RAJESH & ANR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both appellants were brought to trial in the court of Sessions (Sessions case no.176/2001) on the charge for the offence of attempt to murder under Section 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the gravamen thereof being that on 10.02.1999, at about 9.15 p.m. in front of dispensary of "C? Block, Camp no.2, Nangloi within the jurisdiction of police station Nangloi ("the police station"). In furtherance of their common intention, they had committed certain acts wherein a dangerous injury was inflicted with a knife on the person of Rajesh, son of Hari Ram (PW-3), by the first appellant Rajesh (A1), aided and assisted by the second appellant Ashok Kumar Patel (A2), with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if such injury had resulted in the death of the said person (victim), they would be guilty of the offence of murder. The trial court, by its judgment dated 24.08.2002, found the appellants guilty, as charged, and convicted them accordingly. By order dated 27.08.2002, sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.5,000/- each was awarded as punishment to the appellants with direction that in the event of default in payment of fine, they would undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months each, the benefit of set off under Section 428 Cr. PC having been accorded.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the aforementioned judgment, and order on sentence, the present appeal was filed, the plea of the appellants being that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case, the injuries having been suffered by the victim on account of fall, certain glass pieces having caused the incised wound in his abdominal region.

(3.) The sentence of imprisonment was suspended, by order dated 24.10.2002, and the appellants were enlarged on bail. The appeal had been admitted, by an earlier order dated 19.09.2002, and was directed to be taken up from the list of "regulars?. It came up in 2014, but the appellants would not appear. This led to bailable warrants being issued to secure their presence. The turn of the appeal to be taken up for hearing from the regulars subsequently came up in January 2019 when once again they were not present. Their presence was secured by duress process.