KULWANT SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition, the Petitioners seek setting aside of the judgment dated 29 th August, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal of the Petitioners filed against the Judgment and order on sentence dated 4 th July, 2009 and 6 th July, 2009 respectively passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate convicting the Petitioners for offences under Sections 323/325/34 IPC and directing them to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of three months.

(2.) Petitioner No. 1, who argued on behalf of all the Petitioners, stated that the doctor, who conducted the MLC, has not been examined. Thus, the medical evidence cannot be read against them. In fact, on 22 nd August, 1996 the Complainant had beaten the Petitioners and their MLCs got done at Swamy Dayanand Hospital(in short SDN Hospital ) are already placed on record. The Complainant Mohit Gaur was not taken to the SDN hospital and police got fabricated MLC of Mohit Gaur prepared, on the basis of which, the Petitioners have been convicted. Instead of Dr. Rajender Gupta, one Dr. Rajiv Gupta was examined as PW10, who was not on duty on the relevant date, that is, 22 nd August, 1996 as per the RTI reply received by the Petitioners. Thus on the basis of fabricated documents, the Petitioners have been convicted and the impugned judgments be thus set aside.

(3.) Learned APP for the State on the other hand contends that PW3 Mohit Gaur is an injured witness, who has been examined in the Court and has proved his complaint on the basis of which this FIR was registered. PW4 Vijay Pal Singh, TSR driver and an eye witness, neighbour of the Complainant has also corroborated the version of PW3. No suggestion of fabricated documents being prepared has been put to the witnesses and thus the same cannot be considered at this stage. The statement of PW3, the injured Complainant, is further corroborated by the MLC and the X-ray, which shows a fracture in the nasal bone. Hence there is no infirmity in the impugned judgments and the petition be dismissed.