Delhi District Court
State vs Rahul Etc on 21 July, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. KUMAR RAJAT,
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-07, SHAHDARA DISTRICT,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF :
CNR No. DLSH01-008044-2019
SC No. 565/2019
FIR No. 350/2017
PS Madhu Vihar
U/s 308/323/325/506/34 IPC
STATE
Vs.
1. RAHUL,
S/o Sh. Ram Kishan,
R/o H.No. E-27/121, Indra Camp Part-I,
Chota Hasan Pur, Madhu Vihar, East Delhi.
2. OM PRAKASH,
S/o Sh. Munna Lal,
R/o H.No. E-27/121, Indra Camp Part-I,
Chota Hasan Pur, Madhu Vihar, East Delhi.
3. BANDHU,
S/o Sh. Munna Lal,
R/o H.No. E-27/121, Indra Camp Part-I,
Chota Hasan Pur, Madhu Vihar, East Delhi.
4. BENI BAI,
W/o Sh. Munna Lal,
R/o H.No. E-27/121, Indra Camp Part-I,
Chota Hasan Pur, Madhu Vihar, East Delhi.
5. CHIRONJI BAI,
W/o Sh. Ram Kishan,
R/o H.No. E-27/121, Indra Camp Part-I,
Chota Hasan Pur, Madhu Vihar, East Delhi.
........ Accused persons
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 1 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 2025.07.21
Date:
14:05:44 +0530
Date of Institution of case 12.12.2019
Date of case reserved for 12.07.2025
Judgment
Judgment Pronounced on 21.07.2025
Decision All accused persons Convicted
u/s 308/506/34 IPC
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
1. As per the case of prosecution, on 04.10.2017, DD
No. 61A was received by the IO, who along with Ct. Lalit
reached the spot at JJ Colony, Indra Camp, Delhi, but the injured
persons were already taken to LBS Hospital and he collected
MLC of injured persons.
Complainant Shiv Charan alleged that on 04.10.2017,
he was at his home and at about 10 PM, his neighbours Rahul,
Om Prakash and Bandhu were abusing by standing outside his
jhuggi and he asked the reason, then Rahul told him to teach a
lesson and that he would be killed and Rahul and Om Prakash
took out a danda from their jhuggi and started beating Shiv
Charan and his wife Prem, sons Pramod and Mukesh came to
save him, but in the meanwhile, Govindi, his mother Chironji Bai
and mother of Bandhu, Beni Bai came and accused Rahul, Om
Prakash and Bandhu told to finish complainant and all of them
started beating him with danda and fist and leg blows with
intention to kill. Accused persons threatened to kill them and
complainant and his family members suffered injury in legs and
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 2 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:06:10 +0530
hand and then, later they called 100 number and PCR Van took
them to LBS Hospital. The said persons had also quarreled with
complainant and his family earlier also, but matter was not
reported and was pacified and no 100 number call was made that
time.
2. On the above complaint of the complainant, the FIR
was registered vide FIR No. 350/2017, dt. 05.10.2017 in PS
Madhu Vihar u/s 308/323/506/34 IPC. After investigation,
charge-sheet was filed against the accused Rahul, Om Prakash,
Bandhu, Beni Bai, Chironji Bai and Govind Dass u/s
308/323/325/504/506/34 IPC and after filing of the charge-sheet,
cognizance of offences was taken against the accused persons.
CHARGE
3. Charge for the offences punishable u/s 308/506/34
IPC was framed against the accused persons namely Rahul, Om
Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and Chironji Bai by Ld. Predecessor
on 11.02.2020. Accused Govind Dass had expired and case
against him was abated on 28.03.2019. Accused persons pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. Prosecution examined eleven (11) witnesses in its
favour to prove the case.
5. PW1 Shiv Charan deposed that in the year 2017, he
was residing at his address i.e. T-156, Jhuggi, JJ Camp, Indra
Colony, Madhu Vihar, Delhi and he used to work as a labour. On
04.10.2017, he was present at his above home and at about 10:00
pm, accused Rahul along with Bandu, Om Prakash, Beni Bai and
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 3 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 14:06:16
Date: 2025.07.21
+0530
Chironji Bai came in front of his jhuggi and started abusing him
and accused Rahul along with all of them gave beating to him
with the help of danda and also gave beating with danda to his
wife Prem, his sons Mukesh and Pramod due to which they all
received injuries. Accused Rahul abused him and when he tried
to stop him, he called other accused persons Om Prakash,
Govindi, (Govind Das since expired), Chironji Bai, Bandhu, Beni
Bai and stated that “aaj tera kaam kar dete hain” and someone
called at 100 number and police came at the spot and took PW1,
his wife and his sons to the hospital and their medical
examination was conducted.
6. Police recorded his statement, Ex.PW1/A. PW1
pointed out the place of incident to the IO, who prepared the site
plan, Mark-X. Accused Rahul along with Om Prakash and
Bandhu were arrested on his identification vide arrest memos,
Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D respectively. PW1
admitted in his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP that accused
Rahul stated PW1 that ‘aaj tujhe maja chakhate hai, aaj tujhe jaan
se maar denge” and accused Rahul and Om Prakash took out
dandas from their jhuggi. Wife of PW1 namely Prem, his sons
Mukesh and Pramod came to save PW1, but accused Rahul along
with other accused persons gave beatings to them also with the
help of dandas and fist and blows. Accused persons gave beatings
to him, his wife and his sons with intention to kill them. Accused
Rahul along with others had also quarrelled with them before the
date of incident and accused Rahul along with other co-accused
persons were threatening to kill them and saying that ‘ baar baar
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 4 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
Date:
RAJAT 2025.07.21
14:06:23
+0530
ka jhagda, aaj hi khatam kar denge’. PW1 had correctly
identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and
Chironji Bai in the court.
7. PW2 Prem deposed that on 04.10.2017, at about
10:00 pm, accused Rahul came in front of her house i.e. T-156,
Jhuggi, J J Camp, Indra Colony, Madhu Vihar, Delhi and started
abusing her husband, who tried to stop accused Rahul from
abusing and he started beating to her husband Shiv Charan and
she was present there at that time. Thereafter, accused Bandhu
and Om Prakash also came there with dandas and they along with
accused Rahul gave beating to her and Shiv Charan and her sons
Mukesh and Pramod, who were also present there. Co-accused
Chironji Bai and Beni Bai also came there and gave beating to
her, her husband and her sons with the help of danda and fist and
blows due to which they all received injuries. They called at 100
number and police official came at the spot and took them to the
hospital for their medical examination at LBS Hospital. Accused
Rahul and other co-accused were neighbours of PW2.
PW2 admitted in her examination-in-chief by Ld.
Addl. PP that at the time of incident, accused Rahul along co-
accused were saying that ‘aaj tumhe jinda nahi chodenge’.
Accused Rahul along with co-accused Om Prakash and Bandhu
were beating to her husband initially when she along with her
two sons tried to save her husband. Then accused Rahul along
with co-accused namely Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and
Chironji Bai gave beatings to all of them. PW2 had correctly
identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 5 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:06:28 +0530
Chironji Bai in the court.
