Delhi District Court
State vs Md Irfan on 21 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. DHIRENDRA RANA
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE: SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS), NORTH
DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
In the matter of:-
(Sessions Case No. 58834/2016)
(Session Case No. 788/2018)
CNR No. DLNT01-002794-2016
DLNT01-010621-2018
FIR No. 831/2015
833/2015
Police Station S. B. Dairy
Charge sheet filed
Under Section (FIR No. 307/341/34 IPC
831/2015)
Charge sheet filed
Under Section (FIR No. 308/34 IPC
833/2015)
Charge framed Under
Section (FIR No. 307/34 IPC
831/2015)
Charge framed Under
Section (FIR No. 308/34 IPC
833/2015)
Mohd. Irfan s/o Md. Allias r/o D-18/9,
State Vs. Shahbad Dairy, Delhi
(FIR No. Mohd. Imran s/o Md. Allias r/o D-18/9,
831/2015) Shahbad Dairy, Delhi
Shahid s/o Mohd. Basir r/o H. No. B-48,
State Vs. Shahbad Dairy, Delhi.
(FIR No. Naaz Alam s/o Mohd. Basir r/o H. No.
833/2015) B-48, Shahbad Dairy, Delhi.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 1 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 1 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:48:13 +0530
Date of institution (FIR No. 25.02.2016
831/2015)
Date of institution (FIR No. 20.11.2018
833/2015)
Arguments concluded on 29.04.2025
Judgment Pronounced on 21.05.2025
Decision (FIR No. 831/2015) Accused Mohd. Imran
and Mohd. Shahid are
convicted under
section 307/34 IPC
Decision (FIR No. 831/2015) Accused Mohd.
Shahid and Naaz Alam
are acquitted under
section 308/34 IPC
JUDGMENT
Vide this judgment, I shall dispose off two FIRs i.e., FIR No.
831/2015 and FIR No. 833/2015 both registered at police station S. B. Dairy
which are cross FIR related to same incident.
BRIEF FACTS OF FIR NO. 831/2015
1.1 Events which set the prosecution machinery into motion is that on
18.07.2015 on receipt of DD No. 40B regarding quarrel, IO ASI Dayanand
alongwith Ct. Sandeep reached at spot i.e., D-Block Crossing where they came
to know that injured persons had been shifted to BSA Hospital and no eye
witness was found at the spot. Thereafter, IO alongwith Ct. Sandeep reached at
BSA Hospital where injured Fatima Khatoon and injured Shahid found under
treatment vide MLC No. 8618/15 (Fatima Khatoon) and MLC No. 8619/15
(Mohd. Shahid) with alleged history of physical assault. IO recorded statement
of complainant Mohd. Shahid wherein he alleged that his sister got married
with accused Irfan and due to sour relations, his sister used to live at her
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 2 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 2 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:48:40 +0530
parental house. He alleged that at about 11:00 AM when he went to A-Block
Park, accused Mohd. Irfan was also present there and an altercation took place
between them. He further alleged that accused Irfan told that he would beat
him and when he opposed for the same, accused Irfan started abusing him and
manhandled him. Thereafter, he went to Ambedkar Park, B-Block and accused
Irfan followed him and there also he abused him and had a scuffle with him.
He further alleged that thereafter, he came back to his house and after having
meal, he went to D-Block Market to purchase household articles. At about
04:15 PM, accused Mohd. Irfan and his brother met him. They obstructed his
way and told him that they would kill him as he was disturbing them. Both the
accused persons caught hold of him and gave fist and leg blows. Accused
Imran took out a knife type weapon from his wearing pants and stabbed him in
stomach with an intention to kill him. He further alleged that during the
incident, his mother Fatima Khatoon also reached there and accused Irfan took
the knife from the hands of accused Imran and stabbed her many times.
1.2 On the statement of complainant, FIR was registered. Clothes of
injured Fatima Khatoon were seized by the IO and site plan of the place of
incident was prepared. On 21.08.2015, accused Mohd. Irfan and Mohd. Imran
surrendered before the court and they were arrested. Weapon of offence could
not be recovered. Opinion on the MLCs were obtained and as per opinion
given by the doctor, Fatima Khatoon received dangerous injury and accused
Shahid received grievous injuries. It was opined by the doctor that injuries
could be possible due to sharp weapon and can cause death in the ordinary
course of nature. After completion of investigation, charge sheet for the
offences u/s 307/341/34 IPC against accused persons was filed in the court.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 3 of 37 SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 3 of 37 Digitally signed by DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA RANA Date: 2025.05.21 16:48:45 +0530 BRIEF FACTS OF FIR NO. 833/2015 2.1 Events which set the prosecution machinery into motion is that on
18.07.2015 on receipt of DD No. 40B regarding quarrel, IO ASI Dayanand
alongwith Ct. Sandeep reached at spot i.e., D-Block Crossing S. B. Dairy
where they came to know that injured persons had been shifted to BSA
Hospital and no eye witness was found at the spot. Thereafter, IO alongwith
Ct. Sandeep and Ct. Harbhagwan (came during patrolling) reached at BSA
Hospital where injured Mohd. Imran was found under treatment vide MLC No.
8524/15 with alleged history of physical assault. IO recorded statement of
complainant Mohd. Imran wherein he alleged that his elder brother Mohd.
Imran got married and there was some matrimonial dispute between his elder
brother and his wife, who was residing at her parental house from last three
months. He further alleged that at about 04:15 PM, he went to market to
purchase some articles and when he reached at crossing D-Block, S. B. Dairy,
he met, Mohd. Shahid and Naaz, brother in laws of Mohd. Imran and they
were having dandas in their hands. He further alleged that on seeing him,
accused Naaz told to teach him a lesson as they left his sister and started
beating him with leg blows, fist blows and dandas due to which he received
injuries.
2.2 On the statement of complainant, FIR was registered. During
investigation, accused Mohd. Shahid was arrested, site plan was prepared and
disclosure statement was recorded. The injuries were opined to be simple in
nature. After completion of investigation, charge sheet for the offences u/s
308/34 IPC against accused Mohd. Shahid and Naaz Alam (without arrest) was
filed in the court.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 4 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 4 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:48:50 +0530
CHARGE (FIR NO. 831/2015)
3. On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, vide order
dated 15.03.2016, charge under section 307/34 IPC was framed against the
accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
CHARGE (FIR NO. 833/2015)
4. On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, vide order
dated 23.01.2019, charge under section 308/34 IPC was famed against the
accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE (FIR NO. 831/2015)
5. Thereafter, prosecution in support of its case have examined 20
witnesses in all.
FORMAL WITNESSES
6. PW3 SI Puran Chand, being the duty officer, exhibited FIR as Ex.
PW3/1, endorsement on rukka as Ex. PW3/2 and certificate under section 65B
of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW3/3.
7. PW4 Ct. Anand Singh took four sealed pullandas bearing seal of
BSA and four sample seals to deposit the same in FSL Rohini vide RC No.
16/21/16. He deposited the same at FSL and handed over the acknowledgment
received from FSL to MHC(M).
