Ex.PW-4/A). The patient was referred to Neuro Trauma and ENT for further examination and management. PW-6 (Dr.Shivesh) conducted CT-scan vide form (Ex.PW-6/A) and submitted his report (Ex.PW-6/B). The injuries suffered by the victim were ‘grievous’ in nature.
4. The occurrence took place at around 10.15 p.m. Incident was reported to the police immediately and DD No. 53B (Ex.PW-8/E) came to be recorded at Police Station Welcome at 10.32 p.m. In the complaint (Ex.PW-1/A), the complainant give detailed account as to how and in what manner, the injuries were caused to his brother Manish. The accused was specifically named in the complaint. The investigation was assigned to ASI Dharam Vir Singh. Since the FIR was lodged promptly and the appellant was named to be the perpetrator of the crime, there was least possibility to concoct a false story in such a short interval.
5. The victim, aged around 15 years, appeared in the court as PW 3. The learned Presiding Officer put various preliminary questions before recording his statement to ascertain if he was a competent witness and able to give rational answers to the questions put to him. After recording his satisfaction that the statement being given by the victim was voluntary, without any fear or pressure, the learned Presiding Officer recorded his statement. The victim disclosed that on 04.12.2014 at around 9.45 p.m., he was present at Namkeen Chowk, Gali No.2, Subhash Park where a ‘party’ was going on. He was picking up the coins thrown by the individuals present there. When his brother Manoj arrived the spot at about 10.30 p.m., he accompanied him to the house. At a distance of 10/12 steps, the accused who was known to him before tried to snatch his money. On his resistance, the accused picked up a brick lying at the spot and hit him on his head, as a result of which, he started bleeding from his right ear and became unconscious. He was discharged from the hospital next
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
