KARAMBIR Vs. STATE OF NCT (DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Convicted for offences punishable under Sections 363/307 IPC Karambir challenges the impugned judgment dated May 10, 2012 and the order on sentence dated May 15, 2012 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for offence punishable under Section 363 IPC.

(2.) Assailing the conviction learned counsel for Karambir contends that the conviction of the appellant is based on solitary evidence i.e. the testimony of the victim PW-4 who has turned hostile qua the allegation under Section 307 IPC. It is further submitted that apart from the testimony of the victim, no independent witness was produced by the prosecution to establish that appellant kidnapped the victim PW-4 and tried to kill him. The only independent witness PW-9 Kailash did not support the prosecution case and has turned hostile. It was further alleged the motive behind the commission of the offence has not been established by the prosecution. There was no enmity between Karambir and PW-3 Sudan Kumar, father of the victim and PW-6 Tara Chand, grandfather of the victim.

(3.) Per contra learned APP for the State contends that the motive of the appellant to kill can be gathered from the attending circumstances. Furthermore, the injuries caused to the victim demonstrate the intention of the appellant to kill him.