Delhi High Court Criminal Case Judgments

_*🎓🎓THE DELHI HIGH COURT*_

      _* CRIMINAL CASE*_

_*01 =   Section 374(2)  CRPC   Sec. 302 IPC  Murder Conviction & sentence  Challenged  Hostile witness Conduct  Witness PW15 was put to cross-examination, but accused did not cross-examine witness despite opportunity being granted PW12 corroborated testimony of PW15 Testimony of PW32 also establishes presence of PW15 at spot immediately after incident PW15 presence at house of deceased was natural, he being domestic servant of deceased Statement of witness PW-24,  Jaswinder Singh @ Jassa v/s State CRL.A. 1402/2014 03/07/18*_

_*02 =  Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, Section 12 Interim maintenance-Mere fact that spouse with whom the child is living is having a source of income, even if sufficient, would in no way absolve other spouse of his obligation to make his contribution towards maintenance and welfare of child, even if, means/income/salary of that spouse may be less than means/income/salary of other spouse -Minor child staying with the mother/respondent needs medical attention/care on regular basis and even paternity is not disputed Rajat Johar v/s Divya Johar  Crl-MC 1728/2015 17/11/17*_

_*03 =  Section 302  read with Section 34 IPC -Murder-Proof-Testimonies of three interested eye-witnesses do not satisfy the twin requirements of truthfulness and reliability-Being interested witnesses, their evidence also fails the test of independent corroboration by medical and other evidence-If the eye-witness testimonies of prosecution witnesses are kept aside, there is no other independent evidence to prove presence of three accused at the scene of crime-As the direct evidence of interested eye-witnesses not inspiring confidence, motive does assume significance-Failure of prosecution to prove motive for crime also fatal to its case-Unsafe to base conviction of appellants on unreliable testimonies of interested witnesses-Appellants acquitted Dilbagh Singh V. State CRL.A .434/2000 29-1-18*_

_*04 = COFEPOSA Act, Sec. 3  Petitioners are detailed pursuant to the orders passed by Detaining authority  Petitioners contend that they have merely been provided the soft copies of documents on CDs without the relevant hardware to read the said CDs & thus they have not been able to view the contents of the said documents relied upon by the Detaining Authority while passing the detention orders  ISSUE  Whether the detention of the petitioner are vitiated as they have not been provided with the relevant hardware to read the CDs'  HELD  We are of the view that the detention of the petitioners stand vitiated on account of non supply of either the printed copies/ hard copies of the documents contained Dharaneesh Raju Shetty v/s Union of India W.P.(CRL) 1270/2018

 01/06/18*_

_*05 = Section 376(2)(g) IPC  -Gang rape-Conviction-Alteration-Initially at the time when statement of prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 of CrPC she had attributed an individual role to the appellant-Nowhere was the version of prosecution that this was a case of gang rape -Vital improvements in version of prosecutrix-Name of co-accused had been uttered for the first time in the court-No detail of any date, time or place was given as to when such act was committed upon prosecutrix-Conviction under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC is improper and altered to one under Section 376 of the IPC Party Name:-Vinod @ Banti V. State CRL.A .1586/11 15-01-18*_

_*06 = Section 302 IPC Murder of wife-Applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC-Death of deceased took place in the dead of night when, admittedly, appellant was with the deceased-Neither presumption under Section 106 of the Evidence Act discharge by appellant nor he probablised his defence that hanging was suicidal- Appellant appear to caused the death of deceased without pre meditation in a sudden fight or a sudden quarrel, and in the heat of passion- Since no motive has been found for appellant to have murdered his wife, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Exception IV to Section 300 IPC-Conviction of appellant altered from Section 302 to one under Section 304 Part I of IPC-Appeal allowed in partybFeroz V. State NCT Of Delhi -CRL.A .19/13 08-01-18*_

