SHEIKH TAHIR Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the impugned judgment of learned Additional Session Judge, Shahdara, Delhi, rendered on 22nd day of July, 1999, convicting the Appellant for attempting to kill Naushad with a knife by inflicting injuries on his chest and back and also to the order of the same day of the trial court, sentencing the Appellant under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to a fine of Rs.200/ - and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days. Appellant has been also sentenced under Section 27 of the Arms Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to a fine of Rs. 100/ - and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. Both the sentences have been ordered by the trial court to run concurrently.

(2.) ON 9th February, 1997, at about 7.30 PM, Appellant/accused had purportedly attempted to murder Naushad in Gali No. 14, Old Musatafabad, Delhi by inflicting blows on the chest and back of Naushad with a knife (meant for cutting meat) with a view to teach Naushad a lesson for demanding Rs. 30/ - payable to him from the side of the Appellant/accused on account of gambling. This incident is said to have been witnessed by Liyaqat Khan (PW -2) and injured Naushad was removed to the hospital by Dilshad Khan, (PW -1), who had also informed the police. On the statement of Dilshad Khan, (PW -1), FIR of this case was registered and investigation of this case had commenced. During the course of investigation of this case, Appellant/accused was arrested and on his disclosure statement, he had got the weapon of offence, Ex.P -1, recovered from his house. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed against the Appellant/accused in this case for the offences punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Appellant/accused pleaded not guilty to the aforesaid offences with which he was charged and was thus put on trial.

(3.) AFTER having heard both the sides and upon scrutiny of evidence on record, I find that the fate of this case, primarily rests upon the testimony of solitary eye witness Liyaqat Khan, (PW -2). His testimony is assailed by the defence by contending that he is interested witness and his version has been illegally relied upon by the trial court as he has admitted in his evidence that his eye sight is little weak and in the darkness, it becomes more weak and during night time, he is not able to see objects at a distance of 2 to 4 feet. He has also stated in cross - examination by the defence that he had deposed before the court as to what was told to him by Dilshad who had met him on the next day of incident and that he did not go to the spot with the police after this incident.