IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J.
Chhotey Lal @ Chhutalla - Appellant
Versus
State Govt. NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 599 of 2015
Decided On : 26-08-2019
Section 397 IPC - Conviction under Section 392/397 IPC altered to Section 411 IPC - Section 397 IPC, Section 411 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC but the prosecution failed to prove the charge under Section 397 IPC. The appellant's conviction was altered to the offence under Section 411 IPC. The appellant was directed to be released on the period already undergone.
Finding of the Court:
The appellant's conviction was altered from the offence under Section 392/397 IPC to the offence under Section 411 IPC. The appellant was directed to be released on the period already undergone.
Issues: Conviction under Section 392/397 IPC, failure to prove the charge under Section 397 IPC, alteration of conviction to the offence under Section 411 IPC, release of the appellant
Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution failed to prove the charge under Section 397 IPC, leading to the alteration of the appellant's conviction to the offence under Section 411 IPC. The appellant was directed to be released on the period already undergone.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the appellant was directed to be released on the period already undergone.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Ohri, J.
By way of the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment dated 10.03.2015 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi vide which the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC in SC No.80/13 arising out of FIR No.153/2013, registered under Sections 397/411 IPC at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi.
2. Vide order on sentence dated 10.03.2015 the appellant was sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC along with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of which the appellant was directed to undergo SI for 6 months. The benefit of Section 428 Cr.PC was given to the appellant.
3. Brief facts, as noted by the Trial Court are that:
4. The charge was framed against the appellant under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC and Section 411 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During the course of the trial, in order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. Jaiveer Singh, the victim was examined as PW-2. Ct. Amit Kumar who, on being informed by a rag picker that a person was lying unconscious near the railway track behind the metro station, passed on the information to PCR was examined as PW-7. HC Shri Pal Singh and Ct. Krishan, who on receipt of DD No.9A reached the spot, we
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.