AMIT KUMAR CHAUHAN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 11.07.2009, Police Control Room received information with respect to quarrelling and stabbing by knife at Anuj Vihar Gate. The information, when conveyed to the Police Station Delhi Cantt., was recorded there vide DD No. 34A, a copy of which was given to ASI Bhoop Singh for investigation. When the Investigating Officer reached the aforesaid spot, no eye -witness met him there and he came to know that the injured had been taken, by his family members, to Safdarjung Hospital. The Investigating Officer thereupon reached Safdarjung Hospital, where he came to know that the injured had been taken to the Operation Theatre. On being contracted, the doctor attending the injured opined that he was unfit for statement. Some stab wounds were found on the body of the injured and on the basis of the said stab wounds, an FIR under Section 307 was registered. The statement of injured Kaku @ Sapan, S/o Raju was recorded by the Investigating Officer Inspector Rajinder Meena on the next day. He also recorded the statement of the wife and the brother of the injured. It transpired from their statements that the injured was attacked by the appellant Amit Chauhan, with a knife. The appellant was arrested on the same day. The case of the prosecution is that while in police custody, the appellant made a disclosure statement stating therein that the knife had been thrown by him outside the gate. Pursuant to the aforesaid statement, the appellant took the police officials to near his house and produced one vegetable cutting knife, which was seized after it had been sealed with the seal of RM.

(2.) THE appellant was charge -sheeted under Section 307 of IPC. Since he pleaded not guilty to the charge, as many as 13 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. No witness, however, was examined in defence.

(3.) DURING cross -examination, he admitted that the father of the appellant had lodged a complaint against him with a military personnel alleging that he had snatched Rs 5000/ - from Amit. He also admitted during cross -examination that his mother and wife had reached the placed of incident after 10 -15 minutes of the reaching of his brother, who in turn had come after 10 -15 minutes of the incident. Thus, according to him, the incident was not witnessed either by his brother, mother or wife.