8. PW8 HC Umesh, being MHC(M) exhibited entry at serial No.
2390 as Ex. PW8/1, entry No. 2670 as Ex. PW8/2 in register No.19 qua
deposition of case property in malkhana and RC No. 16/21/16 as Ex. PW8/3
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 5 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 5 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:48:55 +0530
through which four sealed parcels were sent to FSL through Ct. Anand and
acknowledgment thereof as Ex. PW8/4.
9. PW12 Ct. Satyavir deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about 4:22 PM,
wireless operator came to duty officer room and informed him that he had
received information from Control Room regarding some Jhagara at D-18/9,
Shahbad Dairy. He reduced the information in writing vide DD No. 40B which
is Ex. PW12/1.
10. PW13 HC Naresh Kumar deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about
04:19 PM, he received a call from mobile No. 9873781813 and informed that
there was some quarrel at H. No. D-18/09 Shahbad Dairy and injuries had been
caused. He forwarded the call to dispatch section and also to CATS
Ambulance. He exhibited PCR call form 1 as Ex. PW13/1 duly attested by
ACP Gulam Sabir.
11.1 PW15 HC Neeraj deposed that on 18.07.2015, he was on duty on
ERV vehicle bearing No. DL-1CM-4009. At about 04:20-04:22 PM, a call
regarding jhagra had been received. Thereafter, he alongwith his staff reached
at D-Block, Shahbad Dairy, Delhi where he came to know that quarrel had
occurred at Crossing (Chauraha) of D-Block. He reached there where two
persons Mohd. Shahid and Ms. Fatima were found in injured condition. He
took both of them to BSA Hospital and got them admitted there.
11.2 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons he
stated that he reached D-Block crossing after about 4-5 minutes of receiving
the call and a lot of crowd was present when he reached there. He stated that he
himself had not made any entry in any record regarding taking injured persons
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 6 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 6 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:48:59 +0530
to BSA Hospital or regarding his visit to spot.
12. PW16 Dr. Meet Kumar, CMO, Dr. BSA Hospital, exhibited MLC
No. 8618 of injured Fatima Khatoon prepared by Dr. Prasoon Kumar under his
supervision as Ex. PW16/1. He also exhibited MLC No. 8619 of injured Mohd.
Shahid prepared by Dr. Bishwa Mishra under his supervision as Ex. PW16/2.
MATERIAL WITNESSES
13.1 PW2 Fatima Khatoon deposed that her daughter got married to
accused Md. Irfan about two years back and about 2-4 months after marriage,
accused started beating and harassing her daughter over dowry demands. She
further deposed that Irfan and his sister gave beatings to her daughter and told
her to take Rs. 10,000/- and to go away. She further deposed that Nafisa, sister
of Irfan offered to give money in case Irfan did not have money.
13.2 She further deposed that about 2-3 days prior to the date of
incident, Irfan came to his house alongwith 2-3 boys and told her that he would
not take Saira with him but would take away her another daughter Moni with
him.
13.3 She further deposed that on the day of incident, her son Shahid
met Irfan somewhere and some quarrel took place between them. Her son told
her about the quarrel when he came back home. She further deposed that she
told her son that he should not quarrel with Irfan as he is his brother in law.
She further deposed that at about 04:04:15 PM on the day of incident, her son
went to the market and she went out of her house in search of Moni as she was
not present at house. She saw that her son was going towards house of Irfan,
she followed him as she had a doubt that he might start quarrel again. She
further deposed that when she reached there she saw Irfan and Imran were
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 7 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 7 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:05 +0530
giving beatings to her son Shahid and Imran stabbed in abdomen of her son.
She called at number 100 from her mobile. She further deposed that one
shopkeeper Mozim intervened and saved he son. A large crowd also gathered
there. She dragged her son and started moving towards her house. She further
deposed that both accused persons chased her and Imran caught hold of her
and Irfan gave three stab wounds to her on her back.
13.4 She was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State wherein she
stated that Saira had been living with her since March 2015. She stated that she
had been stabbed by Irfan with a blade of scissor. She stated that when she
dragged Shahid, both accused were claiming that they should kill her and her
son.
13.5 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons she
stated that a case i.e., FIR No. 833/15 was also registered against her and her
children. She denied that she had not been stabbed by accused persons and her
son was not stabbed by accused persons. She denied that she and her family
members went to the house of accused persons and attacked them. She denied
that a false case had been registered against the accused persons due to
matrimonial dispute of her daughter.
14.1 PW5 Md. Sabir deposed on the date of incident at about 01:00-
2:00 PM, he saw crowd collected at Shahbad Dairy Chowk and he had not
seen anything else.
14.2 He was cross examined by ld. PP for the State wherein he stated
that he saw the crowd when he was present at his workplace. He denied that he
knew Mohd. Shahid and Fatima. He denied that at the time of incident, he had
seen that accused persons were quarreling with Md. Shahid at the chowk. He
denied that he saw accused Imran stabbing Shahid. He denied that during the
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 8 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 8 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:09 +0530
period, he saw Fatima at the spot and trying to save her son and accused Irfan
snatched knife from Imran and stabbed her. He denied that he saw Shahid
catching hold of any danda and giving beatings to Imran and injured him with
the same.
15.1 PW6 Shahid, who happens to be another injured in this case,
deposed that on 18.07.2015, after morning prayer (Namaz), he went to
Sector-26, Rohini to house of his friend and then had gone to park of A-Block,
Shahbad Dairy where he saw that accused Irfan was sitting in the park
alongwith Firoz and drinking beer. He further deposed that there were 2-4
other boys in the park, who were known to him and accused Irfan told those
boys that he would beat him. He further deposed that in order to avoid
confrontation, he left the park and went to main bus stand Shahbad Dairy and
Irfan also reached there, who again started uttering foul names to him. He
further deposed that physical altercation took place between them, public
gathered there and separated them. Thereafter, he went back his home.
15.2 He further deposed that after some time, he left for market to
purchase some articles and when he reached at main chowk, D-Block, accused
Imran caught hold of his collar from back side, thereafter, Irfan and Imran
started beating him. He further deposed that Irfan left and came back with
kanchi se bana chakoo and stabbed in his abdomen with the same. At the same
time, his mother Fatima Khatoon also reached there and when she tried to save
him, accused Irfan also stabbed her. He further deposed that his mother called
at number 100, however, police did not reach at the spot and thereafter, he and
his mother left for Shahbad bus stand. He further deposed that a police gypsy
was passing from there, they stopped it and the gypsy took them to Ambedkar
Hospital. He further deposed that his statement Ex. PW6/1 was recorded in
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 9 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 9 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:13 +0530
hospital. Imran also came in the hospital after having self inflicted head injury
and a case under section 308 IPC was registered against him. He further
deposed that after some days Dayanand asked him to get fresh blood of his
mother on a blade of scissor and to bring it to police station and claimed that
he would arrest Imran and Irfan, however, he did not take it as his mother
refused for the same.