8. PW3 Pramod deposed that on 04.10.2017, he was
present at his house i.e. T-156, Indra Camp, JJ Colony, Hasanpur,
Delhi and at about 10:00 pm, accused Rahul along with co-
accused Om Prakash, Bandhu and Govind (since expired) were
abusing his father Shiv Charan in front of his house and his
father asked them not to do so, but they all started manhandling
(hatha-pai) with his father. In the meantime, accused Chironji Bai
and Beni Bai also came in front of his house. PW3 along with his
mother Prem and his brother Mukesh also reached at the spot i.e.
in front of his house. They tried to save his father, but accused
Rahul along with co-accused Bandhu, Om Prakash, Govind
(expired), Chironji Bai and Beni Bai started beating him, his
father, his mother and his brother with dandas and hasiya (the
tool which was generally used to cut grass). They all received
injuries. His father called at 100 number. Police official came and
took them to LBS Hospital where they all received treatment.
PW3 gave his statement on 05.10.2017 to the police. PW3 had
correctly identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni
Bai and Chironji Bai as being neighbours.
9. PW4 Mukesh deposed that on 04.10.2017 at about
10:00 pm, he was sitting in the room of his house i.e. T-156, JJ
Colony, Indra Camp, Part-I, Hasanpur, Delhi. His mother was
cooking food in the kitchen and his father was standing outside
their house. Accused Rahul along with co-accused Om Prakash,
Bandhu and Govindi (male) were abusing his father outside the
gate of their house and accused Rahul and co-accused were their
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 6 of 41
Digitally
signed by
KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT
Date:
RAJAT 2025.07.21
14:06:34
+0530
neighbour. His father requested them not to do so, at which they
all started beating his father. His father shouted ‘ bachao-bachao’.
On hearing the same, he came out from his room and reached
outside the gate of their house. His brother Pramod and mother
Prem also reached outside the gate of their house to save his
father.
10. PW4 further deposed that they tried to save his father
and co-accused Chironji Bai and Beni Bai also came there.
Thereafter, accused Rahul along with co-accused Om Prakash,
Bandhu, Chironji Bai, Beni Bai and Govindi (male) started
beating his father Shiv Charan, mother Prem, brother Pramod and
PW4 with danda, kulhadi, hasiya (darati). They all tried to kill
them. PW4 further deposed that “hum sabhi ghayal ho gaye mere
papa ne bachate hue, hum sab ko kamre me band kar diya aur
100 number par call kiya”. PCR official came and took them to
LBS Hospital. They were medically examined there. After
discharging from the hospital, he along with his father, mother
and brother went to the PS where their statements were recorded.
PW4 volunteered that “Nali ke karan ladai hui thi”. PW4 had
correctly identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni
Bai and Chironji Bai in the Court.
11. PW5 Dr. Sudesh Kumar, PG, Maulana Azad Medical
College deposed that on 04.10.2017, he was working as JR in the
casualty of LBS Hospital, Delhi and on that day, at about 11:45
pm, one patient Mukesh was brought to the casualty by ASI
Arvind, who was examined by PW5. As per his examination, 7
injuries mentioned from point A to A1 on the MLC bearing no.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 7 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:06:40 +0530
014390 dt. 04.10.2017, Ex.PW5/A of injured Mukesh was in his
own handwriting, were found on the person of above said
injured. Dr. Abbas Ali was CMO on that day and PW5 was
working under his supervision and control. The patient was
referred to surgery and orthopedic department for further
management and evaluation. On that day at about 11:50 pm, one
patient Pramod was brought to the casualty by ASI Arvind, who
was examined by him. As per his examination, 3 injuries were
found on the person of injured Pramod, mentioned from point A
to A1 on the MLC bearing no. 014391 dt. 04.10.2017, Ex.PW5/B
was in his own handwriting. The patient was referred to surgery
and orthopedic department for further management and
evaluation.
12. PW5 further deposed that on that day at about 11:40
pm, one patient Shiv Charan was brought to the casualty by ASI
Arvind and he was examined by PW5. As per his examination, 5
injuries were found on the person of injured Shiv Charan,
mentioned from point A to A1 on the MLC bearing no. 014389
dt. 04.10.2017 Ex.PW5/C and was in his own handwriting. The
patient was referred to surgery department for further
management and evaluation. On that day at about 11:25 pm, one
patient Prem was brought to the casualty by ASI Arvind and she
was examined by PW5. As per his examination, 3 injuries were
found on her person, mentioned from point A to A1 on the MLC
bearing no. 014388 dt. 04.10.2017, Ex.PW5/D. The patient was
referred to surgery and orthopedic department for further
management and evaluation.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 8 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:06:46 +0530
PW5 prepared the X-ray form of injured Pramod,
Mukesh and Prem, Ex.PW5/E, Ex.PW5/F and Ex.PW5/G
respectively.
13. PW6 Dr. Sanjeev Gambhir, Specialist Orthopedic,
LBS Hospital deposed that he was working in the Orthopedic
Department, LBS Hospital since 2017 and he had worked with
Dr. Vishal, who had also worked in the same department. PW6
was acquainted with the handwriting and signature of Dr. Vishal
as he had worked with him. Dr. Vishal had left the services of
LBS Hospital and his present whereabouts were not available in
the record of hospital. As per the opinion given by Dr. Vishal
based on X-ray No. 3365-68 dt. 05.10.2017, on the MLC No.
014390, Ex.PW5/A, the nature of injuries were grievous in
nature as there was dislocation of Meta Corpo Phalangeal (MP)
joint of left thumb, which was mentioned from point C to C1 and
also bears the signature of Dr. Vishal at point D. As per the
opinion given by Dr. Vishal based on X-ray No. 3364 dt.
05.10.2017, on the MLC No. 014391, Ex.PW5/B, the nature of
injuries were simple in nature, which was mentioned from point
C to C1 and also bears the signature of Dr. Vishal at point D. As
per the opinion given by Dr. Vishal based on X-ray No. 3362-63
dt. 04.10.2017 on the MLC No. 014388, Ex.PW5/D, the nature of
injuries were grievous in nature as there was fracture of 3rd and
4th Meta Carpal of left hand, which was mentioned from point C
to C1 and also bears the signature of Dr. Vishal at point D.
14. PW7 Dr. Suraj Prakash, Senior Medical Officer, LBS
Hospital deposed that he was working in the A & E Department,
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 9 of 41
Digitally
signed by
KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT
Date:
RAJAT 2025.07.21
14:06:52
+0530
LBS Hospital since 2015 and he had worked with Dr. Abbas Ali,
who had also worked in the same department. PW7 was
acquainted with the handwriting and signature of Dr. Abbas Ali
as he had worked with him. Dr. Abbas Ali had left the services of
LBS Hospital and his present whereabouts were not available in
the hospital’s record. As per MLC Nos. 014390, Ex.PW5/A,
014391, Ex.PW5/B, 014389, Ex.PW5/C and 014388, Ex.PW5/D,
Dr. Abbas Ali was working as CMO on 04.10.2017 and under his
supervision and control, Dr. Sudesh Kumar had examined the
patients mentioned in abovesaid MLCs respectively and the
name of Dr. Abbas Ali was mentioned on above said MLCs at
point E respectively. PW7 was acquainted with the handwriting
of Dr. Sonal Ghosh (SR Surgery), who was working in
Department of Surgery, LBS Hospital as he had seen him writing
and signing and also received letters/documents, written by him
during the official discharge of his duties and he had left the
services of the hospital and his whereabouts were not available in
the hospital’s record. As per the MLC, Ex.PW5/C, Dr. Sonal
Ghosh had opined the nature of injuries as simple in nature,
which was in his handwriting and the same was mentioned at
point C to C1 and also bears the signature of Dr. Sonal Ghosh at
point F.
