Delhi District Court
State vs Rohit Soni on 20 February, 2026
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SYED ZISHAN ALI
WARSI: ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 04 :
NEW DELHI DISTRICT: PATIALA HOUSE
COURT: NEW DELHI
SC 15/2023
STATE Vs. ROHIT SONI AND ORS.
FIR No. 203/2022
PS: Mandir Marg
U/s. 186/353/332/279/34 IPC
& 128/194(C) M.V.Act
CNR No. DLND01-000474-2023
STATE VS. ROHIT SONI AND ORS.
SC No. : 15/2023
Date of offence : 03.10.2022
Accused : 1. Rohit Soni
S/o Sh. Vinod Soni
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:21
+0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 1 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
2
R/o E-61, A-205, D-1
Block, Jhuggi Nand
Nagri, New Delhi.
2. Ravi Soni
S/o Sh. Vinod Soni
R/o E-61, A-205, D-1
Block, Jhuggi Nand
Nagri, New Delhi.
3. Sheetal
S/o Sh. Ram Babu
R/o A-4/125, Tang
Stand, Nand Nagri,
New Delhi.
Offence : U/s.186/353/333/279/34 IPC
& 128/194(C) M.V. Act
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused No.1 Rohit Soni
and Accused No.2 Ravi
Soni are convicted.
Accused No.3 Sheetal is
acquitted.
Date of committal: 10.01.2023
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 2 of 101 Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:26
+0530
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
3
Date of arguments: 12.02.2026
Date of Judgment: 20.02.2026
JUDGMENT
1. Accused persons were committed for trial
vide order dated 10.01.2023 by court of Sh. Kapil
Gupta, Ld. MM-07, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi
District, New Delhi.
2. On 12.01.2023, fresh case received by
way of assignment before Sh. Harjyot Singh Bhalla,
ASJ-04, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts,
New Delhi with a view to put accused persons on
trial.
3. Charge under Section 186/353/34 IPC
was framed against all accused persons, charge under Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:11:34
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 3 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
4Section 333/34 was framed against accused persons
namely Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni and charge under
Section 279 IPC & 128/194 M.V. Act was framed
against accused Rohit Soni on 09.08.2023. On the
facts that on 03.10.2022 at about 2:30 am, P.K. Road,
near R.K. Ashram Metro Station, Mandir Marg, New
Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Mandir Marg, they
all in furtherance of their common intention,
obstructed police official duty namely HC Naresh and
HC Vinod from performing their official duty and
assaulted them and thereby they all have committed
offences punishable u/s 186/353/34 IPC. Further, on
the abovesaid date, time and place, accused Rohit
Soni picked a piece of brick lying on the road side at
the instance of accused Ravi Soni and gave one single
blow on the face of victim police official namely HC
Vinod causing fracture of his nose while he was
discharging his official duties and they both have
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:38
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 4 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
5
Further, on the abovesaid date, time and place,
accused Rohit Soni was found riding a motorcycle
with two pillions without helmet and also were
driving the said motorcycle on the wrong carriage
way of the road and he has committed offences
punishable under Section 279 IPC & under Section
128/194 M.V. Act.
