KAPOOR SINGH RANA Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal arises out of a judgment of conviction under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Delhi in a case in which injury to the victim was caused by throwing acid on her person.

(2.) The salient feature of this case is that the injured, Sunita Devi, on whose statement the FIR was registered expired before the trial could commence. There is no evidence regarding the cause of her death and, therefore, there is no effort to relate her death to the injuries suffered by throwing of acid. Apparently there was no eye witness to the actual occurrence. She named the petitioner as the person who had thrown acid on her. The FIR accordingly recorded the name of the accused. The victim could not be examined during trial. The evidence against the accused/appellant is the testimony of the victis mother who saw the accused leaving the house and claims to have been told by the victim that the appellant had thrown acid on her. Another salient feature of the case is that in the statement of the mother recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.), the name of the accused has not been mentioned. The trial court observed, inter alia, that there was no reason why the accused would have been falsely implicated, that there was no reason to disbelieve the testimony of the mother on the material facts deposed by her and that the evidence on record proved the charge against the accused. Hence the conviction.

(3.) We can now refer to the details of the case. The FIR No.130/94 under Sections 307/34 IPC at police station Saraswati Vihar was registered on 2.4.1994 at 1.40 p.m. on the statement of Sunita Devi. The substance of her statement is as under: