Point of Law: Conviction upheld - Charges against the appellant have been established beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant challenging the judgment on conviction dated 03.10.2019 and the order on sentence dated 09.10.2019 passed by the learned ASJ (FTC), E-Court, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in SC No. 17/2018 arising out of FIR No. 82/2017 registered under Sections 307/34 IPC at Police Station Nand Nagri, Delhi.

2. Vide the impugned judgment, the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC. Vide the order on sentence dated 09.10.2019, he was directed to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 04 years alongwith payment of fine of Rs.4,000/-, in default whereof, to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 01 month. The benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. was extended to the appellant.

3. Brief facts of the case, as noted by the Trial Court, are as under:-

“1. Criminal law was set into motion on 09.02.2017 at about 6.45 pm when an information regarding stabbing was received at PS Nand Nagri, which was recorded vide DD No. 85-B and was assigned to SI Manoj Kumar, who alongwith Ct. Deepak reached at the spot i.e. E-2 Block, Jhuggi Nand Nagri, where they came to know that injured had gone to GTB hospital. Thereupon, SI Manoj Kumar alongwith Ct. Deepak reached at GTB hospital and obtained the MLC of one Subhash S/o. Het Ram, who was opined fit for statement. The gist of the statement is that "on 09.02.2017 complainant Subhash S/o. Het Ram was going towards District Park via E-2 Block, Jhuggies. At about 6 pm, Ankit and his friend met him near jhuggies and Ankit asked from him his mobile phone to make a call and when he refused Ankit started abusing him. When he objected the friend of Ankit caught hold him from behind and Ankit took out a knife and started hitting him on his left ear, left shoulder and stomach. He started shouting, on which they both ran away from there. Ankit is resident of E-2 Jhuggies and used to come at his shop of tent. Ankit and his friend stabbed him with an intention to kill him. On the basis of above statement of injured, rukka was prepared and present case FIR was registered. Accused took a plea of juvenility, however, after conducting enquiry, J.J.Board, vide order dt. 01.09.2017 held that accused Ankit was more than 18 years of age on the date of commission of offence.”

4. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the appellant under Sections 307/34 IPC. Vide order dated 18.04.2018, charges were framed against him under Sections 307/34 IPC, to which he pled not guilty and claimed trial.

5. During the course of submissions, Mr. Saurabh Soni, learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant, who also joined the proceedings through V.C. from Central Jail No.5, Tihar, New Delhi and was identified by Mr. Deepak Kumar, Jail Warden, submitted that the appellant does not wish to press the appeal on merits. It was prayed that considering the period of incarceration of the appellant as well as his age and clean antecedents, the appellant may be released on the period already undergone. Lastly, it was submitted that the appellant is ready and willing to pay the fine of Rs.4,000/- as imposed on him vide the impugned order on sentence.

6. Mr. Hirein Sharma, learned APP for the State, on the other hand, supported the impugned judgment and order on sentence. It was submitted that the appellant in the present case is guilty of causing grievous injuries to the complainant on vital parts of his body and thus, the order on sentence may not be interfered with.

7. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and have also gone through the Trial Court Record.

8. To prove its case, the prosecution had examined a total of nine witnesses. The complainant/Subhash was examined as PW-1; Dr. Akash Varshney, who proved the MLC of the complainant, was examined as PW-5; SI Manoj Kumar, the Investigating Office