15.3 He was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State
wherein he stated that his sister got married to Irfan about 15 months prior to
the incident and relations between his sister and Irfan were not cordial. He
denied that accused persons after stopping him said tum hame bahut pareshan
kar rahe ho, aaj jinda nahi chhorenge. He denied that he was stabbed by Imran
but he was stabbed by accused Irfan. He denied that when his mother came,
Irfan snatched the knife from Imran and stabbed her. He stated that he had
never shown the spot of incident to the police as police never took him there.
He stated that clothes worn by him and his mother at the time of incident had
been seized by doctors in the hospital. He exhibited his clothes as Ex. P1
(colly).
15.4 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
stated that there were shops around the spot of incident where he was stabbed.
He could not tell the time when police gypsy was stopped by them. He denied
that no quarrel took place between him and accused persons on the day of
incident and he was never stabbed by any of them. He denied that he never met
Irfan in the park earlier during course of day and no quarrel took place between
them at the bus stand. He denied that injuries sustained by him and his mother
had been sustained by them during course of family quarrel in their house. He
denied that on account of strained relations between Irfan and his sister, they
have falsely implicated them in the present case. He denied that his mother has
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 10 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 10 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:17 +0530
been a complainant in a number of cases which were falsely planted upon
different persons. He denied that they gave beatings to the accused persons.
16.1 PW7 Munjeem deposed that he had not seen any quarrel.
16.2 He was cross examined by ld. PP for the State wherein he stated
that he was running a meat shop at D-Block, Shahbad Chowk and he knew
Md. Shahid and both the accused persons. He could not say if any quarrel
took place between Shahid and accused persons on 18.07.2015 at about 04:15-
04:30 PM at D-Block Chowk. He denied that he saw Imran stabbing Shahid
and Fatima intervening thereupon, Irfan snatched knife from Imran and
stabbed her. He denied that he saw Shahid causing injury to Imran with a
danda.
17.1 PW9 Sonia @ Sayara Khatoon, who happens to be wife of
accused Irfan and sister of injured Shahid, deposed that on 28.04.2014 she got
married with accused Md. Irfan and at her matrimonial home, she was not
treated well by her husband and other in laws. She further deposed that her
sister in law (nanand) used to torture her and used to throw away the articles
brought by her from her parental family stating that ye kya diya hai. She
further deposed that after some time of marriage, her husband and her other in
laws started giving beatings to her. Her brother in law ( jeth) i.e., co-accused
Imran used to abuse her. She further deposed that she stayed at her matrimonial
home for about 9-10 months and when it became unbearable for her and she
felt danger to her life, she returned to her parental home and started residing
there and since then, she was residing at her parental house.
17.2 She further deposed that she made a complaint at CAW Cell
against her husband and her other in laws. Her husband abused her and said to
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 11 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 11 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:22 +0530
her das hazar rupee le lo or mera peecha chor do. She further deposed that her
sister in law (nanand) said that she would pay Rs. 10,000/- to her and she
should have no relation with her husband. She further deposed that on account
of compromise arrived at CAW Cell, she had gone to her matrimonial home
where she stayed for a period of about 2-2½ months and during that period,
behaviour of her husband and other in laws became worse and she was
severely ill treated there. She further deposed that during that period, she got
pregnant and even then her husband Irfan, his brother Imran and their mother
mercilessly beaten her due to which she suffered miscarriage.
17.3 She further deposed that two days prior to 18.07.2015, accused
Irfan came to her mother’s house and abused her. She further deposed that on
18.07.2015 he did hathapai with her brother Shahid, however, his brother
returned home. He further deposed that after some time, her brother Shahid
and her mother Fatima Khatoon went to market for shopping and in the
market, accused Irfan and Imran caused injuries to them.
17.4 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, she
stated that the incident did not occur in her presence. She denied that her
mother and her brother had a quarrel between them and during that quarrel,
injuries were sustained by them.
18.1 PW10 Vikas deposed that at about 04:25-04:30 PM on the day of
incident, when he alongwith his friend Sunil @ Pappu was eating chowmein in
the market near masjid, he saw that his friend Shahid, whom they used to call
as Samir was being beaten by his jija Irfan and his brother Imran. He further
deposed that they saw that mother of Shahid also reached there and tried to
intervene and a scuffle took place. He further deposed that he and Sunil @
Pappu also reached there and tried to intervene and accused persons were
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 12 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 12 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:26 +0530
separated from Shahid and his mother. He further deposed that he saw that
blood was oozing out from the person of Shahid and his mother. Shahid called
at number 100 and he and his mother were shifted to hospital by the PCR van.
He further deposed that he and Sunil also went to hospital where he heard
Shahid saying that injuries had been inflicted by accused persons with the help
of knife to him and his mother. He stated that he had not seen accused persons
giving knife blows to Shahid and his mother.
18.2 He was cross examined by Ld. PP for the State wherein he denied
that he saw accused Imran stabbing Shahid in his abdomen. He denied that he
saw accused Irfan taking knife from the hand of his brother Imran and stabbed
on the back of mother of Shahid.
18.3 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons he
stated that quarrel took place near the house of accused persons and crowd of
about 40 people gathered at the spot at the time of incident. He stated that at
about 05:00 PM, police had not come at the spot but arrived at a distance of
about 100 meters from the spot and police left the place immediately.
19.1 PW11 Sunil @ Guddu deposed on the lines of PW10 Vikas.
19.2 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons he
stated that Irfan was known to him before Shahid came in his contact. He
stated that about 50-60 people gathered at the spot at the time of incident.
WITNESSES OF INVESTIGATION
20.1 PW1 Ct. Sandeep Kumar deposed that on 18.07.2015 on receipt of
DD No. 40B regarding some ‘jhagra’ he alongwith ASI Dayanand went to
D-18/9, Shahbad Dairy where they came to know that jhagra took place at
crossing (chauraha) of D-Block and parties had already been gone to BSA
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 13 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 13 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:31 +0530
Hospital. He further deposed that in the meantime, Ct. Harbhagwan also
reached at the spot and all of them proceeded to BSA Hospital where three
persons were found admitted in respect of the incident. He further deposed that
ASI Dayanand obtained MLC of injured and injured Fatima and her son were
found received stab injuries whereas injured Imran was found to have received
danda blow.
20.2 He further deposed that ASI Dayanand recorded statement of son
of Fatima, prepared rukka and handed over the same to him for registration of
FIR. He went to PS and got the FIR registered and returned back to the spot
alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka and handed over the same to IO. He
further deposed that ASI Dayanand recorded statements of two eye witnesses
at the spot.
20.3 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
stated that statement of no other person except Fatima and Shahid had been
recorded in his presence in the hospital. He stated that one public person,
whose statement was recorded by ASI Dayanand was Shabir whereas he does
not remember the name of other public person.