15. PW8 W/HC Kalpana deposed that on 27.02.2018, she
was posted as Constable at PS Madhu Vihar. On that day, she
joined the investigation of the present case with ASI Moolchand.
On that day at about 04:00 pm, co-accused Beni Bai, Chironji
Bai and Govind Das came at PS Madhu Vihar. IO/ASI
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 10 of 41
Digitally
signed by
KUMAR KUMAR
Date:
RAJAT
RAJAT 2025.07.21
14:06:59
+0530
Moolchand arrested co-accused persons Beni Bai, Chironji Bai
and Govind Das vide arrest memos, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B and
Ex.PW8/C respectively. Personal search of accused Beni Bai and
Chironji Bai were conducted by PW8 vide memos Ex.PW8/D
and Ex.PW8/E respectively and personal search of accused
Govind Das was conducted by IO/ASI Moolchand vide memo,
Ex.PW8/F. Disclosure statement of accused Beni Bai, Chironji
Bai and Govind Das were recorded vide statements, Ex.PW8/G,
Ex.PW8/H and Ex.PW8/I respectively. PW8 correctly identified
accused Chironji Bai and Beni Bai in the court.
16. PW9 ASI Jasbinder Singh deposed that on
05.10.2017, he was posted as HC at PS Madhu Vihar. On that
day, he was working as duty officer from 12:00 midnight to
08:00 am. On that day, at about 03:05 am, Ct. Lalit came at the
PS and handed over him original rukka sent by ASI Moolchand
for registration of FIR. He made endorsement on the rukka [vide
DD No.11 Kyami (OSR)], Ex.PW9/A and he registered FIR No.
350/17, PS Madhu Vihar, Ex.PW9/B (OSR). He also issued
certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act regarding the
registration of FIR, Ex.PW9/C.
17. PW10 HC Lalit deposed that on 04.10.2017, he was
posted as Constable at PS Madhu Vihar and on that day, on
receiving DD No. 61A, he along with ASI Moolchand went to
spot i.e. Jhuggi No. T-156, JJ Colony, Indira Camp, Delhi where
they came to know that caller had been taken to LBS Hospital.
Thereafter, they went to LBS Hospital where they met Prem,
Shiv Charan and Mukesh and IO collected their MLCs. IO/ASI
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 11 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:07:05 +0530
Moolchand recorded the statement of complainant Shiv Charan
and prepared the rukka and then handed over the same to PW10
for registration of FIR. PW10 went to PS and got registered the
FIR. Then he returned to the spot and handed over the original
rukka and copy of FIR to the IO. PW10 further deposed that on
the identification of complainant, accused Rahul along with co-
accused Om Prakash and Bandhu were arrested from JJ Colony,
Indira Camp, Delhi (outside the house of Shiv Charan) vide their
arrest memos, dt. 05.10.2017, Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C and
Ex.PW1/D respectively and their disclosure statements dt.
05.10.2017 were also recorded by the IO vide statements,
Ex.PW10/A, Ex.PW10/B and Ex.PW10/C respectively. PW10
had correctly identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu,
Beni Bai and Chironji Bai in the Court.
18. PW11 Retd. SI Moolchand deposed that on
04.10.2017, he was posted as ASI at PS Madhu Vihar and on that
day, on receiving DD No. 61A, Mark-Z, he along with Ct. Lalit
went to the spot i.e. Jhuggi No. T-156, JJ Colony, Indira Camp,
Delhi, where they came to know that injured had been taken to
LBS Hospital. Thereafter, they went to LBS Hospital where they
met Prem, Shiv Charan, Pramod and Mukesh and he collected
their MLCs. The above said persons were under treatment. He
recorded the statement of complainant Shiv Charan, Ex.PW1/A.
PW11 prepared the rukka, Ex.PW11/A and handed over the same
to Ct. Lalit for registration of FIR and he went to the PS.
19. PW11 further deposed that he along with complainant
Shiv Charan went to the spot and PW11 prepared the site plan,
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 12 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 14:07:10
Date: 2025.07.21
+0530
Ex.PW11/B at the instance of complainant. Ct. Lalit returned to
spot and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to
PW11. Thereafter, PW11 along with complainant and Ct. Lalit
made search of accused persons. On the identification of
complainant, accused persons i.e. accused Rahul along co-
accused Om Prakash and Bandhu were arrested from JJ Colony,
Indira Camp, Delhi vide their arrest memos, dt. 05.10.2017
already Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D respectively and
their personal search were also conducted. Their disclosure
statements dt. 05.10.2017 were also recorded vide statements,
Ex.PW10/A, Ex.PW10/B and Ex.PW10/C respectively. On
27.02.2018, co-accused Chironji Bai, Beni Bai and accused
Govind Das (expired) were granted anticipatory bail by the
Hon’ble Court and they came at the PS and they were formally
arrested with the help of W/Ct. Kalpana vide arrest memos,
Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/A and Ex.PW8/C respectively and their
personal search were also conducted by W/Ct. Kalpana (of
accused Chironji Bai, Benibai and Govind Das) vide personal
search memos, Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/D and Ex.PW8/F. PW11
collected the result on MLC of injured persons i.e. Prem, Shiv
Charan, Pramod and Mukesh and placed it on judicial file. After
completion of investigation, he prepared the charge-sheet and
submitted it before the Hon’ble Court. PW11 had correctly
identified accused Rahul, Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and
Chironji Bai in the Court.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 13 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:07:17 +0530
STATEMENTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS
U/S 351 BNSS/313 CR.P.C.
20. Statements of accused persons namely accused Rahul,
Om Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and Chirnoji Bai were recorded
u/s 351 BNSS/313 Cr.P.C. on 13.01.2025 and they denied the
incriminating evidence put to them. They stated that all the
witnesses are interested witnesses and they were falsely
implicated by the police officials in the present case without any
fault on their part.
21. Accused Bandu stated that he and his mausi Chironji
Bai and Beni Bai received injury and MLC was prepared by
doctor of LBS Hospital, but police did not register their
complaint despite requests. Accused Beni Bai stated that she, her
sister and son sustained injuries inflicted by Keshav Prasad, Shiv
Charan, Prem Kumar, Mukesh and Pramod as Keshav Prasad
used to stalk her daughter and passed sexual comments upon her
due to which, she was scared and afraid. On 28.02.2017, she
went to her job leaving behind her daughter Phoolwati and when
she returned back in the evening, she was scared and on inquiry,
she told that in the noon time, Keshav, Mukesh and Shiv Charan
had collected in front of her jhuggi and made different gestures
by their eyes and passed comments due to which she became
frightened and closed the door of jhuggi as her brother had also
gone somewhere.
22. Accused Beni Bai went to the house of accused
persons and made complaint to Shiv Charan of his son Keshav
that he should restrain his son from indulging in activity of
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 14 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 14:07:23
Date: 2025.07.21
+0530
sexual harassment on which Shiv Charan became offended and
on hearing the noise, neighbourers also gathered there and tried
to make Shiv Charan and his sons understand. Her daughter also
reached there, who took her back in jhuggi stating that ” mummy
rehne do, nahi to apke jane ke baad, ye aur preshan karenge aur
police ko bhi mat bulao” and then, she returned back to her
house, but her daughter became depressed and she has committed
suicide on 01.03.2017 when she went to her job and came to
know of it when she returned and she took her daughter to MAX
hospital from where she was referred to LBS hospital where
doctors declared her brought dead. Shiv Charan also came there
and felt sorry with folded hands and considering the
circumstances, she had not made any complaint to the police, but
on 04.10.2017, she and other relatives talked about the incident
of her daughter, but Shiv Charan and his sons came there and
abused her and her relatives and entered in their jhuggi in
forceful manner and hit her on her head and arm and she
sustained multiple injuries on different body parts and MLC was
prepared, but no complaint was lodged despite repeated request
to police.
