Back
2020 Supreme(Del) 25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANMOHAN, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, JJ.
Inder Pal & Another - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 15 of 2011
Decided On : 31-01-2020
For the Appellants :Fahim Khan, Shoaib Khan, Aditya Tanwar, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Aashaa Tiwari, APP.
The reliability of prosecution witnesses, the possibility of identification due to familiarity between the parties, and the insignificance of motive when direct evidence establishes the crime.
Headnote:
IPC - Offences under Sections 302/307/34 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, medical evidence, identification of the appellants, and motive. The court found the appellants guilty of offences under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 and Section 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment of the trial court was upheld.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a quarrel between the accused and the complainant's family, resulting in the death of the complainant's wife and injuries to the complainant and his children. The prosecution presented evidence from witnesses and medical reports to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellants guilty of the charged offences based on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and medical evidence. The court rejected the arguments regarding the reliability of the witnesses and the identification of the appellants, upholding the judgment of the trial court.
Issues: The issues included the reliability of the prosecution witnesses, identification of the appellants, and the presence of motive. The court addressed these issues and found in favor of the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the reliability of the prosecution witnesses, the possibility of identification due to familiarity between the parties, and the insignificance of motive when direct evidence establishes the crime.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction of the appellants under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 and Section 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was upheld.
JUDGMENT :
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.
1. Present appeal is directed against judgment dated 20.12.2010 and order of sentence dated 22.12.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge NDPS, South & South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Sessions case No. 89/2007 arising out of FIR No. 514/2007 registered under Sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) at Police Station Sangam Vihar, New Delhi whereby the learned Sessions Judge found the appellants-accused guilty and sentenced them as follows:
“…………I sentence the convict Indrawati to RI for a period of seven years and convict Inderpal to RI for a period of five years and also to a fine of Rs.5000/- each for the offence punishable U/S 304/34 (II) IPC. They both are also sentenced to RI for a period of three years each and a fine of Rs.3000/- each for the offence punishable U/S 308/34 IPC. In case of non-payment of fine they shall further undergo RI for a period of two months and one months each respectively. Both the sentences shall run concurrently…….”
2. The brief facts of the case, as mentioned by the learned Trial Court are reproduced as under:
“……….On 03.06.2007, at about 10.37 PM one DD No.29A Ex. PW-11/A was recorded at the PS regarding the above incident and the same was assigned to ASI B.D.Khan/PW-11, who had arrived at the spot alongwith Ct. Kamlesh Kumar / PW-9. It was revealed to them that the injured had already been taken to AIIMS Hospital and in the meanwhile they had also received one other DD No. 47B Ex.PW11/B in that regard. SI O.P. Thakur/PW-21 had also reached there alongwith Ct. Ishwar Singh/PW-14 and then PW-11/ASI B.D.Khan and PW-21/SI O.P.Thakur had both reached AIIMS Hospital and had obtained the MLCs of deceased Shakuntala, who was declared brought dead, and of the injured Sh.Kunwar Pal, Geeta and Vicky.
3. It is also mentioned in the chargesheet that the injured Sh.Kunwar Pal was declared fit for making the statement and the IO/PW-21 SI O.P Thakur had recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A in which he had stated that at about 10 PM in the night after taking his meals he had come out of his house for some fresh air when the accused Inderpal, who was residing in front of his house, had started abusing him on the point of some flow of water of his house in the drain and the foul smell emanating there from and the accused had grappled with him. In the meanwhile, the wife of the accused Inderpal, i.e., the co-accused Indrawati, and his son Raju had started pelting bricks/stones from the roof of their house and the accused Indrawati had hit two stones on the head of his wife Shakuntala (since deceased) and she became unconscious at the spot. The son Vicky and daughter Geeta of the complainant had also come out of their house on hearing the noise of the quarrel and the accused Raju had hit on the head of his daughter Geeta with a stone from the roof of his house and the complainant Sh.Kunwar Pal had also received some injuries in the abovesaid quarrel. It was also stated by him that previously also there had been some quarrels and exchange of hot words between their families on the point of the above drain and the accused Inderpal was drunk at the time of above incident.
4. The IO /PW-21 and PW-11 had then both returned back at the spot and the IO/PW21 had made endorsement Ex.PW21/B on the above statement of the complainant Sh.Kunwar Pal and got a case registered at the PS under the above Sections, through PW-14, Ct. Ishwar Singh. During investigation conducted at the spot, the scene of offence was got photographed by the crime team, the blood sample, earth control and two pieces of stone and brick were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW14/A, all the three accused persons were arrested and their disclosure statement were recorded. The dead body of the deceased Shakuntala was also got postmortem and handed over to her relatives after identification, statements of the witnesses were recorded and the rough a