4. Brief facts on the basis of which charge
sheet was filed in the present matter are as follows :-
That in the intervening night of 02/03.10.2022, SI
Vikas Chand Yadav was on emergency duty from
07:00 pm to 07:00 am, he received DD No. 7A
regarding that HC Vinod was beaten by some boys
while doing his duties near R.K. Ashram. Thereafter,
he alongwith HC Balkari reached at the spot where
HC Naresh, HC Vinod and the PCR staff were
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:11:41
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 5 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
6present. Accused Ravi and Rohit were produced by
HC Naresh and HC Vinod and they narrated him the
incident. And the incident as per tehrir as stated by
HC Vinod that on 02-03.10.2022 night he was on duty
eagle 22 patrolling motorcycle with HC Naresh and
during night patrolling near about 2:20 am when they
reached Mandir Marg T-point, P.K. Road then they
saw three boys were on one motorcycle without
helmet who were going on the wrong side of
Panchkuian Road coming from Gurumuni Akhada
going towards R.K. Ashram, Metro Station and after
watching them they took their motorcycle from
Mandir Marg T point to the other side and started
going towards R.K. Ashram, Metro Station as they
were without helmet, on one motorcycle and coming
from the wrong side during the course of night, on
suspicion HC Vinod and HC Naresh started following
them on their motorcycles and stopped them before
Digitally
Syed Syed
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:11:45
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 6 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
7R.K. Ashram, Metro Station. They enquired regarding
wrong side, without helmet, triple riding and reason
for wandering in late night and asked them to show
motorcycle papers and driving licence, as on the said
road there were incidences of snatching but the rider
of motorcycle has refused to show the documents as
well as to answer the questions. In the meantime HC
Vinod has also saw one suspicious scooty going and
he followed with his motorcycle and after verifying
the said scooty rider when he came back to HC
Naresh he found those three boys in verbal altercation
with HC Naresh and HC Vinod tried to intervene then
they started arguing and scuffling also with him. And
said, you do not have any authority to check the
documents, it is the work of traffic police. During that
period one pillion rider boy has left the spot and the
remaining two boys suddenly became aggressive and
said the police persons keeps disturbing us and we
Digitally
Syed signed
Syed
byZishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:48
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 7 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
8will teach you good lesson today and attacked them.
The boy i.e. pillion rider asked the rider of the bike go
and bring stone. Today we will finish them. On the
instance the rider of the motorcycle brought one
cemented stone from the footpath and threw it
towards head of HC Vinod but he saved himself by
moving back due to which instead of hitting his head
the stone hit him on the nose and he felt dizziness and
blood came over his nose. Thereafter other police
personnels came at the spot and arrested those two
boys. And during the course of investigation name of
the boy who was riding the motorcycle and caused
injury by the stone was revealed as Rohit Soni and the
second boy i.e. pillion rider identity was revealed as
Ravi Soni. On the basis of said facts, FIR was
registered. Investigation was done and chargesheet
u/s 186/353/332/308/279/34 IPC and u/s 128/194 (C)
M.V. Act was filed.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:53
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 8 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
9PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
5. In view of the admission of the accused on
22.09.2023, following witnesses are dropped from the
list of witnesses :-
S. No. Name of the witness
1. PW HC Dharam Raj; Photographer (Ex.P1,
Colly, the photographs and Ex.P2 Certificate u/s
65B of IEA).
2. PW Incharge, Motor Licnesing & Registering
Authority, North Zone, Mall Road, Delhi
3. PW Incharge, Registration Authority Loni Road,
Delhi
4. PW HC Girdhari
5. PW ASI Om Prakash
6. PW ASI Shesh Giri
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:11:56
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 9 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
10
6. The prosecution in order to prove its case has
examined the following witnesses:
S. No. Name of PW Exhibit Nature of
document
1. PW-1 Ex.PW1A, Statement of HC
HC Vinod Ex.PW1/B, Vinod Kumar,
Kumar Ex.PW1/C, Arrest memo of
Ex.PW1/D accused Ravi
& Soni, Arrest
Ex.PW1/DA memo of
accused Rohit
Soni, MLC and
Site plan .
2. PW-2 Ex.PW2/A Report
SI Yudhbir
Singh
3. PW-3 Ex.PW3/A Seizure Memo
HC Naresh
4. PW-4 — —
Ct. Shobhit
Kumar
5. PW-5 Ex.PW5/A, Personal Search
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:11:59
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 10 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
11HC Balkari Ex.PW5/B, Memo of
Ex.PW5/C accused Ravi
Soni, Personal
Search Memo
of accused Rohit
Soni,
Seizure Memo
6. PW-6 Ex.PW6/A, MLC No. 2177
Dr. Sadaf Ex.PW6/B, dated
Saleem 03.10.2022 of
Vinod,
ENT notes
7. PW-7
HC Lallu Ram
8. PW-8
Dr. Rahul
Choudhary
9. PW-9 Ex.PW9/A, Examination
Ankit Marked MP1, Report,
Chaturvedi Marked SC1, Mobile phone
Marked SC2, Redmi (model
Marked MC1, No.