Same submissions were made by accused Om Prakash
qua daughter of Beni Bai i.e. his sister.
23. Accused Rahul stated that his mother, brother and
mausi Chironji Bai sustained injury and rest of the submissions
were same as made by other co-accused Om Prakash and Beni
Bai. He further stated that on 04.10.2017, accused Shiv Charan
and his sons came to him and abused him and his relatives and
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 15 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 14:07:29
Date: 2025.07.21
+0530
hit him after entering his jhuggi forcefully due to which he
sustained multiple injuries on different body parts including
lacerated wound on left eye brow, multiple abrasions on front and
back side of body and his MLC bearing no. 14392 dated
04.10.2017 was prepared at 11.55 PM, but no complaint was
made to police.
24. Accused Chironji Bai also made same submissions as
that of accused Rahul and further stated that she sustained
multiple injuries on her upper arm, right hand, finger and other
body parts and her MLC bearing no. 14394 dated 05.10.2017 was
prepared, but no complaint was made to police.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE,
ANALYSIS OF WITNESSES AND FINDING
ARGUMENTS OF LD. COUNSEL FOR ACCUSED PERSONS
25. It is argued by Ms. Gyan Mitra, Ld. Counsel for
accused persons that they had been falsely implicated by the
police at the instance of complainant and they had never caused
any injury to the victim/complainant and other injured persons.
The prosecution witnesses/injured are interested witnesses and
have deposed falsely against the accused as the son of the
complainant namely Keshav had sexually assaulted the daughter
of accused Beni Bai namely Phoolwati, aged 15 years, due to
which she committed suicide on 01.03.2017, which is proved by
DW1 Dr S Lal, who proved her PMR, Ex.PW11/D9 and DW2
proved the DD No. 21A dated 01.03.2017 recorded at PS Madhu
Vihar regarding the said suicide. Complainant Shiv Charan had
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 16 of 41
KUMAR Digitally signed by
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:07:38 +0530
given his apology letter to Phoolwati on her complaint of sexual
harassment against his son Keshav and on 04.10.2017, when the
accused persons were discussing the behaviour of Keshav, it was
overheard by the complainant and his family members and
complainant along with his family members attacked accused
Rahul, Beni Bai and Chironji Bai and complainant also assaulted
Munna Lal and accused Rahul called at 100 number and
complainant had tendered apology to the accused persons same
day, but later on filed a false FIR in a planned manner and it was
the accused persons, who received injury, but the same was not
brought on record by the police nor the police registered any
cross FIR against the complainant side.
26. The MLCs of the accused persons were prepared,
which were proved by DW1 Dr S Lal i.e. MLC of Chironji Bai,
Ex.DW1/DX, MLC of Beni Bai, Ex.DW1/DX1 and MLC of
Rahul , Ex.DW1/DX2 and in those MLCs, the lacerated injuries
and abrasions have been mentioned, which were prepared on
05.10.2017. The prosecution has deliberately concealed these
injuries and police did not register cross-case, which led to denial
of justice to the accused. PW11/IO has also admitted these MLCs
(earlier Ex.PW11/D1 to Ex.PW11/D3) of Chironji Bai, Beni Bai
and Rahul respectively, were received by him and the IO
correctly identified the photographs, Ex.PW11/D4 to
Ex.PW11/D7 of injury of accused Beni Bai in which injuries are
shown on her body. The prosecution witnesses have made
material omissions, contradictions and improvements in their
testimonies and are not reliable. No weapon of offence as alleged
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 17 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:07:44 +0530
by the witnesses has been recovered. Ld. Counsel for the accused
persons has relied upon the following judgments:
1. State (Delhi Admn.) Vs. Mange Ram 2005 (81 DRJ 26,
decided on 23.02.2005.
2. Anil Vs. State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Mouda 2025 SCC Online Bom 353, decided on
25.02.2025.
3. Bhagwan Sahai & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan (2016) 13 SCC
171, decided on 03.06.2016.
ARGUMENTS OF LD. ADDL. PP FOR THE STATE
27. Sh. Sobit, Ld. Addl. PP for the State has argued that
prosecution has proved its case against the accused persons
beyond reasonable doubt and PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4 are the
injured persons, who have correctly identified the accused
persons as the assailants, who had caused beatings to them with
danda and leg and fist blows as the accused persons abused PW1
and as a result of assault, the complainant and his family
members received grievous and simple injuries, which were
proved by the concerned doctors or the doctors, who appeared on
their behalf and thus the medical evidence has corroborated
testimony of all the PWs and the defence taken by the accused
persons that it was the complainant and his family, who attacked
the accused on account of suicide of the daughter of accused
Beni Bai, is not tenable since as per the admission, her daughter
committed suicide months back in March, 2017, but No FIR was
lodged against the son of complainant or any other family
member and thus, it is an afterthought. The MLCs of the accusedState Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 18 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:07:50 +0530
persons have not been proved in accordance with law as originals
have not been produced and the accused persons had not lodged
any cross FIR with the police against the complainant and his
family members regarding the said incident nor filed any
complaint before police or court for the same and her suicide
even if proved has nothing to do with present case as there is no
complaint against complainant or his son and nothing has come
in the cross-examination of PWs to doubt their veracity as a
witness. IO has also corroborated the testimony of the
PWs/injured and the same is further corroborated by medical
evidence, which proved the injury caused to them and it is settled
law that non-recovery of weapon is not fatal to the case of
prosecution, if eye witnesses/injured have deposed truthfully,
which inspires confidence and the judgments relied upon by the
accused persons are not applicable to the facts and circumstances
of the present case.
28. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the
records.
29. The prosecution has examined 11 witnesses to prove
its case including complainant.
30. The charge against accused persons are u/s
308/506/34 IPC.
308. 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 threeState Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 19 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:07:57 +0530
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.”
Section 503 IPC Criminal intimidation:
Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person,
reputation or property, to the person or reputation of any one
in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm
to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he
is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which
that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding
the execution of such threats, commits criminal intimidation.
Section 34. 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.”
31. The present case was registered on the complaint of
complainant Shiv Charan, who alleged that on 04.10.2017, he
was at his home and at about 10 PM, his neighbours Rahul, Om
Prakash and Bandhu were abusing by standing outside his jhuggi
and he asked the reason, then Rahul told him to teach a lesson
and that he would be killed and Rahul and Om Prakash took out a
danda from their jhuggi and started beating Shiv Charan and his
wife Prem, sons Pramod and Mukesh came to save him, but in
the meanwhile, Govindi, her mother Chironji Bai and mother of
Bandhu, Beni Bai came and accused Rahul, Om Prakash and
Bandhu told to finish complainant and all of them started beating
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 20 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:10:08 +0530
him with danda and fist and leg blows with intention to kill.
Accused persons threatened to kill them and complainant and his
family members suffered injury in leg and hand. The said persons
had also quarreled with complainant and his family earlier also,
but matter was not reported and was pacified and no 100 number
call was made that time.