_*07 =  Electricity Act,Section 135-Theft of electricity Conviction-No document on record to show that appellant was either the owner or the occupier or the user of the said premises and was using the electricity generated from the illegal meter installed at that premises-Appellant was the owner of adjacent shop-Joint inspection report and seizure memo had not been signed by appellant-Mere bald statement of prosecution witnesses that they had noted the presence of appellant at the time of inspection would not be sufficient to nail the appellant-Address mentioned in summon is of disputed premises adjacent to shop of appellant and summon as per report of process server had been received by appellant at the adjacent shop Inderjeet v/s Stat ,CRl-A 1197/2012 15/02/2018*_

_*08 = Section.186, 332, 353, 120B, 504, 342, 506 Part-II/323,34 IPC  Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions.  Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty  Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty  Criminal conspiracy  Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.Punishment for wrongful confinement Punishment for criminal intimidation.Prakash Jarwal v/s. State of NCT Delhi  BAIL APPLN. 495/2018 09/03/18*_

_*09 = PC ACT , Sections 7, 13(1)(d) & 13(2)-llegal gratification-Conviction-Allegation of complainant that traffic police was demanding money from complainant while he was plying his public transport-Testimony of a witness has to be accepted and read as a whole and no one part which suits the prosecution can alone be picked up to order an conviction-Evidence collected as a whole does not inspire confidence-Star witness didn't support the case of prosecution Vikram Singh v/s CBI Crl-A 280/2012 12/03/2018*_

_*10 = Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC Murder-Conviction-Testimonies of eye-witnesses not helpful to the prosecution in implicating present appellant-Arrest and recoveries of weapon of offence by themselves are not enough to fix guilt of appellant without any substantive evidence connecting him to the crime-Benefit of doubt extended to appellant-Conviction of appellant set  Karan Singh v/s NCT Of Delhi CRL-A 500/2002 13/04/18*_

11 =  Sections 308, 324 & 354 IPC and  Section 10 of the POCSO Act-Acquittal-Petition for leave to appeal-Plea of unsoundness of mind-Version of complainant is totally contrary to the contents of the complaint and in conformity with the alleged history given in the MLC of fall from the stairs-Trial court found that respondent takes time in comprehending and formulating his responses to the query put forth, even if the queries are simple in nature-Finding of Trial Court that accused deserves benefit of doubt and also benefit of protection under Section 84 of the IPC as he is incapable of understanding nature of his acts cannot be interfered with-Leave to appeal petition is declined State (NCT) OF Delhi CRL.L.P.575/16 12-03-18

12  = Section 482 CRPC Dismissal of revision petition challenging order of framing of charge and rejection of application for supply of deficient documents-Challenge to impugned order-Petitioner by revision petition challenged the order of trial court on two counts; one non-supply of English translation of charge-sheet and second framing of charge-Since the Revisional Court erred in not noticing that the challenge was also to the order framing of charges, rejection of revision petition on ground that charge has not been framed was unwarranted-Vijay Kumar Aggarwal V. State CRL.M.C. .1311/14 27-02-18

13 = Sections 34/300/302/325 IPC  Murder Life imprisonment  Appeal against conviction and sentence Law relating to interested and/or related witnesses  Exception-4 to Section 300 IPC  HELD This Court is not persuaded to hold that the findings of the trial Court as regards the guilt of the two Appellants for the murder of Ramesh or for causing injuries to PW-6 suffer from any legal infirmity There are at least three injuries on the head and the injury on the chest is so severe that it caused the fracture found in the ribs. Even the liver of the deceased got damaged in the process There is absolutely no scope for concluding that the offence is not one of murder punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 IPC Raj Singh  V/s. State CRL.A.306/2003  09/08/18

14 = NI ACT Sections 138 & 142 -- Dishonour of cheque Cause of action Notice of demand issued No complaint filed  Cheque represented for payment Second notice of demand issued  Cause of action accrued with first notice  Fresh notice of demand not give rise to fresh cause of action Complaint not maintainable. Neerja Parekh v/s  Amit Enterprises Crl. M.C. 1692/2011 29-02-2012