Maked MP1 M2003J15S1),
(the Realme SIM card of Jio,
mobile phone SIM card of
Digitally
Syed signed
Syed
by
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:12:03
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 11 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
12was Airtel, Micro SD
inadvertently 4GB card, SIM
marked as Card of Airtel,
MP1 in his SIM card of Jio,
report bu the One Pen Drive,
same is Realme mobile
mentioned as phone
MP2 in his
opinion),
Marked SC3,
Marked SC4,
Marked PD-A
with folders
“MP1 Video”
“MC1 Video”,
Ex.MP1
and
Ex.MP2
10. PW-10 Ex.PW10/A, Endorsement on
SI Vikas Chand Ex.PW10/B, rukka,
Ex.PW10/C, Seizure Memo
Ex.PW10/D, of mobile
Ex.PW10/E, phones,
Ex.PW10/F, Disclosure
Ex.PW10/P1, statement of
Ex.PW10/P2, accused Ravi,
Ex.PW10/P3 Disclosure
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:12:07
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 12 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
13statement of
Rohit,
Notice u/s 41A
CrPC,
interrogation
report, mobile
phone make
Redmi Note 9,
mobile phone
Realme, pen
drive
11. PW -11 Ex.PW11/A Complaint u/s
ACP Anil 195 CrPC
Samota
12. PW-12 Ex.PW12/A Report DNA
Ms. Seema Examination
Nain
13. PW-13
Dr. Tushar
Shailat
14. PW-14 Ex.PW14/A Report X-ray
Dr. Mohit examination
Kumar
Digitally
Syed Syed
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:12:09
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 13 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
14
7. PW1 HC Vinod Kumar is the complainant. He
deposed that in the intervening night of
02/03.10.2022, he was on patrolling duty on
motorcycle alongwith HC Naresh and at around 2:00
– 2:30 am they were present at Mandir Marg T-
Point, Panchkuiya Road. They saw that on a
motorcycle three persons were coming from wrong
side without helmet from Hanuman Murti road side
towards R.K. Ashram metro station side. On seeing
them, rider of the said motorcycle changed their side
from wrong side towards right side. They chased
them and got stopped. They inquired them regarding
triple riding without helmet and wrong side, and
pursuing the documents of motorcycle and driving
license. Motorcycle rider refused to show any
document. Meanwhile, he saw a scooty in suspicious
condition coming from wrong side. He chased that
scooty and after verifying the scooty rider, he came
Digitally
Syed Syed
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:12:13
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 14 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
15back to HC Naresh. He saw that aforesaid three riders
were arguing with HC Naresh and he tried to
intervene. They started arguing with him. They were
saying that police officials harassed them and they
will teach lesson to police officials. One of the pillion
rider asked the motorcycle rider to bring a stone and
they will teach a lesson to the police officials that
day. The person who was driving the motorcycle
brought a cemented stone piece and threw aiming his
head which hit on his nose. Blood started oozing
from his nose. Meanwhile, one pillion rider, out of
the aforesaid three persons managed to run away
from the spot. Due to injury on his nose, he felt
dizziness and he sat on footpath in a side.
Meanwhile, HC Lalu alongwith Ct. Shobhit came to
the spot and with the assistance of HC Naresh
apprehended two accused persons. HC Naresh gave
intimation to PS whereupon SI Vikas Chand came to
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:12:16
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 15 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
16spot. On interrogation, name of aforesaid two persons
were revealed as Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni and both
accused persons were correctly identified by the
witness. He alongwith HC Lalu went to Lady
Hardinge Medical Hospital for his medical
examination. After his treatment, SI Vikas Chand
recorded his statement and the same is Ex.PW1/A on
which the present FIR got registered. He did not
remember the registration number of the motorcycle.
