JUDGMENT :

ANISH DAYAL, J.

1. These appeals assail the impugned judgment dated 23rd December, 2019 of the learned Trial Court convicting all three appellants for offence punishable under 326A/34 IPC and order on sentence dated 29th January, 2019 awarding each of the appellants sentence as under:

(i) Appellants Hakim and Umesh were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- each, simple imprisonment for a period of one year in default of payment of fine.

(ii) Appellant Gyani was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.50,000/-, simple imprisonment for a period of six months in default of payment of fine.

The victim was held as entitled to compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. and out of total fine of Rs.2,50,000/-, an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- was to be paid to the victim as compensation.

The Incident

2. As per the case of the prosecution on 08th June, 2014 at about 11:30 p.m., complainant Bablu came to PS Govind Nagar, Mathura, U.P. and gave a written complaint. As per the complaint at about 8:00 p.m. on that day, his wife Meera Devi was returning to her house after a temple visit (“darshan” of Galteshwar Mahadev) and on the way back, near Govind Nagar Railway crossing, the three appellants met her and threatened her. They told her that she will have to face the consequences of the report which she had lodged earlier with the police. While appellant Hakim and Gyani held Meera Devi, Umesh poured acid over her and ran away. The victim started screaming in agony and many persons gathered around. The complainant’s sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Rajjo Devi, who was with her but 10-15 paces behind her, took the victim and got her admitted to the Government Hospital, Mathura where her condition was quite serious. Based upon the complaint, FIR No.130/2014 was registered and the investigation was carried out by SI P.K. Malik. After visiting the hospital where the victim was admitted to the burns ward, SI P.K. Malik along with Constable Vivek Kumar came to the gate of the hospital, when a secret information was received that appellant Umesh was present at Govardhan Chauraha on Agra-Delhi Highway and was waiting for some vehicle. Upon reaching the chauraha (cross-road), appellant Umesh was arrested. On 11th June, 2014, SI P.K. Malik recorded the statement of the PW-6, sister-in-law Rajjo. Efforts were made to arrest appellant Hakim (who was the father of Umesh) and Gyani by raiding their houses but Hakim was not found at home and the house of Gyani was found locked. Despite subsequent raids, the accused Hakim and Gyani could not be found, however, they surrendered subsequently on 15th June, 2016. In the meantime, pursuant to inquiries with the family, the police came to know that the victim had been shifted to Bharatpur to another hospital and would be discharged after 3-4 days. On 9th June, 2014, the statement of the victim was recorded and on completion of the investigation, the IO filed the charge- sheet on 22nd June, 2014 against all three appellants under Section 326A IPC. Cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of Sessions and charges under Section 326A/34 IPC were framed to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses, statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the appellants examined 3 witnesses in defence. It may be noted that on a petition filed by the complainant, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 01st September, 2015 transferred the present case from Mathura to Delhi.

Submissions by the Appellants

3. Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants contended that the learned Trial Court had overlooked facts and evidence on record and passed an order in a mechanical manner since there were many contradictions and inconsistencies in the version of the prosecution. He conten