VIJAY KUMAR KAMAT Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant- Vijay Kumar Kamat impugns judgment dated 12.07.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.54/2009 arising out of FIR No.418/2008 PS S.P.Badli by which he was convicted for committing offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine Rs. 5,000/-.

(2.) Vijay Kumar Kamat was employed with Ravinder Singh in his factory R.J.Industry situated at Gali No.8, Khasra No.22/9/3, Samay Pur Badli where door hinges / kabjas were manufactured and dust was removed with compressor. Vijay Kumar Kamat used to operate the compressor. Sadhu @ Chhotu was working at the nearby tea stall of his relative Shrawan Choudhary and used to deliver tea to the workers in the factory. On 30.09.2008, Sadhu, aged 11 years went to the factory to deliver tea to the workers. It is alleged that Vijay Kumar Kamat pumped air in his stomach by putting compressor pipe on his anus deliberately. It caused injuries to him and he was taken to hospital. Daily Diary (DD) No.15A (Ex.PW-10/A) was recorded at 12.55 A.M. at PS Samay Pur Badli. The investigation was assigned to SI Kuldeep Singh. Sadhu was not fit to make statement. SI Kuldeep Singh lodged First Information Report under Section 326 IPC. After discharge from the hospital, Sadhu's statement was recorded. The Investigating Officer also recorded statement of the witnesses conversant with the facts. Victim's MLC was collected.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant urged that the Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in its true and proper perspective and fell into grave error in relying upon the testimonies of hostile witnesses. It did not appreciate the testimony of material witnesses present in the factory that the appellant was not at fault and Sadhu had sustained injuries due to fall on the compressor. No due weightage was given to the testimonies of the defence witnesses. Vital discrepancies emerging in the statement of the witnesses were ignored. The victim had not lodged any complaint and his statement was recorded after a considerable delay of ten days. The appellant was not a suspect and was not arrested for five days. The doctor, did not specify that the injuries were dangerous in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Learned APP urged that First Information Report was lodged on Daily Diary (DD) No.15A (Ex.PW- 10/A) which recorded that the appellant inserted compressor pipe in the anus which resulted in causing injuries. The injuries were 'dangerous' in nature. The victim remained admitted in hospital for two months.