Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA
Ajay Singh Negi – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J.
1. In this appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (the Cr.P.C.), the sole accused in SC No. 6646/2016 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-02, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, assails the judgment dated 26.07.2017 and the order on sentence dated 10.08.2017 as per which he has been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC ).
2. The prosecution case is that on 10.03.2015, at about 8:30 PM, in front of House No. 98, DDA Flats, South Enclave, Dakshinpuri, New Delhi, the accused fired at PW1 with a country-made pistol causing an injury. The accused did not have a license to own a fire arm. Hence, as per the charge-sheet/final report, the accused was alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Section 307 IPC and Sections 25 , 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, 1959 (the Arms Act).
3. On the basis of Exhibit PW1/A FIS of PW1, given on 10.03.2015, crime no. 237/2015, Ambedkar Nagar Police Station, i.e., Exhibit PW5/B FIR was registered by PW5, Head Constable. PW11, Sub Inspector (SI) was entrusted with the investigation of the case.
Minor injuries do not negate culpability for attempt to commit murder; intention inferred from actions and circumstances surrounding the act.
The court affirmed conviction for attempted murder while reducing the sentence due to mitigating circumstances, highlighting scrutiny of evidence in violent crime cases and the need for direct corrob....
The conviction for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC was upheld based on eyewitness accounts, while the charge under the Arms Act was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
The court emphasized that a single credible witness's testimony is sufficient for conviction, even with investigative lapses, provided it establishes the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt.
The refusal of the accused to undergo TIP, the recovery of the weapon of offence, and the consistent testimony of eyewitnesses can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Right of private defence - Basic principle underlying doctrine of right of private defence is that when an individual or his property is faced with a danger and immediate aid from State machinery is ....
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on uncorroborated witness testimony, especially from related parties, is insufficient for conviction.
Point of Law : Murder - Conviction set aside - Trial court has committed gross-error in believing the sole testimony of PW5 and conviction should not have been based on such type of testimony, which ....
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