15 =  -Section 482 r/w Sections 309 & 300  CRPC Criminal Procedure  Inherent Power/Petition under Article 227  Quashing of criminal  proceedings Double jeopardy and doctrine of res sub-judice Allegations of defamation leading to both Civil and Criminal Procedure  Respondent-1, not only filed Civil suit claiming damages but also initiated instant criminal proceedings qua defamation  Arvind Kejriwal v/s  Arun Jaitley  

Crl. M.C.2417/2016 19/10/16

16 = Sections 307, 120 B & 34 IPC  Attempt to murder  Conviction  Appeal against  Modification in order Appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo SI for 5 years  Appellant does not wish to contest the appeal on merits  Appellant prayed for modification in order on sentence -- Appellant has served 4 years 4 months and 19 days, besides remission which he has earned up to date  Appellant is a young man of 29 years Pramod @ Pammi v/s State Crl.A.  1293/2012 08/11/13

17 = Section 433A CRPC Restriction on powers of remission or commutation in certain cases  Judgment which convicted the petitioner directed that, prior to actual imprisonment for a period of 25 years, case of the petitioner should not be considered for remission Application for Parole is rejected by the respondents relying  upon said direction  Held, petitioner undergone imprisonment for more than 10 years Aman Kumar Rastogi v/s State W.P. (Crl.) 1174 of 2015 18/08/15

18 = Sections 232, 313 (1)(b) CRPC- Right of the accused to move Court at the stage of acquittal  Under Section 313(1)(b) the Court is required to question him generally on the case after the witnesses for the prosecution have been examined and before he is called for his defence Section 311 empowers the Court to summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined, for the just decision" in a case Ranjan Dwivedi v/s C.B.I. Crl. Rev. P. 142/2007 15/11/07

19 = Section . 482 CRPC  Sec. 419 IPC Prevention of Corruption Act,  Sec. 13(1)(d) & 13(2)  Ld. Special Judge convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 419 IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) PC Act  ISSUES Whether abuse of position is a precursor for conviction under Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act even if the case falls under Section 13(1)(d)(i) of Prevention of Corruption Act Whether on facts the prosecution has lead admissible evidence to prove that the appellant impersonated himself and derived illegal gratification HELD  Amendment as introduced to Section 13 (1)(d) PC Act clearly deletes the words in discharge of his officials duties which gave a restricted meaning to the provisions of Section 13 (1)(d) of the PC Act Manoj Kumar Mishra Vs. CBI CRL.A. 1177/2016 , 23/05/18

20 = Section. 120-B & 364-A IPC Criminal conspiracy  Kidnapping for ransom, etc.  Indian Evidence  Sec. 114  Court may presume evidence of certain facts  Conviction & sentence  Challenged  Child witness  Reliance on  Test Identification Parade (TIP)  Non-holding of Beyond reasonable doubts  Benefit of doubt  Statement of PW-1 u/S. 164 was not immediately recorded before MM  No valid explanation by prosecution for this delay  Key element of S. 364 A does not emerge from testimony of PW-1  Despite police having CD containing voices of caller who made ransom calls, no attempt was made to collect specimen voice samples of A-3 and A-4 and send CD containing recorded conversations to FSL for comparison of questioned voice with specimen voices  PW-5 & PW-6 failed to support prosecution Abhay Kumar Mishra Vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi  CRL.A. 1004/2017 20/03/18

21 :- Section 376(2)(f) IPC for raping a minor aged 5 years and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3 lakhs and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. Out of the fine, if recovered, a compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- is to be given to the prosecutrix Shamsher Singh v/s State of Delhi  Crl-A 420/2012 30-Sep-2014

22 :- Arms Act,  Section 25  Quashing of FIR Marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 stands dissolved by decree of competent court  Disputes between them settled  Parties decided to go their separate ways  Petitioner has already remarried  No useful purpose served by continuation of the criminal complaint FIR and proceedings thereto quashed.Arun Sirohi v/s State Crl. M.C.. 1405 of 2008 02-May-2008