32. During his deposition also, he stated the correct date
of occurrence i.e. 04.10.2017 and time as 10 PM when the
accused persons Rahul, Bandhu, Om Prakash, Beni Bai and
Chironji Bai abused him outside his jhuggi and gave beatings to
him with danda and also to his wife Prem, sons Mukesh and
Pramod, who also suffered injuries and he proved his said
complaint, Ex.PW1/A and that on his pointing out, site plan,
Mark X was prepared by the IO and on his identification,
accused Rahul, Om Prakash and Bandhu were arrested. PW1
admitted the suggestion of Ld. APP that accused Rahul and Om
Prakash took out dandas from jhuggi and Rahul stated that PW1
would be killed and when his wife and sons came to save him,
they were also beaten with dandas, fist and leg blows with
intention to kill and they had also threatened to kill them.
33. During cross-examination by accused, there is no
confrontation brought on record with any previous statement of
PW1 and he admitted that accused Beni Bai was residing in front
of his jhuggi and on 04.10.2017, he called police at 100 number
and he identified his house as Mark A in site plan, Mark X, which
shows that site plan was correctly prepared and the place of
occurrence is rightly shown and that it is also proved that accused
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 21 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:10:15 +0530
persons were neighbours of complainant PW1.
34. PW1 denied that his son Keshav used to eve tease or
sexually harass daughter of Beni Bai namely Phoolwati due to
which she committed suicide on 01.03.2017 and PW1 gave
mafinama in the PS. To prove this defence, no FIR or complaint
against Keshav or any other family member of complainant has
been proved or brought on record and no such
mafinama/settlement in any PS has been proved and thus, the
suggestion appears to have been given on vague ground. PW1
denied that he along with his sons Mukesh and Pramod over
heard the role of Keshav and it were they, who attacked the
accused, rather than accused attacking them, but the accused
persons could not explain as to why after 7 months of suicide of
Phoolwati, the complainant and his family would get agitated and
started causing injury to the accused persons and that too when
there was no allegation or complaint against Keshav or any other
family member in any PS before or after the suicide.
35. PW1 admitted his presence in his house on
04.10.2017 at 10 PM and denied that he assaulted Munna Lal that
day and that he tendered apology to accused persons on the same
day due to which they did not make any complaint against him.
The said suggestion has no basis as when the complainant had
lodged an FIR against the accused, they could have also got
registered a cross FIR even after PW1 had tendered apology and
no such written apology has been brought or proved on record
and PW1 denied that he sustained injury due to falling on his
own and not caused by any accused and others did not suffer any
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 22 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:10:19 +0530
injury. PW1/complainant is consistent in his testimony since his
initial complaint and nothing has come in his cross-examination
to doubt his veracity as a witness. PW1 reiterated that he called at
100 number. The contention of Ld. Counsel that it was accused
Rahul, who called the police could not be established by accused
or any prosecution witness and accused even did not place on
record any CAF that he called at 100 number from his mobile
number 8920441690 and even otherwise also it will not make
any difference to the case as the purpose of 100/112 call is to
give the initial information and to set the criminal law into
motion.
36. PW2 Prem, wife of PW1 Shiv Charan had also
deposed the correct date and time of offence that on 04.10.2017
at about 10 PM, accused Rahul started abusing PW1 and when he
opposed, accused Rahul started beating him in her presence and
co-accused Bandhu and Om Prakash came there with dandas and
along with Rahul, they caused beatings to PW2, PW1 and their
sons Mukesh and Pramod and accused Chironji Bai and Beni Bai
also gave beatings to them with danda and fist and leg blows.
PW2 has correctly identified all the accused persons as the ones,
who caused injury to her and her family members and merely
because a witness failed to state the entire facts in his
examination in chief, his evidence cannot be discarded in toto
particularly when during cross-examination by Ld. APP, a
witness has admitted the facts put to him. In the present case,
PW1 and PW2 have admitted the facts put to them by Ld. APP
and PW2 admitted that all the accused persons told that they
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 23 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:10:25 +0530
would not spare them on the day of incident and all the accused
persons gave beatings to PW2 and her family members. PWs
have deposed after 6 years of occurrence and it is natural that
person does not remember each and every detail after lapse of
such a long period.
37. During cross-examination by accused, PW2 admitted
the suggestion that Phoolwati was daughter of accused Beni Bai,
who was her neighbour, but denied that her son Keshav used to
molest Phoolwati due to which she committed suicide on
01.03.2017 and when family members of accused Beni Bai went
to lodge police complaint against Keshav, the complainant side
tendered mafinama and complaint was not lodged against
Keshav. There is no mafinama/apology letter brought on record
by the accused nor any complaint was ever lodged against said
Keshav and thus, such suggestion will not enure any benefit to
the accused persons.
38. PW2 also denied that it was the complainant side,
which attacked the accused persons with dandas and caused
injuries and that injuries suffered by PW2 was due to fall on her
own. Similar suggestion was denied by PW1. It is not possible
that both PW1 and PW2 fell on their own and sustained grievous
and simple injury and there is no suggestion given as to how they
had fallen on their own. Thus, PW2 corroborates the version of
PW1 and there is no infirmity came in her cross-examination to
create doubt on her testimony.
39. PW3 Pramod has also deposed correctly that on
04.10.2017 at about 10 PM, accused Rahul, Om Prakash and
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 24 of 41
KUMAR Digitally signed
by KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT 14:10:30 +0530
Date: 2025.07.21
Bandhu abused his father PW1 in his presence in front of his
house and when his father told them not to do so, they
manhandled him and when he along with his mother PW2 Prem
and brother Mukesh tried to save his father, all the accused
persons started beating him, his parents and brother with danda
due to which they received injury and he also correctly identified
all the accused persons. In his cross, he admitted that Keshav was
his brother and there is no criminal case pending against him and
he denied the suggestion that many cases are pending against
Keshav. No list or any document has been produced regarding
any criminal case against Keshav and thus, this suggestion
appears to be vague and even otherwise also, such fact has no
concern with the present case as no complaint was ever lodged
against Keshav. PW3 denied that Keshav sexually assaulted
Phoolwati, who was daughter of accused Beni Bai due to which
she committed suicide and that a case was lodged against him in
this regard. PW3 also denied that when accused persons were
discussing the said suicide of Phoolwati, then PW3 and his
family members got annoyed and attacked them and that injuries
to him are self inflicted.
Thus, PW3 has corroborated the version of PW1 and
PW2.
40. PW4 Mukesh deposed that on 04.10.2017 at 10 PM,
accused Rahul, Om Prakash and Bandhu abused his father
outside his house and on his father’s request not to do so, they
started beating him and he and his family members went there to
save his father and accused Chironji Bai and Beni Bai also came
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 25 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:10:51 +0530
there, who along with others caused beating to him and his
family members with danda etc. with intention to kill. PW4
corroborated the version of PW1 that PW1 called at 100 number
and that due to the acts of accused, they sustained injury. PW4
also denied any criminal case against his brother Keshav or that
he sexually assaulted Phoolwati due to which she committed
suicide and his father apologized to accused Beni Bai, who had
not pursued the complaint. PW4 denied that he and his family
members caused injury to accused persons by beating them with
danda and iron rod or that 100 number call was made by Rahul or
that no injury was caused to him or his family members.
41. It is difficult to believe as to why a person will not
complain against an accused due to whose sexual assault, his or
her minor daughter had committed suicide. Thus, PW4 has
corroborated the version of PW1, PW2 and PW3 regarding
beatings given to them by all the accused persons due to which
they sustained injuries.
MEDICAL EVIDENCE
42. PW5 Dr. Sudesh Kumar proved the MLC of PW4
injured Mukesh, Ex.PW5/A, as per which there were 7 injuries
including lacerations of 2x.5 cm and 1x.5 on the forehead along
with bruises, abrasions, swelling and tenderness in the forearm,
shoulder, hand and knee and he was referred to Surgery and
Orthopedic Department.
