Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
Parmod Kumar @ Rahul & Another – Petitioner
Versus
State – Respondent
Crl.Rev.P. No. 913 of 2018
Decided On : 09-02-2021
Revision Petition - Criminal Offences - Sections 342, 325 and 34 IPC - The court discussed the evidence and found the accused guilty under Section 342, 325 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellate Court upheld the judgment of the Trial Court. The defense taken by the appellants was considered a sham defense.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 342, 325 and 34 IPC for beating the victim with hockey, wooden sticks, and bat. The victim was taken to the hospital and identified the accused. The accused denied the allegations and stated that they were falsely implicated. The Trial Court found the testimony of the victim reliable and trustworthy, and the injuries inflicted on the victim were grievous in nature. The appellate Court upheld the judgment of the Trial Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty under Section 342, 325 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment and deposit compensation to the injured/victim. The defense taken by the appellants was considered a sham defense.
Issues: The main issue was the reliability of the victim's testimony and the defense taken by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the judgment of the Trial Court and found the accused guilty based on the reliable and trustworthy testimony of the victim and the nature of the injuries inflicted.
Final Decision: The judgment of the Trial Court was sustained, and the accused were granted the benefit of probation under Section 360 Cr.P.C read with Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
JUDGMENT :
1. This revision petition filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C is directed against the order dated 09.10.2018, passed by the Additional Session Judge, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.77/2017 where by the Additional Session Judge has confirmed the judgment dated 17.12.2016, passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate-03 (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, convicting the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 342, 325 and 34 IPC. By order dated 20.02.2017, the accused have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 325 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one month for offence punishable under Section 342 IPC. They were also directed to deposit compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-( Rs.50,000/-each ) to be paid to the injured/complainant. In default, the accused have to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.
2. The allegation in the FIR is that on 19.04.2010, injured Dharmesh was going to attend the ring ceremony of his sister with his friend. It is stated that on the way when they reached in front of House No.I-58, Adhyapak Nagar, Nangloi, Delhi, the accused Parmod, Seema, Harpal, Suresh and Ashok pulled him into the house No.I-58 and started beating him with hockey, wooden sticks and bat. After beating the victim they threw the victim in a vacant plot. The injured/victim was taken to the hospital. Police came to record the statement of the injured/victim, and he identified the petitioner herein. Harpal passed away during the course of the investigation itself and the other two accused namely Suresh and Ashok could not be identified and therefore were not taken into custody.
3. Proceedings were initiated against the accused. In order to prove the guilt, prosecution examined 9 witnesses.
i. PW-l (Dharmesh) is the injured/victim.
ii. PW-2 is the father of the injured. He stated that he received information from SGM Hospital that Police brought his son to the hospital and he has been badly beaten up.
iii. PW-3 Head Constable Somveer was examined to prove the FIR.
iv. PW-4 Constable Kuldeep was examined to prove the arrest memo of the accused.
v. PW-5 Head Constable Naresh was examined to prove DD No.35A dated 19.04.2010.
vi. PW-6 Dr. Vijay was examined to prove the discharge summary as well as the MRI report.
vii. PW-7 Retired SI Rameshwar Dass has deposed that on 19.04.2010, at about 09:25 P.M, he received DD No.35A for investigation which was regarding quarrel. He went to the spot i.e. I-58, Adhyapak Nagar, Near Chand Pradhan Chowk, Nangloi where he came to know that the victim has been admitted to SGM Hospital. He deposed that no eye-witness was found by him. He went to SGM Hospital and came to know that injured Dharmesh has been admitted to the hospital and is unfit for statement.
viii. PW-8 Dr. Manoj Dhingra was examined to prove and exhibit his opinion on MLC.
ix. PW-9 SI Dinesh Chandra deposed that on 30.10.2010, after registration of FIR, further investigation was handed over to him by the order of the then SHO. On 31.10.2010, he went to the house of complainant/Ashok Kumar and made inquiry from him. He states that at that time, injured/victim namely Dharmesh was not at home. He recorded the statement of complainant Ashok Kumar. On 20.12.2010, he collected the opinion on the MLC of Victim/injured Dharmesh regarding the name of injury from the concerned doctor. After going through the MLC on which the doctor stated that the injuries were grievous he added section 325 IPC. He enquired the victim/injured Dharmesh, recorded his statement and prepared the site plan. On 26.02.2011, he arrested accused Pramod, Seema and Harpal Singh (now deceased) and prepared their arrest memos. As the offences under investigation were bailable, the accused were released on bail. He recorded the statement of Constable Kuldeep and examined Shashi (the sister of the victim) and recorded her statement. He states that he could not find out the two other accused p
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