21.1 PW14 ASI Awran deposed that on 21.08.2015 he joined the
investigation and accompanied ASI Dayanand and Ct. Ashok to Rohini Courts
as accused Imran and Irfan surrendered before the court. He further deposed
that IO moved an application before the court seeking permission to
interrogate accused persons and arrest them. After obtaining permission from
the court, accused persons were interrogated and arrested vide arrest memos
which are Ex. PW14/1 (Irfan) and Ex. PW14/4 (Imran), their personal search
was conducted vide personal search memos which are Ex. PW14/2 (Irfan) and
Ex. PW14/5 (Imran) and their disclosure statements were recorded which are
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 14 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 14 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:35 +0530
Ex. PW14/3 (Irfan) and Ex. PW14/6 (Imran).
21.2 He further deposed that IO obtained one day PC remand of
accused persons and accused persons led them to their house where efforts
were made to trace out the scissor used in the commission of offence but same
could not be traced. He further deposed that accused persons pointed out the
placed of occurrence vide pointing out memos which are Ex. PW14/7 (accused
Irfan) and Ex. PW14/8 (accused Imran).
21.3 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons he
stated that at the place of occurrence, IO had not asked any public person to
join the proceedings. He stated that the place of occurrence was surrounded by
residential area, jhuggi cluster and shops etc.
22. PW17 Retd. SI Satish Chander deposed that on 21.08.2015
accused Imran and Irfan were arrested by ASI Dayanand in court premises. He
further deposed that on that day, he was present in the court complex and on
the request of ASI Dayanand, he moved an application before Ld. MM seeking
one day PC remand of both accused persons which is Ex. PW17/1.
23. PW18 Ct. Kamal, deposed that on 05.12.2015, he alongwith IO
ASI Dayanand reached at BSA Hospital where concerned doctor handed over
blood sample of Mohd. Shahid and Ms. Fatima Khatoon to IO which were
seized by IO vide seizure memo which is Ex. PW18/A.
24. PW19 ASI Ashok Kumar deposed on the lines of PW14 ASI
Awran about the arrest of accused persons.
25. PW20 Retd. SI Dayanand being the IO in this case deposed about
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 15 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 15 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:40 +0530
the investigation carried out by him and on the lines of PW1 Ct. Sandeep
Kumar, PW14 ASI Awran and PW19 ASI Ashok Kumar. He exhibited rukka as
Ex. PW20/A, site plan as Ex. PW20/B, seizure memo as Ex. PW20/C.
26. Accused persons admitted opinion 167/15 prepared by Dr. Vijay
Dhankar, BSA Hospital which is Ex. A1 and MLC No. 15731 and 15732
prepared by Dr. Binni Dua, BSA Hospital which are Ex. A2 and Ex. A3 vide
statement recorded under section 294 CrPC on 11.10.2022.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE (FIR NO. 833/2015)
27. Prosecution in support of its case, have examined 9 witnesses in
this FIR.
FORMAL WITNESSES
28. PW1 SI Puran Chand, being the duty officer, exhibited FIR as Ex.
PW1/1, endorsement on rukka as Ex. PW1/2 and certificate under section 65-B
of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW1/3.
29. PW5 Dr. Rekha Diwan, proved MLC of Mohd. Imran as Ex.
PW5/A prepared by Dr. Bishnu Mishra. She deposed that on 17.09.2015, Dr.
Ravi Kumar has given the opinion that injuries suffered by the patient were
simple in nature.
30. PW7 Ct. Satyavir Singh deposed that on 18.07.2015 at around
04:22 PM, he recorded DD No. 40B regarding quarrel and injury which was
received from wireless operator as Ex. PW7/A.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 16 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 16 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:44 +0530
31.1 PW9 Dr. Meet Kumar deposed that on 18.07.205 at about 05:07
PM, patient Mohd. Imran was brought to hospital by HC Bindu with history of
physical assault, who was examined by Dr. Bishwa Mishra, JR under his
supervision. He further deposed that patient had multiple horizontal lacerated
wound over the frontal and occipital part of head. He further deposed that after
examination and initial treatment, patient was referred to Surgery Department.
He proved MLC as Ex. PW9/A.
31.2 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
stated that as pe content of MLC, no other injury was present on the body of
patient except mentioned in the MLC. He stated that injuries suffered by
patient could have been inflicted with the help of a danda. He denied that all
the injuries suffered by the patient were of similar dimensions.
MATERIAL WITNESSES
32.1 PW2 Mohd. Imran, who happens to be complainant/injured in this
case, deposed that Mohd. Irfan is his younger brother, who had married with
sister of accused Shahid and Naaz. He further deposed that wife of his brother
Irfan had some matrimonial issues and she was living with her parents.
32.2 He further deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about 04:15 PM, when
he was going to D-Block, Chauraha for taking household articles, accused
Shahid and Naaz alongwith their associates met him. He further deposed that
accused Shahid and Naaz were having dandas in their hands and on seeing him
(PW2), accused Naaz threatened him to teach him a lesson as they (PW2 and
his family) had abandoned his sister. He further deposed that accused Shahid
and Naaz attacked him and gave him danda blows due to which he received
injuries on his head and on his back. He further deposed that their 2-3
associates also gave beatings to him, however, he did not know their names.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 17 of 37 SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 17 of 37 Digitally signed by DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA RANA Date: 2025.05.21 16:49:49 +0530
He further deposed that he was taken to Ambedkar Hospital. He exhibited his
statement as Ex. PW2/A recorded by Police.
32.3 He further deposed that on 11.07.2016, accused Shahid was
arrested by police and he signed arrest memo which is Ex. PW2/B. He further
deposed that he also signed memo which is Ex. PW2/C when accused Naaz
Alam was arrested.
32.4 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
stated that at the time of incident, accused Shahid was not admitted in the
hospital. He denied that they had lodged the present FIR registered as a counter
case lodged by the accused persons against him. He further denied that he was
not beaten up in the present case and the incident had taken place only with his
brother. He further denied that he had lodged the present case against the
accused persons just to pressurize them to withdraw the case lodged by their
sister against his brother.
WITNESSES OF INVESTIGATION
33. PW3 Ct. Gaurav deposed that on 11.07.2015, he joined the
investigation with IO SI Ved Prakash and went to house/ jhuggi of complainant
Mohd. Imran. He further deposed that complainant took them to the jhuggi of
accused Shahid and pointed out towards the accused. He further deposed that
IO arrested accused Shahid and conducted his personal search.
34.1 PW4 HC Pradeep deposed on the lines of PW3 Ct. Gaurav as he
joined the investigation with IO and PW3 Ct. Gaurav.
34.2 In addition, he deposed that IO recorded disclosure statement of
accused which is Ex. PW4/A. He further deposed that accused took them to
place of incident and pointed out the place of incident vide pointing out memo
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 18 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 18 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:49:56 +0530
which is Ex. PW4/B.
34.3 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
admitted that he was aware that sister of accused had got initiated CAW
proceedings against the complainant. He stated that he was not aware that
another FIR under section 307 IPC was got registered by mother of accused
against the complainant and the present FIR is a counter blast to that FIR. He
denied all the suggestions put forth on behalf of accused persons.