23 :- Murder Trial  Rule of evidence  Circumstantial evidence  Last seen evidence  Last seen is specie of circumstantial evidence Foundation of last seen theory is based on principles of probability and cause and connection Where a fact has occurred with a series of acts, proceeding or accompanying it, it can safely be presumed that the fact was possible as a direct cause of the preceding or accompanying acts,Vishal v/s State Crl-A  413 of 2000 01/02/16

24 :-  NDPS ACT Sections 20(B) & 20(C)  Illegal possession of Charas  Possession of Charas weighing 692 gms  Possession of intermediate quantity of Charas Conviction under Section 20(B) of NDPS Act Appellant has undergone incarceration of 5 years  Mitigating factors  Period of sentence reduced to period already undergone by him  Fine of Rs. 1 lac reduced to Rs. 50,000/-.Mohd. Ayub v/s State of NCT of Delhi CRL.A. 635/2013 06/01/16

25 :-  Section 197 CRPC -Sanction for prosecution-Case involving custodial death-Contention that no specific sanction granted for offence of murder-Rejected-Sanction is granted on the particular set of facts and not provisions of law R.S Dhaiya V. State (Through NCT Of Delhi -CRL.A .54/04 01-18

26 :-  Constitution of India, Articles 226 & 227-Writ-Petition for quashing of order passed by Special Judge imposing cost upon Director of Prosecution, CBl for a causing delay in adjudication of the Sessions case by not posting a SPP well in advance before the previous SPP was relieved-Posting and transfers of the public prosecutors in CBl is the prerogative of Director of Prosecution or Director CBl-Special Judge has no jurisdiction or authority to question the transfer of SPP posted in the Court-Simply because SPP was transferred and another PP was posted CBI v/s Shrikant Jain  WP CRl 2865/2017 29/01/18

28 :-    Section 482 CRPC  Sect. 34, 406 & 498A IPC Petitioner No. 1 got married to respondent No. 2 Petitioner No. 2 & 3 are parents of Petitioner No. 1  Disputes arose between the parties and accordingly respondent No. 2 got registered FIR against the Petitioner No. 1  Parties have settled their dispute and Petitioner No. 1 has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR  ISSUE  Whether the FIR registered against the petitioner is liable to be quashed on the basis on settlement  HELD  Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by mutual consent and decree Abhijit S Bellur. Vs. State CRL.M.C.3531/2018  19/07/18

29  :- Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, Section 12 Interim maintenance-Mere fact that spouse with whom the child is living is having a source of income, even if sufficient, would in no way absolve other spouse of his obligation to make his contribution towards maintenance and welfare of child, even if, means/income/salary of that spouse may be less than means/income/salary of other spouse -Minor child staying with the mother/respondent needs medical attention/care on regular basis and even paternity is not disputed Rajat Johar v/s Divya Johar Crl-MC 1728/2015 17/11/17

30 :- Criminal law Additional defence documents and witnesses  Summoning of  Fact that petitioner can produce certified copies of record would not suffice as petitioner would be required to summon original records for proving certified copies  Petitioner is in custody so no benefit would accrue to petitioner in case petitioner is permitted to summon record as well as witnesses sought for No prejudice would be caused to prosecution in case petitioner is permitted to summon record as well as witnesses Om Prakash Chautala v/s Central Bureau Of InvestigationCRL.M.C. 2646/2018 27/07/18

31:-  Section 378(4) CRPC Leave petition against order of acquittal-Case under Section 135 of Customs Act- Summons to appear before investigating agency were sent by speed post-No sincere and genuine efforts were made by investigating agency to serve summons personally upon respondent-Specific denial by respondent that no such summons were received by him-Trial court committed no error to observe that before initiating criminal proceedings against the respondent, Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence V. Raju Arora CRL.L.P. .6/18 05-02-18

Contact us

Legallites Law Firm Ch.no. 1416 Rohini court Delhi 110085