ROHTAS Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the question of fact is not in dispute. On the night of 9.2.1979. Tara Chand (complainant) and his wife, Soot. Leela Wati were sleeping inside their house in village Bakhtawarpur, after bolting the outer door from inside At about 2 A.M. Tara Chand heard some voice and he woke up. He opened the door and saw Rohtas son of Maha Singh Chauhan, resident of the same village who was residing in his neighbourhood. At that time, Rohtas picked up iron weight of 2 kg. and 10 kg. and hit Tara Chand. Rohtas also caused injuries with mussal, which he picked up from the room. In the meantime. Leela Wati also woke up and she was also injured with mussal by Rohtas. Both of them fell unconscious but Rohtas succeeded in eseaping from that place. At about 7 A.M. one Sattan (P.W. 4) came to the house of Tara Chand for purchasing atta. He found both of them lying injured. He immediately informed P.W. 11. Balbir Singh who in turn, informed the police on telephone and removed the injured to the hospital. P.W. 12 Ram Singh A.S.I. is the 1.0. who conducted the investigation. On coming to know from the scene of incident that Tara Chand and his wife have been removed to the hospital, he went there, collected the M.L.C. and after obtaining the permission from the doctor, recorded the statement of Tara Chand, in which, he not only gave the detailed version of the incident but also level and charges against the accused Rohtas having committed theft of golden earrings of Leela Wati and Rs. 3,000/- from his iron safe. On his statement, he made an endorsement and sent the same to the police station on the basis of which a case under Sections 459/380 I.P.C. was registered. He also took into possession the articles from the place of occurrence, got prepared the site plan and after completing the investigation, filed the challan in the Court.

(2.) In support of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses out of which P.W. 1 Anjul Chaturvedi, P.W. 7, Dr. J.R. Dais, Radiologist were responsible for examining Tara Chand while P.W. 9 Prem Mohan Kapoor, Medical Officer proved the M.L.C. of Leela Wati. The injuries on the person of the accused were found to be simple, Tara Chand and his wife supported the version in all tits material particulars whereas the remaining formal witnesses lent full support to the prosecution version.

(3.) The accused in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. denied the allegations in toto and pleaded that he had been falsely implicated because of the rivalry of the two groups in the village. In defence, he examined three witnesses to support his contention that there are two factions in the village, one beaded by. Sita Ram and the other by the father of the accused and that the accused bears good moral character.