MADAN LAL @ MANOHAR @ MOTTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges a judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 13.10.2010 in S.C. 82/2007. The Appellant (hereafter called "Madan Lal") was convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I IPC, and directed to undergo life imprisonment and also pay Rs. 5,000/- as fine.

(2.) The prosecution case was that one Kishan, lived in the Ground Floor portion of T- 396, Gali No. 15, Factory Road, Neem Wala Chowk, Nabi Karim, Delhi. It was alleged that PW-14, who was on patrolling duty in Neem Wala Chowk, was informed by PW-2 around 04.00 AM in the morning on 20.03.2007 that Kishan had been stabbed by Madan Lal with a knife and that was lying in a room. It was further stated that PW-14 and PW-2 went to the premises where he found Kishan lying in a seriously injured condition in a room on the Ground Floor. Both, i.e. PW-2 and PW-14 took the victim in a three-wheeler to Lady Harding Hospital. Kishan was declared "brought dead" a fact sought to be established by the MLC (Ex. PW-18/A). Having regard to these facts, a Daily Diary No. 7-A entry (Ex. PW-5/A) was recorded, which formed the basis of the FIR, and investigated. PW-10 and PW-15, both policemen, reached the hospital and recorded the statement of PW-2, under Section 161 Cr.PC (placed on the record) as Ex. PW-2/A. PW- 2 stated that the deceased Kishan was a smack addict whose place used to be frequently visited by other addicts. He also stated about hearing a noise around 03.00 AM on 20.03.2007 from the street near his house (he used to live on the First Floor of the same premises as the deceased, who was his brother). PW-2 further claimed to have witnessed the deceased and the appellant quarrelling (both were smack addicts) with each other; he tried to intervene; but the Appellant had a knife in his hand with which he attacked the deceased and inflicted a knife injury on his left thigh and then fled the spot. PW-2 claims to have given a chase to the Appellant but without success and thereafter returned to Neem Wala Chowk and recounted the episode to PW-14.

(3.) After conclusion of investigation, the Appellant, who had, in the meanwhile been arrested, was charged with commission of the crime. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution relied on the testimony of 18 witnesses, including PW-2, the deceased's brother as well as PW-3, his (PW-2's wife). In addition, the prosecution relied on the testimonies of PWs-10, 11, 14 and 15 as well as the testimony of the doctor, who conducted the Postmortem proceeding, i.e. PW-18. After considering these and other materials placed on the record, the Trial Court held the Appellant guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I IPC and sentenced him in the manner described previously in this judgment.