Zulfikar v. State & Anr

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

ARUNA SURESH, J.

February 16, 2009 mm

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI Judgment reserved on : February 12, 2009 % Judgment delivered on : February 16, 2009 + CRL.A. 57/2001 ZULFIKAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pawan Sharma and Ms.Richa Kapoor APPs for the State. CRL.A. 631/2000 ALIMUDDIN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pawan Sharma and Ms.Richa Kapoor APPs for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ARUNA SURESH 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. 1. Our apology for a brief judgment. Arguments concluded in the two appeals at 4:30 PM on 12.2.2009, leaving us no time to dictate judgment in open Court. 2. The facts are in a very narrow compass and indeed, learned counsel for the appellant conceded that the entire contours of the case of the prosecution, duly proved through the testimony of the eye witnesses and in particular the injured eye witness Rahisuddin PW-2, are to be found in the rukka Ex.PW- 2/A. 3. The police reached the place of the occurrence when information conveyed was recorded vide DD No.20A at 11:55 AM on 29.4.1996 informing the police that Danu has been injured. Const.Surinder Singh PW-8 posted at the police chowki accompanied by HC Devender Kumar PW-9 reached the place of occurrence and learnt that the injured had been removed in a PCR van to the hospital by Const.Sukh Ram Pal. 4. SI Jeet Singh PW-16, was also handed a copy of DD No.20A and he also proceeded to the spot. Therefrom he went to the hospital i.e. GTB Hospital since he was informed that Danu Mia as also Rahisuddin were removed to the hospital. He learnt that Danu Mia had died in the hospital and Rahisuddin was given medical treatment for an injury on his hand. Rahisuddin was suffering a superficial injury caused on his hand by a sharp edged weapon. He made his statement Ex.PW-2/A that 29.4.2006 was Bakr Id and everyone was in a festive mood and taking dinner. Appellant Zulfikar came and accused Danu Mia of defaming his sister. A verbal spat ensued between the two and Alimmudin (Saleem) also came and joined. Zulfikar caught the hand of Alimmudin to lead him out. Danu Mia followed. All of a sudden, Alimudding took out a knife. He i.e. Rahisuddin saw this and, to save Danu Mia attempted to snatch the knife from the hand of Alimuddin upon which Alimuddin inflicted a cut on his right hand. At that Zulfikar exhorted Alimuddin to assault Danu (Mar Saale Danu Ko) at which Alimuddin inflicted a stab blow on the right shoulder of Danu. A crowd had gathered. Zulfikar was apprehended at the spot and that he was brought to the hospital along with Danu. 5. It is not in dispute that Zulfikar was apprehended at the spot and accused Alimuddin was apprehended soon thereafter. It is also not in dispute that the weapon of offence i.e. the knife used was recovered from a charpai in the house of Alimuddin pursuant to his disclosure statement Ex.PW-16/H. 6. Salim PW-1, has corroborated what was disclosed to the police by Rahisuddin who appeared as PW-2 and deposed said facts and withstood cross examination. 7. As per the post-mortem report Ex.PW-4/A proved by Dr.K.K.Banerjee who conducted the post-mortem of Danu on 30.4.1996, two injuries were seen on the body of Danu. The first was an incised wound present on the right axilla in the front starting from the tip of right shoulder cutting across the anterior axillary fold, the tip of right axilla going 2.5 cms in front of posterior axillary fold. The second wound was an incised subcutaneous tissue deep wound on the lateral border of left abdomen. 8. Unfortunately for Danu Mia, the first wound cut through the blood vessels and resulted in excessive bleeding. He died due to shock resulting from haemorrhage. 9. The learned Trial Judge has held that th