PW5 also proved the MLC of Pramod, Ex.PW5/B, as
per which, he had swelling in the forehead and abrasions and he
was referred to Surgery and Orthopedic Department.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 26 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:10:56 +0530
PW5 also proved the MLC of Shiv Charan,
Ex.PW5/C, as per which, there are lacerations of 3x.5x.8 cm and
2x.5x.5 cm on the head region and forehead along with four other
abrasions and he was referred to Surgery Department.
PW5 also proved the MLC of Prem, Ex.PW5/D, as
per which, as per which, there is one laceration of 1x.5x.5 cm in
forehead along with abrasion and tenderness and she was referred
to Surgery and Orthopedic Department.
PW5 also proved the X-ray form of said injured
Pramod, Mukesh and Prem, Ex.PW5/E, Ex.PW5/F and
Ex.PW5/G.
43. In cross-examination PW5 admitted that there is no
mention of assailants and date of admission/discharge in the said
MLCs, but volunteered that the date of examination is mentioned
and date of discharge is mentioned in separate slip, which is
given to patient and copy of the same is retained by the hospital
and thus, the credibility of PW5 is not shaken in the cross and he
did not comment whether injuries could be caused due to fall on
surface or scuffle or if they are self inflicted. It is very difficult to
hold that a person will cause a self inflected grievous injury to
himself without any cause.
44. PW6 Dr. Sanjeev Gambhir appeared on behalf of Dr.
Vishal and proved his opinion as to nature of injury as grievous
in the MLC, Ex.PW5/A of PW4 Mukesh as there was dislocation
of Metacorpo Phalengeal joint of left thumb and his opinion as
to nature of injury in the MLC, Ex.PW5/B of PW3 Pramod as
simple in nature and in the MLC, Ex.PW5/D of Prem, the nature
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 27 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:11:03 +0530
of injury opined is grievous as there was fracture of 3rd and 4th
Metacorpal of left hand.
45. In his cross PW6 stated that he had knowledge of
handwriting and signature of Dr. Vishal in those MLCs though
they were not prepared in his presence and no suggestion is given
to him that he had wrongly identified the handwriting and
signature of Dr. Vishal or Dr. Vishal had not given the correct
opinion.
46. PW7 deposed on behalf of Dr. Sonal Ghosh, who
opined the nature of injury as simple as mentioned in the MLC,
Ex.PW5/C of PW1 Shiv Charan. PW7 stated in his cross that
though he has no personal knowledge of said MLC, but he has
knowledge of handwriting and signature of Dr. Abbas Ali and Dr.
Sonal Ghosh as he had seen them writing and signing and also
received letters/documents written by them in discharge of their
duties and no suggestion is given in the cross that he had wrongly
identified the handwriting and signature of Dr. Sonal Ghosh or
that he had not identified correctly. No suggestion is given to
PW5, PW6 and PW7 in their respective cross-examinations that
the said injuries were not possible with the danda or the leg or
fist blows.
47. Thus, it is apparent from the MLCs of PW1, PW2,
PW3 and PW4 and testimonies of PW5, PW6 and PW7 that PW1
and PW3 suffered simple injury and PW2 and PW4 suffered
grievous injury on vital and other parts of body and the medical
evidence corroborates the version of PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4
that injuries were caused to them as a result of beatings caused
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 28 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:11:10 +0530
by accused persons.
POLICE WITNESSES
48. PW8 proved the arrest of accused Beni Bai, Chironji
Bai and Govind Das (deceased), Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B and
Ex.PW8/C and their personal search, Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/E and
Ex.PW8/F and these facts are corroborated by PW11/IO. PW8
proved recording of disclosures of these accused persons, but
nothing has been recovered in the personal search and disclosure
is not admissible without any recovery.
49. PW9 ASI Jasbinder proved the endorsement on rukka,
Ex.PW9/A and registration of FIR, Ex.PW9/B, but it is not
disputed.
50. PW10 HC Lalit was with the IO during investigation
and proved the registration of FIR and that he brought back the
original rukka and copy of FIR to the IO at the spot and also
proved the arrest of accused Rahul, Om Prakash and Bandhu at
the instance of complainant vide arrest memos, Ex.PW1/B,
Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D on 05.10.2017 and their disclosures,
Ex.PW10/A, Ex.PW10/B and Ex.PW10/C. These facts were also
corroborated by PW11/IO, but their arrest is not disputed and
does not affect the credibility of case. All the said disclosures are
not admissible in the absence of any recovery as barred u/s 25
and 26 of Indian Evidence Act.
51. In his cross, PW10 stated that he did not know the
mobile number of caller or if it was made by accused Rahul from
his mobile 8920441690 and he did not know if nearby residents
disclosed to IO that injured Shiv Charan, Mukesh, Pramod, Prem
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 29 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:11:15 +0530
and also Keshav assaulted accused Chironji Bai, Beni Bai and
Rahul after trespassing their jhuggi and they received injury and
denied having knowledge of suicide of Phoolwati on 01.03.2017
due to sexual assault by Keshav and due to conversation amongst
the accused persons being overheard by PW1 Shiv Charan led
him and his family members to assault accused persons and
threatened them, which shows that PW10, who was part of the
investigation had no knowledge that it was the complainant side,
which attacked the accused first as it had not come in the
investigation nor any complaint was proved by the accused
against said Keshav.
52. PW10 had no knowledge if accused persons wanted to
lodge an FIR against the complainant side and there was no
blood seen by PW10 at the spot. PW10 admitted that he had seen
PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4 and Keshav in the hospital, but did not
seize their cloths.
53. PW11 Moolchand deposed the fact that PW1, PW2,
PW3 and PW4 were treated at LBS Hospital and he collected
their MLCs and he recorded the statement of complainant Shiv
Charan, Ex.PW1/A and prepared rukka, Ex.PW11/A and also the
site plan, Ex.PW11/B. PW11 corroborated the version of PW1
regarding recording of Ex.PW1/A and preparation of site plan,
Ex.PW11/B (Mark X) at the instance of complainant.
54. In his cross-examination, PW11 stated that call
recorded vide DD No. 61A, Mark Z was regarding fight at Indra
Camp, Jhuggi, J J Colony, Delhi and he did not investigate the
mobile number 8920441690. No public person came forward to
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 30 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:11:20 +0530
give his statement in writing regarding the said fighting between
the complainant side and accused persons. IO PW11 correctly
identified the MLCs of accused Beni Bai, Ex.PW11/D1 dated
05.10.2017, but there is no visible laceration injury or any other
injury mentioned therein and the same was proved by DW1 Dr. S
Lal, who identified the signature of Dr. Abbas Ali. PW11 also
correctly identified the MLC of accused Chironji Bai,
Ex.PW11/D2 dated 05.10.2017, wherein bruises and abrasions on
arm and head and swelling was noted, which was also proved
through DW1 Dr. S Lal. DW1 also correctly identified MLC of
accused Rahul, Ex.PW11/D3 where there was a laceration on
eye-brow of .5x.5 cm, which is a minor one and multiple
abrasions on arm and back and it was also proved by PW11.
55. PW11 has explained that he received these MLCs, but
the accused persons did not give any statement or complaint
regarding registration of any FIR to him, which shows that
accused persons had not lodged any cross FIR against the
complainant side as they might have suffered minor
abrasions/injuries in the fight when they attacked the
complainant side and PW11 has denied that he deliberately did
not register the FIR or the statements of accused persons as
victims. Had the accused been aggrieved, they could have
approached the Court or higher police officials, but they did not,
which shows that they were the actual aggressors and not the
victims in the present case.
