Crl.A 288/2011, Crl.A 402/2011, Crl.A 403/2011 & Crl. M. (Bail) 2196/2011

Page 1

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

RESERVED ON: 02.02.2012

PRONOUNCED ON:29.02.2012

+

CRL.A. 288/2011

AJAY@ CHOTU

..... Appellant

Through : Sh. S.C. Sagar, Sh. Rajesh Khatri and

Ms. Nisha Kain, Advocates.

+

CRL.A. 402/2011

VICKY

..... Appellant

Through : Sh. L.K. Verma, Advocate.

+

CRL.A. 403/2011, CRL.M.(BAIL) 2196/2011

ANIL @ MONU

..... Appellant

Through : Sh. Viraj. R. Datar, Sh. Chetan. B.

Lokur and Sh. Parmanand, Advocates.

versus

THE STATE

..... Respondent

Through : Sh. Sanjay Lao, APP.

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

MR. JUSTICE S.P. GARG

MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT

%

1.

This judgment will dispose of three appeals, directed against a

common judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, dated

2012:DHC:1437-DB

Crl.A 288/2011, Crl.A 402/2011, Crl.A 403/2011 & Crl. M. (Bail) 2196/2011

Page 2

20.01.2011, in SC No. 65/2009. The appellants were convicted of the

offences punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. They were sentenced to

undergo Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 each, in default

of which they were to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for 6 months

each.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 23.03.2006 at about

05:35 PM, DD No.12A was recorded by PW-5, HC Krishan Lal stating that

a person was lying injured (and seemed to have been stabbed) near

Samadhan School, E and F Block Dakshinpuri. On receipt of this

information, SI Rajeev Kumar (PW-15) reached the spot along with

Constable Hari Singh; he found blood, pieces of broken glass bottle, two

slippers and two buttons of a white shirt lying at the spot. As the injured had

already been removed to Batra hospital, he left Const. Hari Singh at the spot

and went there. He collected the MLC of Khoob Chand, (the deceased)

Ex.PW-4/A, which mentioned that he was brought dead to the

hospital.Ghanshyam, PW-6, the deceased’s brother who was an eye witness

to the incident met the IO. His statement (Ex.PW-6/A) was recorded. PW-6

in his statement stated that he saw Ajay @ Chotu, resident of Tigri, catching

hold of his brother (deceased) while Anil @ Monu, resident of Tigri, was

holding a broken glass bottle in his hand and Vicky, resident of Dakshinpuri

was holding a knife in his hand. He further stated that all the three persons

were known to his brother and they were attacking him. Upon seeing the

appellants attacking his brother, PW-6 stopped his scooter and immediately

rushed to save him but in the meantime Vicky stabbed his brother with a

knife in the abdomen and Monu attacked him with a broken glass bottle. He

2012:DHC:1437-DB

Crl.A 288/2011, Crl.A 402/2011, Crl.A 403/2011 & Crl. M. (Bail) 2196/2011

Page 3

further stated that on seeing him (PW-6) the appellants fled the spot, leaving

his brother in a pool of blood. A PCR van came and PW-6 along with his

brother went to Batra hospital. On the basis of PW-6’s statement, the rukka

was prepared and FIR No. 182 of 2006 was registered under sections 302/34

IPC.

3. After completion of investigation, charges were framed against the

appellants Ajay, Anil and Vicky. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial. The prosecution, to prove its case examined 19 witnesses. The

material witnesses relied upon by the prosecution are PW-6 Ghanshyam,

PW-13 Nirbhay Singh, PW-15 SI Rajeev Kumar and PW-18 Sobhan Singh.

After considering these, and other materials, including exhibits, and

documents placed on record during the trial, the impugned judgment

convicted the appellants in the manner stated earlier, and sentenced them to

undergo various prison terms.

4. Counsel for the appellants argued that the impugned judgment cannot