IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J.
IN THE MATTER OF
Kuldeep & Ors - Appellants
Versus
State - Respondent
CRL.A. 28, 131 of 2013
Decided On : 19-11-2019
APPEALS - Conviction under Sections 307/34 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act - The court discussed the presence of the appellants at the spot, the identification of the appellants by the injured, and the common intention shared by the appellants and their co-accused. The court upheld the conviction and sentences of the appellants as handed down by the trial court.
Fact of the Case:
The injured, Vinay Kumar, was shot at by the appellants and their co-accused at Tyagi Dairy. The injured identified the appellants and described the specific roles played by them. The injured's testimony was corroborated by other witnesses. The injured was initially supportive of the prosecution case but turned hostile during cross-examination after a considerable time had passed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the injured's testimony during examination-in-chief, the positive identification of the appellants, and the testimony of other witnesses proved the presence of the appellants at the spot and their involvement in the offense. The court also held that the common intention shared by the appellants and their co-accused was evident from the sequence of events.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the injured's testimony, the presence of the appellants at the spot, and the shared common intention of the appellants and their co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the testimony of a hostile witness does not get completely wiped out and if a part of the testimony is reliable, it can be used in the aid of the prosecution case. The court also emphasized that the presence of the appellants at the spot was duly proved and their shared common intention was evident from the sequence of events.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants and upheld their conviction and sentences as handed down by the trial court. The appellants were directed to surrender before the Jail Superintendent within a period of two weeks.
JUDGMENT :
1. By way of the present appeals, the appellants have assailed the common judgment on conviction dated 08.10.2012 and order on sentence dated 19.12.2012 in FIR No. 697/07 under Sections 307/34 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act, P.S. Nand Nagri whereby all the appellants were convicted under Sections 307/34 IPC and were sentenced to RI for four years along with fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default whereof to undergo RI for one year. It was also directed that the fine imposed i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- (in total) shall be payable to the injured/complainant after the expiry of the period of appeal.
2. As both appeals assail a common judgment, they are taken up together for hearing and are disposed of vide this common judgment.
3. For the sake of felicity, brief facts of the case, as noted by the trial court, are reproduced as under:-
Bhargavan and Ors. vs. State of Kerala reported as (2004) 12 SCC 414
Balwantbhai B. Patel vs. State of Gujarat and Anr. reported as AIR 2010 SC 1158
Bhagwan Singh v. State of Haryana
Barendra Kumar Ghosh vs. King Emperor: AIR 1925 PC 1
Khujji @ Surendra Tiwari vs The State of Madhya Pradesh reported as (1991) 3 SCC 627
Rabindra Kumar Dey v. State of Orissa
Syad Akbar v. State of Karnataka (1980) 1 SCC 30
Pattipati Venkaiah vs. State of A.P. reported as (1985) 4 SCC 80
Inderjit vs. The State. reported as 1986 CrLJ 966
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.