56. Four photographs, Ex.PW11/D4 to Ex.PW11/D7 were
shown to PW11, but he showed ignorance as to when they were
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 31 of 41
Digitally
signed by
KUMAR KUMAR
Date:
RAJAT
RAJAT 2025.07.21
14:11:26
+0530
taken and by whom. The photographs were objected to by Ld.
APP and the source of photographs with which Ld. Counsel for
accused wants to show the injury of one of the accused, has not
been proved as per law as neither any certificate u/s 65B Indian
Evidence Act has been proved nor any negatives have been
proved and thus, the said photographs cannot be relied upon and
objection of prosecution is sustained.
57. PW11 in his cross stated that no previous enmity
between complainant side and accused came to his knowledge or
if Phoolwati committed suicide due to eve teasing by Keshav and
he had no knowledge about DD No. 21A, Ex.PW11/D8 and MLC
of Phoolwati, Ex. PW11/D9. Even if these documents are proved
that does not prove the innocence of accused as accused persons
have nothing to do with suicide of Phoolwati too after 7 months
and that no FIR or complaint was made against complainant or
Keshav or any other family member.
58. The PW1 is consistent in his testimony and the other
statements made before police and his testimony is corroborated
by PW2, PW3 and PW4, which is further corroborated by
medical evidence proved through PW5, PW6 and PW7 and
nothing had come in their cross-examination to doubt their
veracity as witness and the police witnesses including PW11 IO
have also supported and corroborated the testimony of said
witnesses.
RECOVERY OF WEAPON
59. Ld. Counsel for accused persons argued that no
danda/weapon allegedly used in the crime, has been recovered
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 32 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:11:33 +0530
from the possession of accused persons or otherwise, but on the
contrary Ld. APP submits that recovery of weapon is not required
to prove the case of prosecution when ocular evidence is
available, which is proved by PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4.
60. In State of Rajasthan Vs. Arjun Singh, (2011) 9 SCC
115, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the non-recovery of pistol
or cartridge does not detract the case of the prosecution where
clinching and direct evidence is acceptable.
61. In Mritunjoy Biswas Vs. Pranab @ Kuti Biswas and
Anr, (2013) 12 SCC 796, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that
where unimpeachable ocular testimony, supported by medical
evidence is available, non-recovery of the weapon of assault is of
no advantage to the accused.
62. In Mohinder Vs. State, 2010 VII AD (Delhi) 645, it
was held that non-recovery of weapon of offence during
investigation is not such an important factor to neutralize the
direct evidence of complicity of accused in the murder of the
deceased.
In Lallan Prasad Sonkar Vs. State of Delhi decided on
05.12.2024, Hon’ble Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of
accused in a similar offence, in which there was no recovery of
weapon and held that:
“As to the non recovery of the weapon of offence i.e.
the danda, gainful reference is made to the decision in Aas Mohd.
@ Anshu Vs. State, reported as 2021:DHC:4339, wherein this
Court has held that mere non recovery of the weapon of offence
cannot be fatal to the case of the prosecution”.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 33 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:11:39 +0530
63. In Ved Kumari and Anr. Vs. State & Anr, 96 (2002)
DLT 820, it has been held that in order to constitute offence u/s
308 IPC, it must be proved:-
i) That the accused had committed an act,
ii) That the said act was committed with the intention or
knowledge to commit culpable homicide not amounting to
murder and,
iii) That the offence was committed under such circumstances,
the accused by that act had caused death, he would have been
guilty of culpable homicide.
64. It is clear from the said judgments that non-recovery
of weapon of offence is not fatal to the case of prosecution
particularly when there is direct evidence of eye
witnesses/injured, especially when it is untainted and
corroborated by medical evidence and in this case, there is
testimony of PW1 to PW4, who have correctly identified the
accused persons, who had abused PW1 Shiv Charan and caused
injuries to PW1 to PW4 with the danda and leg and fist blows.
Even if weapon is not recovered and injury is also caused by leg
and fist blows, which are grievous and simple in nature and that
too on vital parts of body and other parts of body, are sufficient to
attract Section 308 IPC.
65. Acts of the accused persons were intentional and they
had knowledge that if the danda and fist and leg blows were hit
on the forehead/head, which are vital/sensitive parts of the body
and also other parts of the body, it might be fatal to the injured
and still they hit the injured persons with full force which
resulted in grievous injury to PW2 and PW4 and simple injury to
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 34 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:11:44 +0530
PW1 and PW3 and by that act, they could have caused death of
the PW2 and PW4 and for that they could have been liable for
culpable homicide not amounting to murder and there was no
provocation to the accused persons to cause such injury to the
injured. All the accused persons acted in furtherance of their
common intention, which is apparent from the testimonies of all
the injured/PWs.
66. There was also allegation of criminal intimidation
against accused persons that they had threatened the complainant
and his family members.PW1 and PW2 have not deposed in their
examination in chief that accused persons had threatened them,
but in their cross-examinations by Ld. APP, PW1 admitted that
accused Rahul stated that ” Aaj tujhe maja chakhate hai, aaj tujhe
jaan se maar denge” and all the accused persons threatened to kill
them and said that “Baar baar ka jhagda aaj he khatam kar
denge”. PW2 admitted that all the accused persons said that ” Aaj
tumhe jinda nahi chodenge”.
67. There is no suggestion given in the cross-examination
of PW1 or PW2 that accused persons had not extended any threat
to kill the complainant and his family members and nothing has
come in their cross-examination, which could doubt the
testimonies of PW1 and PW2 regarding of extension of threat to
the complainant and his family members to kill them and thus,
prosecution has proved the charge u/s 506/34 IPC against the
accused persons as they had acted in furtherance of their
common intention and correctly identified by the complainant.
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 35 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:11:49 +0530
DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS
68. The accused persons have denied the incriminating
evidence put to them in their statements u/s 313 Cr.P.C. They
stated that all the witnesses are interested witnesses and they
were falsely implicated by the police officials in the present case
without any fault on their part.
69. Accused persons have taken the defence that it was
the complainant side which attacked them as son of complainant
namely Keshav used to stalk and sexually assault the daughter of
accused Beni Bai namely Phoolwati, who committed suicide on
01.03.2017 and when they were discussing this fact on
04.10.2017, the complainant and his family members attacked
them and accused persons sustained injuries, but the police did
not register any FIR and IO did not file the respective MLCs of
accused persons, which shows that it was the accused persons
also, who sustained injury. The accused persons did not lodge
any complaint against Keshav as complainant had tendered
apology in the PS and in this case also, the matter was settled, but
complainant side lodged false FIR.
DEFENCE WITNESSES
Accused persons examined two witnesses in their
defence.
70. DW1 Dr. S. Lal, HOD and Specialist Grade-I,
Department of Forensic Medicine, LBS Hospital, Delhi deposed
that on 01.03.2017, he was posted as above. On that day, he had
received inquest papers vide DD No. 21A dt. 01.03.2017, PS
Madhu Vihar and he conducted postmortem of deceased Phoolwati
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 36 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT 14:11:56
Date: 2025.07.21
+0530
D/o Munna Lal. During her external examination, he found ligature
mark present around the neck, whose details are already mentioned
in the PM Report, Ex.PW11/D9, prepared in his handwriting. The
cause of death was asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.