35.1 PW6 SI Ved Prakash, being the IO in this case, deposed about the
investigation carried out by him. He exhibited notice under section 41.A CrPC
served upon co-accused Naaz Alam as Ex. PW6/A.
35.2 During cross examination done on behalf of accused persons, he
stated that two criminal cases were pending against the complainant. He denied
that accused persons were not involved in the incident and a false case was
registered against the accused persons by the complainant due to previous
enmity.
36. PW8 Retd. SI Dayanand deposed that on 18.07.2015, on receipt of
DD No. 40B, he alongwith Ct. Sandeep went to the spot i.e., D-18/9, Shahbad
Dairy, Delhi where he came to know that the quarrel took place at D-Block
crossing (Chauraha) and injured had already been taken to BSA Hospital by
PCR Van. During that period, Ct. Har Bhagwan also came there. He further
deposed that thereafter, he went to BSA Hospital alongwith Ct. Sandeep and
Ct. Harbhagwan where he found injured Mohd. Imran admitted. He further
deposed that he obtained MLC of injured Mohd. Imran and recorded his
statement. He further deposed that he also met opposite party Mohd. Shahid
and Fatima as they were also found having injuries on their person. He further
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 19 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 19 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:01 +0530
deposed that on the basis of statement of Mohd. Imran, he prepared rukka
which is Ex. PW8/A and got the FIR registered through Ct. Har Bhagwan. He
further deposed that thereafter, investigation of the present case was marked to
ASI Rajender and FIR No. 831/15 was marked to him for investigation.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 Cr.P.C (FIR NO.
831/2015)
37.1 After closure of PE, statement of accused was recorded u/s 313
Cr.P.C. on 11.09.2023, wherein they denied all the incriminating evidences put
to them. They stated that they have falsely implicated in this case.
37.2 Accused Irfan stated that on the occasion of Eid he went out
where he met his formal friend (who is close friend of PW6) with whom he
had drinks. Later on they moved to Park in A-Block where PW6 was already
present. There were some hot talks were exchanged between him and PW6.
From there he started moving towards B Block at his maternal grandmother
house. When he reached near Ambedkar Park B-Block, Shahid also came there
and a quarrel took place between him and Shahid. Public persons intervened
and thereafter, they went to their respective houses. Later on, one of the
neighbour informed him that few persons were beating his brother Imran. He
went there to intervene. Police reached at the spot and took his brother to
hospital where he was medically examined. Later on a cross FIR was lodged
by his brother against PW6 Shahid.
37.3 Accused Imran stated that on the day of incident he was working
as a DTC driver at Rohini Depot-4. After coming back from his work, he went
to main market, Shahbad Dairy to purchase some food items for his family. In
the market, Shahid (PW6), who is brother in law of his brother, some hot
words were exchanged with PW6 Shahid. Few muscle men were standing
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 20 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 20 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:07 +0530
beside him carrying danda, lathis and iron pipe. They started beating him
brutally. While some of his fellow friends namely Vijay @ Gappu and
Chandan came to rescue him at that time PW6 alongwith his brother ( chota
bhai) and brother in law (jija) with some other muscle men ran away. After that
Vijay @ Gappu had made call at number 100. After that PCR came at the spot
and took him to BSA hospital where he was medically examined. A cross FIR
has also been lodged against PW6.
Both accused persons opted to lead defence evidence.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 Cr.P.C (FIR NO.
833/2015)
38. After closure of PE, statement of accused persons were recorded
u/s 313 Cr.P.C. on 08.05.2024, wherein they denied all the incriminating
evidences put to them. They stated that they have been falsely implicated in
this case as there was a matrimonial dispute between their sister and brother of
PW2.
Both accused persons opted to lead defence evidence.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE IN FIR NO. 831/2015
39. Vide joint statement recorded on 07.10.2023, both accused
persons closed their defence evidence as they did not want to lead defence
evidence.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE IN FIR NO. 833/2015
40.1 DW1 Fatima Khatoon deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about 04:00-
04:15 PM, her son Shahid had gone to the market. She further deposed that she
could not see her daughter Moni and in search of her daughter, she reached D-
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 21 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 21 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:11 +0530
Block Crossing where she saw that Imran and Irfan were beating her son
Shahid. She further deposed that she called the police at number 100 from her
mobile. She further deposed that accused Imran stabbed her son Shahid in
abdomen. She dragged Shahid and moved towards her house. She further
deposed that in the meantime, Imran and Irfan chased her with an intention to
kill her and her son. She further deposed that Imran caught hold of her and
Irfan stabbed her thrice on her back due to which she had nine stitches on her
back and twenty stitches on her abdomen. She further deposed that her son
Naaz was not present during the incident. PCR reached at the spot and shifted
them to Ambedkar Hospital where she was medically examined vide MLC No.
8618 which is Ex. DW1/A.
40.2 During cross examination done on behalf of State, she stated that
her daughter Saira started living with them after six months of her marriage
with Irfan. She stated that Saira became pregnant after the marriage but due to
the beatings given by Irfan, she suffered a miscarriage. She stated that her
daughter Saira starting living with them due to the beatings and torture given
to her by her in laws for want of dowry. She stated that when she reached at the
spot, crowd was already gathered there surrounding her son and Imran and
Irfan. She stated that when she reached at the spot, Imran and Irfan had already
given beating to her son Shahid. She stated that public persons were
intervening between the quarrel and she could not intervene as she was busy
in making call to the police.
40.3 Upon specific question put to her she stated that after taking her
son from the spot, she rushed towards her house as she had already made a call
to the police.
40.4 She stated that after getting the stab injuries, she was in her senses
at that time. She stated that she sustained injuries at market D-Block Chowk,
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 22 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 22 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:16 +0530
Shahbad Dairy where her son Shahid sustained injuries. She stated that her
daughter Moni is not mentally fit and she was not present at house on
18.07.2015, that is why she went in search of her daughter Moni in her
neighbourhood houses i.e., houses of Hasina and Zakir Khan and thereafter,
she headed towards D Block Chowk in search of her daughter. She stated that
she did not lodge any missing complaint of her daughter Moni. She denied all
the suggestions put on behalf of State.
41.1 DW2 Shahid deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about 04:00-04:15
PM, he sent to market to purchase some articles and when he reached Main
Chowk, D-Block, Imran and Irfan caught hold of him and started beating him.
He further deposed that Imran took out a knife made of scissors and stabbed in
his abdomen. He further deposed that in the meantime, his mother also came
there and on seeing the incident, she tried to save him. At that time both the
Imran and Irfan told that they would kill both of them (DW2 and his mother).
He further deposed that Imran caught hold of his mother whereas Irfan stabbed
his mother. He further deposed that his mother called at number 100. PCR
reached at the spot and shifted them to Ambedkar Hospital where he was
medically examined vide MLC No. 8619 which is Ex. DW2/A.
