Delhi HC grants relief to convict for good conduct

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal moved by a convict of an attempt to murder case. On the other hand, the High Court has modified his sentence and passed an order to release him for the period he has already undergone for his good conduct in the last one year. He had challenged the judgement of his conviction.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri in his recent judgement said,'' Keeping in view the appellant's age, the period of incarceration, his jail conduct for the last one year and other mitigating circumstances, this court deems it fit to modify the order on sentence and direct that the appellant be released on the period already undergone by him.

The bench said,'' he has already undergone the sentence of four years, five months and nine days, along with his remission of six months and three days. His unexpired portion of the sentence is one year and 18 days. The fine amount has been deposited. His jail conduct for the last one year was also satisfactory.

Justice Ohri said,'' the appeal is dismissed insofar as challenge to the judgement on conviction is concerned, however, the order on sentence is modified to the aforesaid extent.

The trial court had convicted Saleem Khan for the offence of an attempt to murder and sentenced him for a period of six years. The court had imposed a fine of Rs. 5,000/- on him. He was also sentenced for a period of one year along with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- under section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by a dangerous weapon or means) IPC.

Advocate B. Badrinath, the counsel for the appellant, contended that the testimony of the complainant Mohd Yunus is unreliable on account of prior enmity with the appellant, which has been admitted by the complainant himself.

It was further argued by the counsel that, ''neither the weapon of offence was recovered during investigation nor were the blood-stained clothes of complaint were seized.

Appellant's counsel added that the testimony of Sahil, the brother of the complaint Yunus, was unreliable on the ground that he had not accompanied his brother to the hospital. It was also submitted that the PCR Form pertaining to the call on 100 number was not produced.

He also contended that there were contradictions in the testimonies of the complainant and his brother at the time of the incident. Lastly, he contended that the Investigation Officer had not recorded the statement of any public witness.

On the other hand, Additional Public Prosecutor supported the conviction and sentence. It was submitted that the testimonies of both Mohd. Yunus and Sahil are consistent with each other and reliable, as both have deposed that they were assaulted by the appellant, who was already known to them.

The bench while rejecting the contention of the appellant said, ''combined with the fact that the testimonies of the complainant and his brother Sahil are cogent and consistent, the contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the weapon of offence was not recovered, has no merit.

The next contention was that the testimonies of the complainant and his brother have contradictions on the aspect of the time of the incident. While the complainant deposed that the incident occurred around 10.00 pm, his brother Sahil deposed that the incident occurred around 08.00 pm.

The bench said,'' in this regard, it is noted that in the alleged history of offence recorded by the doctor concerned in the MLC of Sahil, it was mentioned that the physical assault took place around 10.00 pm as per the patient himself.

According to the prosecution, on the day of the incident, on 24 May 2017, around 10.00 pm, the complainant Mohd. Yunus was going along with his brother Sahil to take medicine. The appellant came and assaulted him with a knife. The assault resulted in injuries on his neck and on his right shoulder.

The prosecution said, when Sahil tried to save his brother Yunus, he was also given a knife blow to him on his face. After it, Sahil made a call to 100 number. A PCR reached the spot and took them to GTB Hospital. In this regard, a case was lodged at Khajoori Khas police station in Delhi.

( With inputs from ANI )

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor