INDERJEET Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-Inderjeet challenges the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 20.01.2011 of learned Addl.Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.4/08 arising out of FIR No.288/04 registered at Police Station S.P.Badli by which he was held guilty under Section 308 IPC. By an order dated 25.01.2011, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three and a half years.

(2.) Allegations against the appellant, as reflected in the chargesheet, were that on 25.05.2004 at about 08.45 pm, at Main Road, Near Mandir, Sector-18, Rohini, Delhi, he inflicted injuries to Rajender Singh by sariya in an attempt to commit culpable homicide. Daily Diary No. 27-A (Ex.PW-1/A) was recorded at 09.45 pm at Police Station S.P.Badli on getting information about admission of injured Rajender Singh at Babu Jagjivan Ram hospital by his wife Balvinder Kaur. The investigation was marked to SI Dhananjay Gupta who with Ct.Narender went to the hospital. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report after recording complainant-Rajender Singh's statement (Ex.PW-2/A). The complainant gave detailed account of the incident and implicated Inderjeet for causing multiple injuries to him by saria. Since the First Information was lodged in promptitude, there was no possibility of the complainant to fabricate or manipulate the incident and to falsely name Inderjeet to be the author of the injuries caused to him. MLC (Ex.PW-3/A) records the arrival time of the patient at Babu Jagjivan Ram hospital at 9.30 p.m. Name of his wife Balvinder Kaur appears in the MLC. He was brought to the hospital by Gopal Singh. Various injuries were found on his body. PW-5 (Dr.Sanjay Kumar) proved the MLC (Ex.PW-3/A) by which the patient was examined by Dr.K.L.Sarvangy, Dr.Mahesh Kumar and Dr.Nitin Puri and following injuries were found on the body :-

(3.) The patient was referred to Trauma Centre for ultrasound and further management. The prosecution examined PW-10 (Dr.Deepak Kumar Singh), Chief Medical Officer, Shaushruta Taruma Centre who deposed that the patient was admitted on 26.05.2004 after being referred from BJRM hospital. He remained under treatment in the Trauma Centre and was discharged on 02.06.2004. He proved the medical documents (Ex.PW-10/A) regarding the treatment given to the victim. As per the medical documents, the injured was treated for perforation of intestines and the patient was operated for exploratory lapratomy at 04.00 a.m. on 26.05.2004 itself. He further deposed that the injuries were life threatening and had medical aid not been provided to him, these could have been fatal. Nature of injuries was opined 'dangerous' by Dr.Choden, Sr.Resident, General Surgery. In fact, injuries suffered by the victim are not under challenge. Specific suggestion was put to PW-2 (Rajender) in the cross-examination that during grappling between him and the appellant, he (the victim) fell down and sustained injuries. The witness volunteered to add that he was hit by a 'saria' by the accused. The complainant denied the suggestion that he had abused the appellant before the appellant attacked him. Defence pleaded by the appellant that the victim sustained injuries due to fall inspires no confidence. No such suggestion was put to the doctors in the cross-examination if the injuries suffered by the victim were possible due to fall.