T. RAMESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the aforesaid two appeals filed by the appellants is to the judgment dated 28.02.2014 and order on sentence dated 05.04.2014 in Sessions Case No.69/11 arising out of FIR No.273/2011 Police Station Saraswati Vihar, Delhi under Ss.452/392/394/397/34 IPC vide which the appellants were convicted for offences punishable under S.452/34 IPC and 394/397 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years under S. 452/34 IPC with fine of Rs.1,000/ -; in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month; sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment under S. 394 IPC with fine of Rs.2,000/ -; in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under S. 397 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Both the appellants were granted benefit of S. 428 of Cr.PC.

(2.) A2 ­ Radhika worked as a domestic maid in the house of PW2 ­ Smt Veena Guglani at House No. A - 35, Lok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi for one month.On 11.07.2011 at about 12 pm, she came alongwith her daughter Laxmi and requested her to keep her daughter for some work. When complainant refused, she went away. Again at about 2.30 pm, she came along with her daughter and asked for drinking water. However, she was sent back as complainant had some work to do. At about 3:30 pm, again she visited her house and said that she had forgotten her mobile in the house. After taking mobile and drinking water, she went back. At about 6:15pm, she again rang the door bell of complainant and asked for water. The complainant went in kitchen to bring water and when the complainant brought water, Radhika had come inside the house accompanied by her husband ­ T. Ramesh (A -1) and asked water for him as well. She asked the complainant to employ her husband (A -1 ­ T. Ramesh) in the factory whereupon the complainant told A2 that she will talk to her husband. Instead of going, A1 pulled complainant towards the puja room and pushed her head on the floor and gave her beatings and pressed her neck. Despite her resistant, A -1 continued to beat her. In the meantime, complainant heard the screams of her mother -in -law. A1 came to the complainant and started giving her beatings with the walking stick of her mother -in -law. In the mean time, after hearing the screams of her mother - in -law, neighbours raised alarm. Both the accused ran towards the back door. When complainant rescued herself, she saw her mother in law lying in the lobby in a pool of blood. She bolted the inside doors and raised alarm through jalidar door and dialled at 100 number. The police and neighbour came. In the mean time, both the accused broke the lock of back door and managed to escape. However, A2 was apprehended near the under -construction house while A1 managed to flee away. On receipt of DD No.68B, Sub Inspector Surender Kumar (PW17) alongwith Constable Kuldeep Singh (PW14) reached the spot where Constable Sri Krishan (PW8) and HC Praveen (PW12) (beat staff) met him there. Public persons with the help of beat officers were bringing two ladies in injured condition out of the house. One QRT and PCR van also reached at the spot. Both the injured ­ Smt Veena (PW2) and Smt. Shanti (PW1) were shifted to hospital. Smt Veena was found fit for making statement as such her statement Ex.PW12/A was recorded which resulted in registration of FIR by ASI Tej Singh (PW3) Ex.PW3/A. Crime team was called at the spot. Sub Inspector Matadin Meena (PW4) alongwith the team consisting of the photographer ­ Constable Parvinder (PW5), finger print proficient Constable Ramesh reached the spot and found blood stained mark on the main gate of the house up to door of living room. Blood in huge quantity was found at two places in the drawing room and blood stains on the floor of the house. On the sofa, one blood stained stick was also found. Blood was also found on the table and TV rack. One lead glass was found in broken condition. In the other bedroom, blood, broken pieces of bangles and one plastic glove with blood and blood stains were found. Constable Parvinder took 40 photographs of the spot Ex.PW5/B1 to PW5/B40. The articles lying at the spot were seized vide seizure memos by Sub Inspector Surender Kumar (PW17). ASI Dayanand (PW11) also produced A1 who was apprehended by him while he was running on the road and his clothes were stained with blood. Both the accused were arrested vide arrest memos Ex.PW8/F1 and PW8/G1 respectively. MLCs of both the injured were prepared. The doctor handed over the clothes of the victims which were seized. On 20.07.2011, an application for conducting judicial test identification proceedings of A1 was moved. These proceedings were conducted by PW6 - Sh. Vijay Kumar Jha, Metropolitan Magistrate, Rohini Courts. However, accused refused to participate in the proceedings Ex.PW6/B. CDR of phone number 9953900755 recovered from the personal search of A2 and mobile phone number 9582549091 recovered from the personal search of A1 was obtained which reveals the communications done between these two phones at 8.29 and 8.30 hours and location of both the phones at that time was ND Block, Pitampura, Kohat Enclave, Delhi. During the course of investigation, the exhibits were sent to FSL from where results Ex.PW15/A and PW15/B were given by Ms Manisha Upadhyay Sr. Scientific Officer (Biology), FSL, Rohini, Delhi (PW15). After completing investigation, charge -sheet was submitted against both the accused.

(3.) After compliance of S.207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charge for offence under Ss. 452/34, 392/394/397/34 IPC was framed against both the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellants, the prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses.