PANKAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment and order on sentence dated 5th May, 2003 vide which the appellant was convicted under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ -, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

(2.) THE case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 21st May, 2000, information was received at PS Kotla Mubarakpur that one person had been stabbed and a quarrel was taking place at J 43 Seva Nagar. The information was recorded vide DD No. 51B and was given to ASI Rajbir Singh for investigation. He went to the spot and came to know that the injured Rakesh had been taken to some unknown hospital. His wife Saraswati met him on the spot. The Investigating officer recorded her statement wherein she alleged that about two years ago, her husband has taken shop of the uncle of Pankaj on rent in Defence Colony Market where he did business of flowers for three months and thereafter vacated the shop. On 19th May, 2000 Pankaj came to their house and placed order for flowers and stated that he would come again on the next day. On 20th May, 2000, Pankaj came to their house along with one more person at about 10:15 p.m. After about 10 minutes, she heard the alarm raised by her husband. She went inside the room and saw that Pankaj stabbed her husband in the stomach and the other person caught her neck. She fell down and both of them ran away. While fleeing away, Pankaj was saying that he had taught a lesson for vacating the shop taken on rent.

(3.) IN order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined ten witnesses. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused while recording his statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. wherein he admitted that injured Rakesh had taken a shop on rent from his uncle about three years prior to 20th May, 2000 and had vacated that shop after about three months. However, he has denied the rest of the case of prosecution. According to him, Rakesh did not want to vacate the shop taken on rent from his uncle and when he vacated the shop, he threatened to teach him a lesson. He examined DW -1 Shankar Dubey in support of his defence, who has deposed that in the year 2000, he used to supply flowers to accused as well as to the injured. There was quarrel between Pankaj and Rakesh as Rakesh was not paying rent of the shop. Pankaj got the shop vacated from Rakesh. While leaving the shop, Rakesh threatened Pankaj to see him later. In the year 2002, he came to know that Pankaj had been implicated in a false case.