STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION Vs. VINOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - By this appeal, the State challenges the acquittal of Vinod Kumar for an offence under section 307 Indian Penal Code which is alleged to have been committed by him on 30th October, 1976. By the impugned Judgment dated 23rd January, 1979, the teamed trial Court has disbelieved the prosecution allegation that Vi nod Kumar had fired a shot at about 10.05 p.m. injuring his wife Rita in the house of her father, bearing No. WZ- 52, Vishnu Garden, New Delhi. The trial Court accepted the rival version put forth by the respondent herein that in fact a shooting incident had occurred on that very day i.e. 30th October, 1976 near gali No. 46, Regharpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, at about 8.30 p.m. In that shooting incident, Sudhir Bhasin with whom it was alleged that Rita was having illicit relations and also Rita got injured.

(2.) According to the prosecution version which has been rejected, Vinod Kumar had come to his inlaws house i.e. House No. WZ-52, Vishnu Garden, New Delhi in a three wheeler scooter at about 9.45 p.m. on 30th October, 1976. After entering the front room where the members of the family were seated, he fired a shot with his pistol hitting Rita on her nose. Thereafter he ran away. The respondent was chased but he could not be caught hold of. The driver of the three wheeler scooter No. DHR 1993 which was parked near the house, informed Rita's father Shri Behari Lal that the respondent had traveled in that scooter from his house situated at Regharpura, Karol Bagh. On hearing the pistol shot, according to Behari Lat, a number of neighbours had collected and Rita was removed to Willing don hospital by her mother Raj Kumari, and his son namely Vipin. According to the M.L.C. Ex. P.W. 1/B, prepared by Dr. A.L. Goel, Rita when admitted in the Casuality was conscious but her nose was bleeding. Her blood pressure at that time was 100/70 and pulse rate was 102 per minute. What is worth noticing is that neither Rita who was admittedly conscious nor her mother who got her admitted, told the doctor that the shot had been fired by the respondent Vinod Kumar. It is mentioned in the medico-legal certificate under the columns Particulars of injury, Alleged R/O having shot at by somebody. Diagnosis recorded-was that the injury received was a bullet injury. Dr. Goel was not produced but the certificate was got proved through P.W. 24 Shri Nand Lal, Record Clerk of the Hospital. In spite of opportunity granted, the record keeper was not cross-examined. Therefore, the contents of the M.L.C. have to be taken to be correct.

(3.) There is no doubt that Rita received a bullet injury on 30th October, 1976. It is further established that the bullet had been fired from the licenced pistol owned by her husband Vinod Kumar, respondent herein. It is further admitted in cross-examination by the Investigating Officer that on that very day at about 8.30 p.m., there was a shooting incident near gali No. 46, Regharpura in which incident, Sudhir Bhasin admittedly a very good friend and a colleague of Rita got injured. A case under section 307 I.P.C. against the respondent herein for that incident was also pending at the time when the evidence in the present case was being recorded. The learned trial Court has held that Rita had also got injured in the firing incident at Regharpura. The prosecution case-that the respondent had traveled in a three-wheeler scooter which was driven by Yogeshwar Prasad, P.W. 9 from Regharpura to her in-laws house has been rejected. It has been held that it was Rita who had traveled in that scooter after the shooting incident at Regharpura to her father's house.