Crl. A. 32, 36 and 66/2012. Case: 1. Rajesh Kumar, 2. Vadiwel Vs 1. State, 2. Govt. of NCT of Delhi. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | Crl. A. 32, 36 and 66/2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Vivek Sood, Prem Prakash, Jaydeep Tandon, Sunil Dalal and Himanshu Aggarwal, Advocates and For Respondents: Aashaa Tiwari, APP, Ram Kanwar Dahiya and P.S. Subhash Place, Advs. |
| Judges | Pradeep Nandrajog and Mukta Gupta, JJ. |
| Issue | Indian Penal Code - Section 320 |
| Judgement Date | September 23, 2014 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
Judgment:
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
1. Rajesh Kumar, his father Ramesh Kumar and Vadiwel, a bosom pal of Rajesh have been convicted for having murdered Jagdish S/o Mangal Chand on April 29, 2010 at around 11:45 PM. The judgment is dated October 07, 2011. Vide order on sentence dated October 11, 2011 the three have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and pay fine in sum of ` 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. One Ambu @ Ammu was declared a proclaimed offender. The verdict of guilt is based upon a motive being proved: accused Rajesh and Ramesh bearing a grudge against Jagdish who used to trouble Rajesh's sister Sangeeta The learned Trial Judge has believed the testimony of Kamaal PW- 3, Dilip Kumar PW-19 and Sushil Kumar PW-21. From the call record details Ex.PW-28/B and Ex.PW-28/F the learned Trial Judge has found corroboration to the testimony of Dilip Kumar PW-19.
2. Learned counsel for the three accused have urged at the hearing today that truth has emerged from the testimony of Kamaal PW-3 and that the contours of the incident have been graphically narrated by Kamaal. Learned counsel argued that the material improvements in the deposition of Dilip Kumar PW-19 who was an interested witnesses has been overlooked by the learned Trial Judge.
3. The FIR in question is pursuant to the statement Ex.PW-2/A made by Mohan PW-20, who unfortunately for the prosecution did not support the case of the prosecution, in that, he stood by his statement Ex.PW-20/A of returning home and being outside Om Telecom at House No. A-236, Shakurpur at 11:45 PM. He disclaimed seeing the incident at which Jagdish received injuries. He said that he saw Jagdish lying on the ground with Dilip and Sushil near him. He said that he removed Jagdish in his TSR to the hospital. Mohan's statement Ex.PW-20/A reads as under:-
"Statement of Sh.Mohan, S/o Munni Ram, R/o A-308, J.J.Colony, Shakurpur, Delhi aged 26 years.
I reside at the above given address. I am a TSR driver. Today on April 29, 2010 I was returning to my house in my TSR No. DL 1RE 6843. The time was 11:45 PM when I reached Om Telecom at House No. A-236, Shakurpur. I saw three boys quarrelling with Jagdish, S/o my maternal uncle, Mangal Chand R/o, A-302, Shakurpur, Delhi. The three were holding on to him. The name of one boy is Rajesh, S/o Rames, R/o A- 239, Shakurpur. The second was Vadiwel and the name of the third is Ammu, both of whom reside at G Block, Shakurpur. I had seen the two in the company of Rakesh earlier on and thus I know the three. But I do not know the house number of the two. Rajesh was abusing Jagdish and was accusing him of telephoning his sister and harassing her. He threatened...
To continue reading
Request your trial