RANJEET BIHARI Vs. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to a judgment dated 07.03.2012 in Sessions Case No. 136/2011 arising out of FIR No. 40/2009 PS Maurya Enclave by which the appellant -Ranjeet Bihari was convicted under Section 307 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act. By an order dated 17.03.2012, he was awarded RI for seven years with fine Rs. 2,000/ - under Section 307 IPC and RI for two years with fine Rs. 1,000/ - under Section 27 Arms Act. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge -sheet was that on 24.01.2009 at about 06.30 P.M. at LD Block, Maurya Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi, the appellant in furtherance of common intention with his associate Nasiruddin @ Guddu (since acquitted) inflicted injuries to Akhilesh in an attempt to murder him. The police machinery swung into action on getting information about the incident at 09.30 P.M. and Daily Diary (DD) NO. 25A was recorded. The investigation was entrusted to HC Satveer who with Const. Satyender went to the spot. ASI Vinod Kumar after taking over the investigation lodged First Information Report after recording Ajay's statement (Ex. PW -1/A). In the complaint, Ajay (victim's cousin) disclosed that on finding Akhilesh in an injured condition near Metro Station, LD Block, he took him to Muni Maya Ram Jain Hospital and admitted him there. He further informed that on his inquiry as to who was the perpetrator of crime, Akhilesh revealed name of his assailant as Ranjeet Bihari, one of the three culprits. In his statement on 26.01.2009, the victim implicated Ranjeet Bihari, Nasiruddin @ Guddu and their associate for inflicting injuries to him. During investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Both, Ranjeet Bihari and Nasiruddin @ Guddu were arrested. Pursuant to the appellant's disclosure statement, a knife was recovered at his instance. After completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed in the Court; they were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined twelve witnesses to substantiate the charges. In 313 statement, the appellant pleaded false implication and denied his complicity in the crime without examining any witness in defence. The trial resulted in his conviction as mentioned previously. It is relevant to note that Nasiruddin @ Guddu was acquitted of the charges and the State did not prefer to challenge his acquittal.

(3.) AFTER the stabbing incident, Akhilesh was taken to Muni Maya Ram Jain Hospital. MLC (Ex. PW -9/A) records the arrival time of the patient at 08.30 P.M. PW -1 (Ajay)'s name finds mention therein whereby he admitted Akhilesh in the said hospital. Three stab wounds were found on the body. Since the victim was incapable to record statement, FIR was lodged on the Ajay's statement. When Akhilesh was declared fit to make statement on 26.01.2009 his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded in promptitude. PW -9 (Dr. Sandeep) who had medically examined Akhilesh, aged 17 years, on 24.01.2009 brought with the alleged history of 'assault' by a group of persons proved MLC (Ex. PW -9/A) and was of the opinion that injuries were 'grievous' in nature. Daily Diary (DD) No. 25A regarding the stabbing incident came into existence at 09.30 P.M. Since the First Information Report was lodged at 11.30 P.M. immediately, the complainant was not expected to concoct a false story in such a short interval to implicate the appellant for the injuries caused to the victim.