JAI KUMAR @ JAI @ PAPPU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present appeal, the Appellant challenges his conviction for offence punishable under Sections 324/353/186 IPC and 27 of Arms Act in Sessions case No. 170/1997 and the order on sentence whereby he has been awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year each for offence punishable under Sections 324/353 IPC and 27 Arms Act and Rigorous Imprisonment for three months for offence punishable under Section 186 IPC with all the four sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) IN brief the prosecution case is that on the 5th October 1996 at about 4 p.m., the Appellant was going along with the two co -accused Rakesh and Ratan when PW6 HC Shiv Om at 'Nakabandi' stopped them as one of them was a Badmas of the area. They pushed his motorcycle with the result he fell down. The two other accused persons made on escape whereas the Appellant fled away on the motorcycle. PW6 followed him whereafter the Appellant inflicted an injury to PW6 by the 'ustara' which was in his pocket. The Appellant was apprehended on the spot along with the razor (ustara). Subsequently, co -accused Rakesh Kumar was also arrested and a charge -sheet was filed against both of them after declaring the third accused Ratan a proclaimed offender. A complaint under Section 195 Code of Criminal Procedure Ex. PW10/A was filed by the DCP after perusal of the facts along with the charge -sheet. After examination of the prosecution witnesses and recording of the statements of the accused under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, the co -accused Rakesh was acquitted as he was a lame person and thus the learned Judge held that he could not have got down suddenly from the motorcycle and pushed PW6 and in the absence of any corroborative evidence, gave him the benefit of doubt, and the Appellant was convicted and sentenced as above.

(3.) PER contra, learned APP for the State says that PW6 Shiv Om is the injured Complainant who has described the entire incident. Nothing material has been elicited in his cross -examination. The 'ustara' and the shirt of the Complainant were both blood -stained and the same were sent to the CFSL. The CFSL report Ex. PW13/F mentioned that both the ustara and the shirt were stained with human blood of group 'AB'. Though PW1 & PW2 have turned hostile as to witnessing the incident, but they still corroborated the fact that an incident took place and a phone call was made from their shop whereupon the police came. The doctor was not examined as he was not available in the hospital and in his absence record clerk has proved and exhibited the MLC. There is no enmity between the Appellant and PW6. It is thus prayed that the Appeal be dismissed being devoid of any merit.