41.2 During cross examination done on behalf of State, he admitted
that his sister had some matrimonial issue with her husband and she was living
with them. He admitted that on the date of incident, complainant Mohd. Imran
met him. He denied that on that day, his brother Naaz was also with him and
they both were carrying dandas. He further denied that accused Naaz on seeing
Mohd. Imran threatened him that they would teach him a lesson as they had
abandoned their sister. He further denied that he and his brother Naaz attacked
complainant and gave him danda and fist blows. He further denied that he
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 23 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 23 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:26 +0530
alongwith his brother Naaz had caused injuries on the head of Mohd. Imran.
He further denied that Imran and Irfan did not cause any injury to him and his
mother and their injuries were self inflicted.
42.1 DW3 Naaz Alam deposed that on 18.07.2015 at about 02:00 PM,
he went to house of his sister on occasion of Eid and he remained there till
05:00 PM. He further deposed that thereafter, he received a call from his
neighbour, who informed him that his brother and mother had been stabbed
and they had been shifted to Ambedkar Hospital by PCR van. He further
deposed that he reached at hospital at about 05:30 PM and found that his
mother and brother were admitted there.
42.2 During cross examination done on behalf of State, he stated that
he received a call from his neighbour around 05:30 PM. He stated that he took
around 10-15 minutes in reaching BSA Hospital from his sister’s house. He
denied that he was present at the residence of his sister on 18.07.2015 and he
was not present at the spot at the time of incident. He denied all the
suggestions put on behalf of State.
43.1 DW4 Ali Hasan deposed that on 18.07.2015, he invited Naaz
Alam on the occasion of Eid, who came to his house at 02:00 PM and stayed
there till 05:00-05:30 PM. He further deposed that Naaz Alam received a
phone call and the caller informed that his brother and his mother had
sustained injuries with knife. He further deposed that Naaz Alam shared this
fact with him and thereafter, he left.
43.2 During cross examination done on behalf of State, he stated that
Naaz Alam did not disclose to him, who had caused injuries to his mother and
brother. He further deposed that Naaz Alam received phone call around 05:00
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 24 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 24 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date:
2025.05.21
16:50:30 +0530
PM to 05:30 PM. He stated that the distance between his house and D-Block,
Shahbad Dairy Chauraha is around 5 km. He denied that Naaz Alam did not
visit his house on 18.07.2015 and he alongwith his brother Shahid was present
at the place of incident where he alongwith his brother Shahid had caused
injury to complainant Mohd. Imran. He stated that he did not make any
complaint to the police authority or before the court concerned that Naaz Alam
was present at his house on the date of incident and he has been falsely
implicated in this case.
44.1 DW5 Vikas deposed that on the date of incident i.e., on the
festival of Eid, at around 04:00-04:30 PM, when he was having chowmein at a
Kiosk in D Block Market, he saw that Imran and Irfan were giving beatings to
his friend Shahid. He further deposed that mother of accused Shahid also came
there. He further deposed that he intervened between them and saw that Shahid
and his mother were given beatings by Irfan and Imran and blood was oozing
out from the abdomen of Shahid and from the back of his mother. He further
deposed that thereafter, Shahid called PCR at number 100. PCR came at the
spot and took Shahid and his mother to BSA Hospital and at that time Naaz
Alam was not present at the spot.
44.2 During cross examination done on behalf of State he admitted that
he is a witness in FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy and his statement was
recorded as a prosecution witness in that case. He stated that he did not report
the matter to any authority that Shahid and his mother were beaten by Imran
and Irfan. He denied all the suggestions put on behalf of State.
45. Vide joint statement recorded on 06.11.2024, both accused
persons closed their defence evidence.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 25 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 25 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:39 +0530
46. Thereafter, matter was fixed for final arguments.
ARGUMENTS
47. I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for State and Sh. Jai Subhash Thakur,
Ld. Counsel for accused Imran and Irfan (accused in FIR No. 831/2015 and
complainant in FIR No. 833/2015) and Sh. Mayank Sangwan, Ld. Counsel for
accused Shahid and Naaz Alam (accused in FIR No. 833/2015 and
complainant in FIR No. 831/2015).
FINAL ARGUMENTS IN FIR NO. 831/2015
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
48. It was argued by Ld. Addl. PP that the allegations levelled against
the accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan are serious in nature. They stabbed
complainant Shahid and his mother Fatima with the help of a part of scissors
with an intention to commit their murder and inflicted injuries on their vital
parts multiple times. It is further submitted that both accused were annoyed as
PW9 Saira Khatoon had lodged a complaint in CAW cell against her husband
Mohd. Irfan. It is submitted that the incident occurred in day light in a market
area and was witnessed by PW Mohd. Sabir, PW Sunil, PW Vikas and PW
Mujeeb. All these witnesses have corroborated the version of complainant
Shahid and Fatima as to how they suffered injuries at the hands of accused
persons. Injuries suffered by them were opined to be dangerous and grievous in
nature. Hence, prosecution has successfully proved its case under section
307/34 IPC against both the accused persons.
49. Ld. Counsel for the complainant Sh. Mayank Sangwan has argued
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 26 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 26 of 37
Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:45 +0530
on the lines of Ld. Addl.PP for the State and prayed for conviction of the
accused persons.
It was further argued that all the police officials have clearly
proved the chain and the manner of investigation and merely because the
witnesses are police officials their testimony cannot be disbelieved and for this
reliance is placed on the case of Girija Prasad Vs. State of M.P. (2007) 7 SCC
625.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED MOHD. IRFAN AND IMRAN
50. It is argued by Sh. Jai Subhash Thakur, ld. Counsel for accused
persons that complainant had attacked upon the accused persons and they were
duly armed with wooden dandas. They had inflicted injuries on the head of
accused Mohd. Imran. The present FIR was lodged by the complainant against
the accused persons by inflicting injuries upon himself and his mother as they
were annoyed because accused Mohd. Irfan had a matrimonial discord with his
wife Saira. It is submitted that despite best efforts police could not recover the
alleged weapon of offence. The public witnesses have not corroborated the
testimony of complainant and his mother and in fact, complainant alongwith
his brother Naaz Alam is likely to be convicted in FIR No. 833/2015. It is
further submitted that both accused persons are entitled to be acquitted as
prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond
reasonable doubt.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE IN FIR NO. 833/2015
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
51. It is argued on behalf of State that accused Shahid and Naaz Alam
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 27 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 27 of 37
Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:50:54 +0530
caused injuries on the head of complainant Mohd. Imran during the incident. It
is submitted that in both the FIRs, accused persons are likely to be convicted as
prosecution has proved its case against all of them beyond reasonable doubt.
52. Ld. Counsel for the complainant Sh. Jai Subash Thakur has argued
on the lines of Ld. Addl.PP for the State and prayed for conviction of the
accused persons.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED SHAHID AND NAAZ ALAM
53. It is argued by Sh. Mayank Sangwan that this FIR is a counter
blast which is based upon false and concocted version of the incident. It is
submitted that injuries suffered by complainant Imran are self inflicted as it is
not possible to hit a person with a wooden danda horizontally, if he is being
attacked from front. It is further submitted that apart from the alleged head
injury, no other injury was found present on the body of complainant Imran
which is in contradiction of the story that he was attacked by the accused
persons with danda, saria and fist blows. How come a person could suffer
injury only on his head not on any other part. It is further argued that the MLC
of accused Mohd. Shahid in FIR No. 831/2015 is prior to the MLC of
complainant herein. It is submitted that complainant Imran reached hospital
after inflicting injuries upon his head to save himself and his brother from
punishment as they had stabbed accused Shahid and his mother Fatima. It is
submitted that prosecution has miserably failed its case against the accused
persons under section 308/34 IPC and they are entitled to be acquitted.
