Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Anish Dayal, JJ.
Salim - Appellant
Versus
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Crl. A. 189 of 2018
Decided On : 12-10-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. convictions for multiple offenses (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellants question eyewitness reliability (Para 3) |
| 3. prosecution's strong reliance on testimony (Para 4) |
| 4. assessing common intention and direct evidence (Para 6) |
| 5. conviction upheld; sentences sustained (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Anish Dayal, J.
1. These connected appeals assail the following:
(i) Impugned judgment dated 14th December, 2017 passed by the learned Trial Court convicting the appellants Salim, Mohd. Uvesh and Alam for the offence punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 IPC; appellant Salim and Mohd. Uvesh for offence punishable under Section 302 read with section 34 IPC, Section 397 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act; appellants Salim, Mohd. Uvesh and Alam for the offence punishable under Section 120B read with Section 394/397/302 IPC; and
(ii) Order on sentence dated 15th December, 2017 awarding the following sentences to the three appellants:
1. Appellant Salim
| Sl. No. | Section | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of payment of fine. |
| 1. | 394 r/w Section 397/34 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 2. | 302/34 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 3. | 25 Arms Act | Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 4. | 27 Arms Act | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 5. | 120B r/w Section 394/397/302 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
2. Appellant Mohd. Uvesh
| Sr. No. | Section | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of payment of fine. |
| 1. | 394 r/w Section 397/34 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 2. | 302/34 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 3. | 25 Arms Act. | Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 4. | 27 Arms Act. | Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 5. | 120B r/w Section 394/397/302 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
3. Appellant Alam @ Madari @ AsgarAlam
| Sr. No. | Section | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of payment of fine. |
| 1. | 394/34 IPC | Imprisonment of life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
| 2. | 120B r/w Section 394/397/302 IPC | Imprisonment for life. | Rs. 1000/- | Simple imprisonment for one month. |
All sentences of all the convicts were to run concurrently.
Two other accused viz. Munavvar and Mehboob were acquitted by the impugned judgment dated 14th December, 2017 by the learned Trial Court
The Incident
2. As per the case of prosecution, Mohd. Shakeel (the complainant) carried on the business of handicraft on 3rd Floor of a rented house bearing P-165, Zakir Hussain College, Shakur ki Dandi, Delhi where he used to reside along with his co-workers Mohd. Hasibul Alam, Devanand Kumar Sharma, Mohd. Feroz, Govind and Mohd. Shahid. On 8th October, 2012, at about 11:30 a.m. while all these persons were doing their work, one person 22-23 years of age came into the room and went away and later during the day was accompanied along with three other persons who entered the room and closed the door by bolting it from inside. One of the persons took out his pistol, pointed it at them and asked them to give whatever was with them. Mohd. Shakeel and the other occupants stated that they had nothing with them. Upon hearing this, the intruders started beating them and snatched mobile phones of Mohd. Shakeel, Mohd. Hasibul Alam and Govind and beat up Mohd. Shakeel due to which he received injuries on his left foot. The intruders searched the clothes which were hanging in the room and took out around Rs. 7,000 or 8,000/- and left the house after closing the door from outside. Mohd. Shahid, one of the occupants came out from the window, unbolted the door from outside and raised a hue and cry. Many public persons collected in the street and tried to catch the intruders. One of the public persons chased the intruders and caught one of them but was shot in the head by th
Use of weapon to constitute offence under Section 397 IPC does not require that ‘offender’ should actually fire from firearm or actually stab if it is a knife or a dagger but mere exhibition of same,....
The actual user of a deadly weapon during a robbery is solely liable under Section 397 IPC, while others involved may face lesser charges if not directly implicated.
Conviction for attempted murder requires intent or knowledge of causing fatal injury, corroborated by witness and medical evidence, despite the victim’s hostility.
The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses are consistent in relation to all material particulars and there exists no ground whatsoever for the modification of the impugned judgment dated 22.02.202....
The court determined that the appellant's actions constituted culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II due to lack of intent, modifying the conviction from murder under Section 302.
The conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. was upheld based on consistent eyewitness testimonies and established intent, with the sentence modified to 18 years' rigorous imprisonment.
: For bringing criminal activity of accused within meaning of Section 34 IPC, there must be specific overt act attributed to accused in attacking victim.
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
