VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2011 › High Court of Delhi

Rashid v. State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
25 July 2011
Bench
Badar Durrez Ahmedauthor, Veena Birbal
Case no.
CRL.A. 865/2009

Judgment

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

VEENA BIRBAL, J JULY 25, 2011 SR/dutt

Case details

Parties and counsel

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on 25.07.2011 + CRL.A. 865/2009 RASHID … Appellant - versus - STATE … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr P. N. Bhan For the Respondent : Ms Richa Kapur AND + CRL.A. 814/2009 NASIR … Appellant - versus - STATE … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr R. M. Tufail with Mr Anwar A. Khan, Mr Farooq Chaudhary and Mr Vishal Sehijpal For the Respondent : Ms Richa Kapur CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes BADAR DURREZ AHMED 1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 67/2009 on 25.09.2009. The case arose out of FIR No. 368/2005 registered under Sections 302/120B/34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at police station Bhajanpura on 03.09.2005. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the appellants Nasir and Rashid in these two appeals were found guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 302/120B IPC and the appellant Rashid was additionally convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/120B/34 IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The appellants were also aggrieved by the order on sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi on 30.09.2009, whereby the appellant Nasir was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for life and to also pay a fine of ` 5,000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 302/120B IPC. The appellant Rashid was similarly sentenced to a term of imprisonment for life and was also directed to pay a fine of ` 5,000/- in default of which, he was to undergo simple imprisonment for six months in respect of the offence punishable under Section 302/120B/34 IPC. The appellant Rashid was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay a fine of ` 3,000/- and in default of such payment, he was to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The benefit of Section 428 Cr. P.C was given to the appellants. 2. The prosecution's case is that on 02.09.2005 an information had been received by DD No. 25-A through lady constable Babita that a man was lying dead in main Gali No. 1, Noor-E-Elahi Colony. On receipt of the said information, Sub-Inspector Beghraj, Head Constable Jagbir Singh and Constable Bhim Singh reached the spot. Inspector Ombir Singh with driver Kiran Pal and Constable Digamber are also stated to have arrived at the spot. There they found a red motorcycle of the make Hero Honda Splendor bearing registration No. DL-7SL-7186 in front of house No. 95. They also found blood at the spot and a chappal of the left foot lying there. They noticed an empty cartridge lying at some distance. On their arrival at the spot, the police party learnt that the injured had been taken to GTB hospital by a PCR van. Head Constable Jagbir Singh was directed to guard the spot and Inspector Ombir Singh along with other police officials reached at GTB hospital in a government vehicle and obtained the MLC bearing No. B-3262/05 of an unknown person wherein it was stated that the patient was brought dead with an alleged history of a gunshot wound. 3. The prosecution's case further is that at GTB hospital, one Smt. Hasiba met the police party and she identified the deceased as her husband. Her statement was allegedly recorded wherein she stated that shortly after 10 pm on 02.09.2005, her husband had received a call on his mobile and on receiving the said call, he immediately left the house on his motorcycle bearing No. DL-7SL-7186. When her h

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.