54. I have heard the arguments at length and perused the entire record.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 28 of 37 SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 28 of 37 Digitally signed by DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA RANA Date: 2025.05.21 16:50:59 +0530 FINDINGS
55. The accused Mohd. Irfan and Mohd. Imran have been charged for
the commission of offences punishable under sections 307/34 IPC. Accused
Shahid and Naaz Alam have been charged for committing offence punishable
under section 308/34 IPC.
56. The relevant sections are reproduced as under:
SECTION 307 IPC
Attempt to murder.–Whoever does any act with
such intention or knowledge, and under such
circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he
would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act,
the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment
for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore
mentioned. Attempts by life convicts.–2[When any
person offending under this section is under sentence
of 1[imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused,
be punished with death.]SECTION 308 IPC
Attempt to commit culpable homicide.–Whoever
does any act with such intention or knowledge and
under such circumstances that, if he by that act
caused death, he would be guilty of culpable
homicide not amounting to murder, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to three years, or with fine,
or with both; and, if hurt is caused to any person by
such act, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, or with fine, or with both.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 29 of 37 SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 29 of 37 Digitally signed by DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA RANA Date: 2025.05.21 16:51:12 +0530 SECTION 34 IPC Acts done by several persons in furtherance of
common intention.–When a criminal act is done by
several persons in furtherance of the common
intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that
act in the same manner as if it were done by him
alone.]
57. It is a settled law of criminal jurisprudence that a person is
believed to be innocent till the guilt is proved against him. This principle is
called The Presumption of Innocence. In another words, the accused is entitled
to take advantage of reasonable doubt in respect of his crime. The principle
finds its genesis in the Declaration of Human Rights under Article 11 Section 1
incorporated by the United Nations in 1948. It is also mentioned in the
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights in Article 6 Section
2 and United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
under Article 14, Section 2.
Presumption of Innocence is a re-statement of the rule that in
criminal matters the prosecution has the burden of proving guilt of the accused
in order to be convicted of the crime of which he is charged.
In Chandrashekhar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh decided on
06.07.2018 relying on judgment of Data Ram Singh Vs. State of UP passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 06.02.2018, it was held that:
“the freedom of an individual is utmost important and cannot
be curtailed specially when guilt if any, is yet to be proved.It
is settled law that till such time guilt of a person is proved, he
is deemed to be innocent…….. A fundamental postulate of
criminal juris prudence is a presumption of innocence
meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until
found guilty……….
Thus, the inference which is culled out from the above is that it is
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 30 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 30 of 37Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:17 +0530
for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
58. In this backdrop, I proceed to delve upon the evidence adduced on
behalf of the prosecution.
59. In FIR number 831/2015, accused Irfan and Imran are facing trial
on the allegation that they attacked complainant Shahid. Accused Imran
stabbed the complainant and when Fatima came to his rescue, accused Imran
caught hold of her whereas accused Irfan stabbed her multiple times. Both
accused are facing trial under section 307/34 IPC.
60. Complainant Shahid has been examined as PW6 whereas PW
Fatima has been examined as PW2. Both these witnesses, have corroborated
each other on material aspects. They have been thoroughly cross examined on
behalf of accused persons, but nothing material could be extracted by the
defence counsel. Barring suggestions, which have been totally denied by these
witnesses, no effective defence has been put by the accused persons. It is not
the case that both these accused persons were not present at the spot at the time
of occurrence. There is not even a single suggestion in this regard. Therefore, it
is duly proved that accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan were present at the
spot at the time of incident.
61. Prosecution has examined four independent witnesses for the
purpose of corroboration of testimonies of complainant and his mother. PW5
Mohd. Sabir has turned hostile on material aspects but he admitted that he was
present at his work place and had seen the gathering of public at the time of
incident. Meaning thereby, he had proved the fact that the incident occurred at
Shahbad Dairy Chowk as claimed by complainant and his mother.
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 31 of 37 SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 31 of 37 Digitally signed by DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA RANA RANA Date: 2025.05.21 16:51:23 +0530
62. Second independent witness is PW7 Mujeeb. He has also turned
hostile but he admitted that he knew complainant as well as accused persons
and he used to run a meat shop at D-Block, Shahbad Dairy chowk. His
testimony is of no consequence in respect to allegations in both the FIRs. Third
independent witness is PW10 Vikas, who admitted that around 04:25-04:30
PM, he was present in the market with PW11 Sunil @ Guddu. He stated that
accused persons were beating the complainant. He also supported the version
of the prosecution that Fatima reached there and tried to intervene. He stated
that blood was oozing out from the bodies of Shahid and Fatima. PCR van
reached there and he alongwith PW11 Sunil went to the hospital. Therefore,
this witness has corroborated the sequence of incident described by
complainant and his mother against the accused persons barring the fact that he
had seen the accused persons stabbing the complainant and his mother.
Meaning thereby, the presence of both the parties, the occurrence of incident
and the injuries sustained by the complainant and Fatima are duly corroborated
by this witness.
63. Statement of PW11 Sunil is more or less similar to PW10 Vikas
regarding the presence of parties at the spot, however, he has turned hostile
that he had seen accused persons stabbing the injured persons in his presence.
Therefore, these four public witnesses have not deposed the fact that accused
persons had stabbed the complainant and his mother but the other material
aspect of the incident stands proved by them. Hence, the untainted and reliable
testimonies of the complainant and Fatima are sufficient enough to prove the
fact that they were stabbed by accused persons.
64. Although, police could not recover the weapon of offence but that
is of no consequence in proving the allegation under section 307/34 IPC.
Recovery and exhibition of weapon of offence is not a sine qua non for
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 32 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 32 of 37Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:27 +0530
bringing home a charge against any accused persons and law is settled in this
regard. PW16 Dr. Meet Kumar has proved MLC of Fatima Khatoon and PW
Mohd. Shahid both dated 18.07.2015 as Ex. PW16/1 and Ex. PW16/2. This
witness has not been cross examined on behalf of accused persons and
moreover, the subsequent opinion qua the nature of injury has been admitted
by the accused persons under section 294 CrPC. Therefore, it is proved by the
prosecution that complainant and Fatima Khatoon had suffered grievous
injuries caused by a sharp edged weapon which is opined to be dangerous in
nature.
