State Nct Of Delhi vs Raghu Raj & Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 4241 Del

$~3
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CRL.L.P. 196/2013
      STATE NCT OF DELHI                               ..... Petitioner
               Represented by:          Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP

                                        versus

      RAGHU RAJ & ORS.                                 ..... Respondents
              Represented by:           Mr.Madhav Khurana, Advocate for
                                        R-1
                                        Mr.Haneef Mohammad, Advocate for
                                        R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
                      ORDER

% 08.09.2014

Crl.M.A.No.4622/2013 & Crl.L.P.No.196/2013

1. There is a delay of 172 days in seeking leave to appeal against the decision dated July 17, 2012, in so far Raghuraj and Giriraj have been acquitted and co-accused Radhe Shyam alone has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and Section 324 IPC.

2. The non-application of mind in filing the petition seeking leave to appeal is evidenced by the fact it treats as if all accused have been acquitted. This explains the prayer made to grant leave to appeal and reverse the decision dated July 17, 2012. This explains even Radhe Shyam being impleaded as a respondent.

3. On February 19, 2014, noting that Radhe Shyam had been convicted, the leave petition was restricted to questioning the acquittal of Raghuraj and

Giriraj.

4. Before the State could file the criminal leave petition, Crl.Apeal No.1348/2012 filed by Radhe Shyam was disposed of by this Court on March 22, 2013, altering his conviction for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part I IPC.

5. The said decision dated March 22, 2013 extensively discusses the evidence and concludes that the manner in which the prosecution alleged the incident to have taken place was incorrect. The Division Bench has noted that there was a scuffle between two parties. On one side was the party comprising Radhe Shyam, Raghuraj, Giriraj and one Rohit. On the other side was the party comprising Shambhu PW-1, Ravi PW-5, Avdesh PW-4, Netrapal PW-2, Dharmbir PW-7 and the deceased. The Division Bench has brought out that probably the group of which the deceased was a member had attacked Radhe Shyam's residence. The Division Bench noted that there were injuries suffered by Radhe Shyam, Raghuraj as also Giriraj which were not explained by the prosecution. The Division Bench concluded that in the melee, Radhe Shyam took out a knife and inflicted a solitary stab injury on the deceased. Under the circumstances the Division Bench altered Radhe Shyam's conviction from 302 IPC to one under 304 Part-I IPC.

6. In view of the reasoning of the Division Bench it is apparent that as regards the two co-accused who have been acquitted no case would be made out to grant the State leave to appeal for the reason as per the decision of the Division Bench it was a free-fight between two groups without any pre- meditation and during the sudden quarrel one member of the group took out a knife and stab one member of the other group. Only one blow was struck.

7. Raghuraj and Giriraj cannot thus be fastened with any liability under

Section 34 IPC.

8. Thus, whether we condone the delay in seeking leave to appeal or dismiss the petition seeking leave to appeal on merits hardly matters. We dismiss the petition seeking leave to appeal as also the application delay to be condoned.

CRL.L.P. 196/2013 Dismissed.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 08, 2014 skb