71. The MLC No. 14395 dt. 05.10.2017 at about 12:10 am,
of accused Beni Bai, W/o Munna Lal was prepared by JR in the
supervising authority of Dr. Abbas Ali, CMO, LBS Hospital, Delhi
in which she sustained injuries and he identified the signature of Dr.
Abbas Ali at point A and that the document, Ex.PW11/D1 is correct.
72. Carbon copy of MLC bearing no. 014394 dated
05.10.2017 of Smt. Chironji Bai of LBS Hospital, Ex.DW1/DX
(OSR) brought by Sh. Kamal, Nursing Orderly, MRD, was shown
to DW1 and he identified the signature of Dr. Sudesh Kumar at
Point A.
The injured was brought by ASI Rajender at about
12.05 AM. The MLC bears the following injuries:
1. Laceration over 1×0.5 cm over right index finger, right middle
finger.
2. Linear bruise 6×2 cm over left arm.
2. Swelling left cheek 1×2 cm.
73. The said injuries were mentioned from Portion A to
A1 in the handwriting of Dr. Sudesh Kumar, who had worked
under the supervision of DW1 and that is why he had identified
his handwriting and signature and he had left the hospital and his
whereabouts are not known.
74. Carbon copy of MLC bearing no. 014395 dated
05.10.2017 of Smt. Beni Bai of LBS Hospital, Ex.DW1/DX1
(OSR) brought by Sh. Kamal, Nursing Orderly, MRD, was shownState Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 37 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:12:04 +0530
to DW1 and he identified the signature of Dr. Sudesh Kumar at
Point A.
75. The injured was brought by ASI Rajender at about
12.10 AM. The MLC bears the injury mentioned from Portion A
to A1 i.e. “swelling over left parietal region of head”, in the
handwriting of Dr. Sudesh Kumar.
76. Carbon copy of MLC bearing no. 014392 dated
04.10.2017 of Rahul of LBS Hospital, Ex.DW1/DX2 (OSR)
brought by Sh. Kamal, Nursing Orderly, MRD, was shown to DW1
and he identified the signature of Dr. Sudesh Kumar at Point A.
77. The injured was brought by ASI Rajender at about
11.55 PM. The MLC bears the following injuries:
1. Two small lacerations of 1×0.5 cm over right side forehead and
right eyebrow
2. Two small abrasions over right hand dorsum.
3. Multiple bruises over right forearm, back and left shoulder.
4. Multiple linear superficial incised wound over left forearm.
5. Small abrasion over right shoulder.
6. Small swelling over forehead.
The said injuries were mentioned from Portion A to
A1 in the handwriting of Dr. Sudesh Kumar.
78. DW2 Inspector Hawa Singh deposed that DD No.
21A dated 01.03.2017, Ex.DW2/DW (OSR) PS Madhu Vihar
brought by HC Yogesh, has been shown to DW1. In the said DD
at Sl. No. 21, it is recorded that Ms. Phoolwati, D/o Munna Lal
had hanged and she was admitted in Max Hospital and report has
been lodged and same has been intimated to DW2 and he went to
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 38 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:12:11 +0530
the spot and inquest proceedings were done by DW2. After
sometime, he was transferred from PS Madhu Vihar to Crime
Branch and the inquest file was handed over to MHC(R).
79. On perusal of said MLCs, it was apparent that only
minor injuries were caused to the accused Beni Bai, Chironji Bai
and Rahul as there are mostly abrasions and swelling and only
slight lacerations caused to Chironji Bai and Rahul, which can be
caused when they attacked the complainant side with leg and fist
blows and when the other side might have resisted the same and
it was the accused persons, who were the aggressors and attacked
the complainant side.
80. DW2 only proved the DD No. 21A dated 01.03.2017,
Ex.DW2/DW (OSR), wherein it is recorded that Phoolwati, aged
about 22 years, committed suicide and she was taken to Max
Hospital and no one has been named in the said DD, which was
recorded 7 months before the occurrence in the present case.
81. No complaint or FIR was lodged by the accused
persons against the said Keshav for sexual assault of Phoolwati
or against the complainant and his family members in the present
case that they had caused injury to the accused persons. In the
PMR of said Phoolwati, Ex.PW11/D9, neither Keshav nor
complainant or his family members were named. Thus, it cannot
be a valid defence of the accused persons that it was the
complainant side, which attacked them when they overheard their
conversation regarding sexual assault on Phoolwati and her
suicide and also it is difficult to sustain the defence that if
accused sustained some injury, they have to be acquitted in every
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 39 of 41
Digitally signed
by KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.07.21
14:12:26 +0530
case when the accused persons suffered minor injuries as per
their MLCs, which are not filed by the IO. The judgment of
Bhagwan Sahai (Supra) relied upon by the accused persons will
not be applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present
case as in that case there was an old enmity between the parties
and it was a cross case and injuries to the accused were not
discussed by the Ld. Trial Court and the Hon’ble High Court and
in this case, there is no opinion of any doctor qua nature of
injuries caused to the accused nor any accused examined
himself/herself as witness nor they called any public witness
from the neighbourhood, who would have seen the occurrence to
prove their contention that complainant side attacked them and
they only defended themselves in private defence or to rebut the
contention of prosecution that complainant side had attacked
them and this cannot be treated as a case of free fight as was in
the case of Bhagwan Sahai (Supra) and as such accused persons
are not entitled to any benefit of doubt.
82. It was contended by prosecution that IO had not filed
said MLCs of accused persons as no case or complaint was
lodged by accused against the complainant and his family
members qua any beating caused to them, as admitted by him in
his cross-examination and no charge-sheet was filed against
complainant and his family members, which appears to be a
reasonable and valid contention and even otherwise it is settled
that in case of defective investigation, benefit may not always be
given to accused, if the case of prosecution is proved by ocular
evidence and the evidence of injured witness is always on the
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 40 of 41
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:12:32 +0530
higher footing, if it inspires confidence and is further
corroborated, which has actually happened in this case.
83. The defence of the accused persons are not such as to
cast doubt in the prosecution case. The complainant and other
police officials have correctly identified accused persons during
trial and the defence of the accused persons appear to be an
afterthought and not plausible. Further, the other judgments of
Mange Ram (Supra) and Anil (Supra) relied upon by Ld. Counsel
for accused persons are also not applicable to the facts and
circumstances of the present case.
CONCLUSION
84. In view of the discussion above, the evidence led by
Prosecution is cogent, trustworthy, consistent, corroborative and
inspires confidence. In the totality of the circumstances brought
on record by way of evidence, this court is of the view that the
prosecution has proved its case against accused Rahul, Om
Prakash, Bandhu, Beni Bai and Chironji Bai u/s 308/506/34 IPC
beyond reasonable doubt.
85. Consequently, the accused Rahul, Om Prakash,
Bandhu, Beni Bai and Chironji Bai are convicted of the offences
punishable u/s 308/506/34 IPC. Accused Govind Dass had
expired and case against him was abated on 28.03.2019.
Bail bonds cancelled. Surety stands discharged.
The accused shall be heard separately on sentence.
Digitally signed
KUMAR by KUMAR
RAJAT
RAJAT Date: 2025.07.21
14:12:39 +0530
PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (KUMAR RAJAT)
ON THIS 21 DAY OF JULY, 2025. ASJ-07/SHD/KKD Court/Delhi
st
21.07.2025
State Vs. Rahul & Ors. FIR No. 350/2017 PS Madhu Vihar Page 41 of 41
[ad_1]
Source link