65. Now, the next question for consideration before this court as to
whether the intention of the accused person was to commit murder or not. Law
is settled that the intention has to be gathered on the basis of the weapon used
in the offence, number of injuries caused upon the injured, the part of the body
on which injuries have been inflicted and the nature of injuries. As per MLC of
complainant, he had an incised wound on umbilical region of abdomen of size
3×0.5×1 cm whereas PW2 Fatima had three incised wound over lower back of
size 3 cm x1 cm. Depth of these injuries were measured as 2/3rd of a little
finger. She had also an abrasion over right occipital region and a lacerated
wound of size 1cm x 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm at right amicula region. Meaning
thereby, both the injured persons had suffered injuries on their vital part of
their bodies which could have been fatal for them. Injured Fatima was stabbed
thrice which is suggestive of the intention of the accused persons and it has to
be presumed that they attacked her and complainant with an intent to kill with
a deadly weapon and inflicted injuries on their vital parts.
66. Keeping in view the above discussion, this court is of the
considered view that prosecution has successfully proved its case against the
accused persons under section 307/34 IPC. Accused Imran stabbed the
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 33 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 33 of 37Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:31 +0530
complainant on his abdomen and when his mother Fatima came to his rescue,
co-accused Irfan stabbed her thrice on her back while accused Imran caught
hold of her.
67. Now, coming to the facts of FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy.
In this case, Mohd. Imran is the complainant and accused are Mohd. Shahid
and Naaz Alam. Complainant Mohd. Imran alleged that around 04:15 PM he
had gone to market of D Block Shahbad Dairy. Both accused persons were
armed with dandas. Accused Naaz Alam statd that isne humari behen ko
chhoda hai, aaj issko sabak sikhate hain. Thereafter, both the accused persons
assaulted him with leg and fist blows and caused injuries on his head with the
help of wooden danda. Complainant was medically examined in the hospital
on the same day at more or less same time of medical examination of Mohd.
Shahid and his mother Fatima.
68. First of all, complainant has not mentioned in his complaint that
his brother Irfan was also present at the spot and resultantly, Mohd. Irfan is not
a prosecution witness in this case. This fact is in contradiction of defence of
accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan in FIR No. 831/2015. During cross
examination of PW2 Fatima and PW6 Mohd. Shahid, it is no where suggested
to them that Mohd. Irfan was not present at the spot and it amounts to
admission of the fact that Irfan was also present at the spot. If that was the
reality then complainant Mohd. Imran in the present case, should have
mentioned his presence in the complaint given to the police. Mohd. Imran has
been examined as PW2 and he maintained the same stand that he was alone at
the time of the alleged beatings. Therefore, the absence of name of Mohd. Irfan
in the present complaint is a glaring defect in the complaint of Mohd. Imran.
69. Complainant Mohd. Imran has portrayed a picture that both
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 34 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 34 of 37Digitally signed
by DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date:
2025.05.21
16:51:35 +0530
accused persons were armed with dandas. Now, this fact has to be verified
from the testimony of public and independent witnesses examined in cross
FIR. In FIR No. 831/2015, prosecution has examined PW Vikas, PW Mujeeb,
PW Sunil and PW Mohd. Sabir. None of these witnesses have deposed that
accused Mohd. Shahid and Naaz were armed with dandas at that time, in fact,
they are absolutely silent about the presence of accused Naaz Alam at the spot.
Although, none of them have deposed that they had seen as to by whom Mohd.
Shahid and Fatima were stabbed but they admitted their presence at the spot
and causing of injuries during the incident. At the cost of repetition, it is
nowhere put to any material witness during cross examination in FIR No.
831/2015 that accused Naaz Alam was also present at the spot. Meaning
thereby, the presence of accused Naaz Alam has not been proved at the spot.
Moreover, accused Naaz Alam has examined himself as DW3 and stated that
he had gone to house of his sister on the occasion of Eid and he remained there
till 05:00 PM. The claim of DW3 Naaz Alam has been corroborated by DW4
Ali Hasan by stating that Naaz Alam was present at his house till 05:00-05:30
PM.
70. Witness Vikas, who is a prosecution witness in FIR No. 831/15, is
a defence witness in FIR No. 833/2015 and he has stated that accused Naaz
Alam was not present at the spot. When defence of accused persons in FIR No.
831/2015 is being read in the light of evidence recorded in the present case, it
is crystal clear that prosecution has failed to prove the presence of accused
Naaz Alam at the spot.
71. Complainant has not talked about the presence of his brother at
the spot which is otherwise proved in cross FIR. Complainant has tried to
prove the fact that accused Naaz Alam was present at the spot which is also
remains unproved. At this juncture it would be apposite to refer to the version
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 35 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 35 of 37Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA
DHIRENDRA RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:40 +0530
of complainant Mohd. Imran given by him at the time of recording statement
under section 313 CrPC in FIR No. 831/2015. He nowhere stated that accused
Naaz Alam was present at the spot. In fact, he mentioned about some
musclemen present with accused Mohd. Shahid. Therefore, at all possible
opportunities, complainant Mohd. Imran has failed to disclose the presence of
Naaz Alam at the spot. If these two facts are missing then the entire version of
the complainant Mohd. Imran is under serious doubt. There is every possibility
that injuries suffered by him are self inflicted as none of the public witness
have stated that Mohd. Shahid was armed with danda which was allegedly
used to inflict injuries upon the head of complainant Mohd. Imran.
72. Therefore, I am of the considered view that version and allegation
of Mohd. Imran qua the occurrence of incident in FIR No. 833/2015 has not
been proved beyond reasonable doubt against accused Mohd. Shahid and Naaz
Alam.
CONCLUSION
73. Thus, in view of the aforesaid findings, it has been proved beyond
reasonable doubt that accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan inflicted
dangerous injuries upon the person of Mohd. Shahid and his mother Fatima
with the help of piece of scissors. Injured Fatima was stabbed multiple times
and injuries suffered by both the injured were on their vital parts. Therefore,
the intent of accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan was no less than to commit
their murder and they were fully aware about the consequences of their act.
The offence was committed by them in furtherance of their common intention
as accused Mohd. Irfan had a matrimonial discord with his wife Saira Khatoon
and this matrimonial discord was the bone of contention between the two
families. Accordingly, accused Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Irfan stand convicted
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 36 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 36 of 37
Digitally signed by
DHIRENDRA DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:44 +0530
for committing an offence under section 307/34 IPC in FIR No.831/2015 PS
Shahbad Dairy. Accused Mohd. Shahid and Naaz Alam stands acquitted under
section 308/34 IPC in FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy. It is ordered
accordingly.
74. Matter be listed for arguments on sentence in FIR No. 831/2015
PS Shahbad Dairy. Digitally signed
DHIRENDRA by DHIRENDRA
RANA
RANA Date: 2025.05.21
16:51:49 +0530
Dictated and announced in the open (Dhirendra Rana)
Court on 21.05.2025 ASJ:Special Judge (NDPS)
(running in 37 pages) (North), Rohini Courts/Delhi
SC No. 58834/2016 FIR No. 831/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Mohd. Irfan & Anr. Page No. 37 of 37
SC No. 788/2018 FIR No. 833/2015 PS Shahbad Dairy State Vs. Shahid & Anr. Page No. 37 of 37