Culpable homicide conviction adjusted from Section 304 Part-I to Part-II IPC; knowledge of likely fatality established, intention not.

CRL.M.(BAIL) 1559/2025 and CRL.M.(BAIL) 1620/2025

1. With the consent of parties, the appeal itself is taken up for hearing.

2. The present applications are disposed of as infructuous.

CRL.A. 1044/2023

1. By way of the present appeal, the appellants seek to assail the judgement of conviction dated 07.08.2023 vide which they have been convicted for offences punishable under Section s 304 (Part-1)/323/341/34 IPC and order on sentence dated 09.11.2023 vide which they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section s 304 (part-l)/34 IPC along with payment of fine of Rs.7,000/-, in default whereof they were directed to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months; rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section s 323 /34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 month for the offence punishable under Section s 34 1 /34 IPC . The benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. was also provided to the appellants and the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. As per the prosecution case, the investigation commenced on receipt of an information on 08.04.2017 at 12.10 AM registered as DD No.3A at P.S. Begampur (Ex.6/A). The information was routed through PCR call made from mobile No.9818294838 stating that at D-Z/203 Sector-20 Rohini near NDPL office, there has been a quarrel and the injured has been hit on the head with a danda. The name of the informer was noted as Lakhan Singh. At the same time, another information also came to be recorded as DD No.3A (later on re-numbered as DD No.4A and time changed to 12:20 AM) at the aforesaid Police Station (Ex.DW-2/B). As per the information, the caller informed that he has been beaten badly and injured near Sector-20, Rohini at Plot No.G2/96 near Sunday Bazar Chowk. The information was provided through mobile No.9250660642.

3. Before proceeding further, this Court deems it apposite to note that as per the admitted case of the parties, both the parties were living in the same neighbourhood, their houses being on the opposite side of the park. As would be evident from the record, while the first information (DD No. 3A) was given through mobile phone of the injured Hoshiyar Singh - the caller being his wife Usha, the second information (DD No. 4A) was recorded at the instance of the accused party.

4. DD No.3A was assigned for enquiry to SI Aadesh Kumar (PW-8), who alongwith HC Rakesh Kumar (PW-12) reached the spot and came to know that a quarrel had taken place between the two parties and the injured was taken to the hospital. He reached the BSA hospital and found two injured persons namely Hoshiyar Singh and Bhim Sen (brother of Hoshiyar Singh), admitted. He visited the hospital again on 08.04.2017 and recorded the statement (EX.PW8/A) of Usha, the wife of the injured Hoshiyar Singh on which the subject FIR came to be registered. At the instance of the complainant, the site plan of the spot was prepared (Ex.PW8/B). He also received the blood stained clothes of injured Hoshiyar Singh worn at the time of the incident from Bhim Sen. The same were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/C. SI Aadesh Kumar also recorded the statement of Bhim Sen under Section 161 CrPC. Both the appellants came to be arrested on 11.04.2017 vide arrest memos Ex.PW8/D and Ex.PW8/E respectively. On the disclosure of appellant/Rohit, the weapon of offence i.e., the danda with which injuries were inflicted to the injured, was recovered from a park situated at Pocket-16, Sector-20, Rohini and the same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/K.

In the meantime, inj