* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Reserved on: 25th September 2025

Pronounced on: 28th October 2025

+ CRL.L.P. 83/2019

STATE

Govt. of NCT of Delhi.

.....Appellant

Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State.

Versus

1. LAXMAN SINGH

S/o Sh. Jagdish Singh

R/o8630, Roshanara Road,

Subzi Mandi,

Delhi.

2. DEEPAK

S/o Sh. Jagdish Singh

R/o 8630, Roshanara Road,

Subzi Mandi,

Delhi. .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Anuj Rajpal, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

CRL.L.P. 83/2019

1. A Leave to Appeal Petition under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners challenging the impugned Order/Judgment dated 11.09.2018 passed by learned Special Judge (NDPS)-1, Central District Tis Hazari, Delhi, thereby acquitting the Respondents for the offence punishable under Section 324/34 IPC.

2. It is submitted that the impugned judgment is based on conjectures and surmises and therefore, bad in law. The testimony of the witnesses have not been appreciated in right perspective. The learned Trial Court has failed to consider that though the injury suffered by the Complainant and his wife was Simple, the weapon used to cause the injury was a sharp object.

Submissions heard.

3. Considering the submissions made by learned APP for the State, the Leave Petition is allowed and accordingly disposed of.

CRL.A.______/2025 (To be numbered by the Registry)

4. An Appeal under Section 378(1) Cr.P.C has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/State to challenge the Judgment dated 11.09.2018 passed by learned ASJ, Delhi, whereby the Respondents herein have been acquitted in case FIR No.492/2015 under Section 323/324/34 IPC registered at Police Station Subzi Mandi, Delhi.

5. The case of the Prosecution in brief was that, Sh. Ravinder Singh, Complainant gave the statement that the Respondents were residing adjacent to his house which he had taken on rent. On 29.09.2015 at about 07:45 P.M. they were smoking cigarette and blowing out the smoke towards the room of the Complainant. When his mother Smt. Kailash Kaur, who was inside their house, confronted the Respondent Laxman about why he was doing so, he retorted that they may shut the door of their house and what objection can they have when he was smoking in his own room. In the meanwhile, the Complainant also returned to his house. Thereafter, he started abusing them. In the meanwhile, Deepak brother-in-law of Respondent Laxman, also came and he slapped the Complainant and pushed his wife. He then picked an empty bottle of liquor and threw it towards the Complainant which broke. He thereafter, picked up the broken pieces of bottle and hit the Complainant on his left arm. When his wife Smt. Harvinder Kaur intervened to save him, both the Respondents hit her as well, with the empty broken bottle. Both, he and his wife, suffered injuries. FIR No.492/2015 was registered, on his Complaint.

6. After investigations, the Chargesheet under Section 452/308/323/34 IPC was filed in the Court of Ld. MM. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

7. The learned ASJ in the Order on Charge dated 08.12.2016, concluded that the Charges were made out under only Section 324/34 IPC and accordingly the Charges were framed against both the Respondents, to which they pleaded not guilty.

8. The Prosecution in support of its case examined five witnesses.

9. PW1/Ravinder Singh is the Complainant who deposed about the incident as stated in his Application. PW2/Satish Chander is the Duty Officer.

10. PW3/Const. Mohan Lal had accompanied HC Bhagirath, the Investigating Officer and has deposed about the arrest of both the Respondents vide Memo Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D and their Personal Search vide Memo Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW3/B.

11. PW4/Doctor Rakesh Solanki had proved the MLC of Ravinder Singh Complainant and his wife Harvinder Kaur as Ex.PW4/A and Ex.PW4/B respectively.

12. PW5/Doctor Navin Kumar on