8. Both the accused Ravi Soni and Rohit Soni
were arrested in his presence vide arrest memo
Ex.PW1/B and Ex.PW1/C, respectively. Third
accused Sheetal joined the investigation on
12.11.2022 in his presence. He identified him and
stated to the IO that he is one of the pillion rider who
alongwith accused Rohit and Ravi was present at the
spot and escaped from the spot. He correctly
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:12:22
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 16 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
17identified the accused Sheetal. His MLC is
Ex.PW1/D. He identified the motorcycle bearing No.
DL5S-CW-1897 make Splender from the
photographs annexed with the file.
9. PW1 during his cross-examination deposed
that his duty hours were from 08:00 PM to 08:00 AM
on the intervening night of 02/03.10.2022. He did
not know, if it was Ashtami night. He has deposed
that it is correct that some persons were passing
through the spot. Some on motorcycle and some on
car. There was barricading at Akhada Picket on the
right side of the spot at the distance of about 150
meter away towards Hanuman Murti side. On
drawing the attention of the witness towards the site
plan annexed with the charge-sheet by Ld. counsel
for accused, witness has pointed out the point of the
barricading in the site plan which is given Point A.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:12:26
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 17 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
18The site plan is Ex.PW1/DA. Barricades were put by
the police staff of Picket duty. They reached at T-
point at around 02:00 AM. Accused persons were
chased and stopped at a distance of 100 meters from
T-point towards Connaught Place. He was on the
motorcycle bearing No. DL1S-AD-1059. The scooty
came at the place after about 1-2 minutes. He did not
know the colour of said scooty. HC Lalu and
Ct. Shobhit came at the spot within 1-2 minute after
he got injured. He did not know the exact time when
SI Vikas reached at the spot, however, he came at the
spot after about 5-7 minutes. He deposed that it is
correct that SI Vikas interrogated the accused in his
presence at the spot and came to know about their
names. He gave the information about the alleged
history to the concerned doctor. Some information
was also given by HC Lalu Ram who was
accompanying him at that time. He only disclosed
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:12:30
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 18 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
19the history to the concerned doctor. HC Lalu Ram
had only accompanied him to the hospital. He
deposed that he was taken to the hospital in an auto.
Only HC Lalu Ram had accompanied him to the
hospital. It is correct that accused persons have filed
one application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. against him. He
denied all the suggestions given by Ld. defence
counsel.
10. PW2 SI Yudhbir Singh deposed that he is
posted in mobile crime team for last two years. In the
intervening night of 02/03.10.2022, on the intimation
received from Duty Officer PS Mandir Marg, he
alongwith HC Dharam Raj reached the spot,
Panchkuiya Road, near R.K. Ashram Metro Station
where SI Vikas Chand alongwith other police
officials met them. They inspected the spot at the
instance of SI Vikas Chand and lifted two blood
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:12:52 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 19 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
20
samples and one cemented stone piece from the spot
and gave the same to SI Vikas Chand for further
examination. His report regarding his visit at the spot
is Ex.PW2/A.
11. PW2 during his cross-examination deposed
that he did not remember the name of duty officer of
PS: Mandir Marg, who informed him to reach the
spot. He received the information at about 03:45 AM
and they reached at the spot at about 04:00 AM. 2-3
police officials were present with SI Vikas Chand at
the spot. They met him near Pillar No.28/29, R.K.
Puram Metro Station. He had not stated the pillar
number in his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. They
proceeded to spot in a government vehicle i.e. mini
bus alongwith four persons including the driver,
photographer and general forensic assistant. They
remained at the spot till 04:50 AM. Police officials
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:12:55
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 20 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
21from PS Mandir Marg remained at the spot. 1-2
persons may be passing through the spot. He
prepared his report at the spot. He deposed that it is
correct that he did not put his signature on the seizure
memo of blood sample and cemented stone. Vol. as
general practice, IC Crime Team prepared his report
and did not put signatures on the seizure memo of
the exhibits. He deposed that it is correct that he did
not notice any blood stain on the cemented stone
seized from the spot. He denied all the suggestions
given by Ld. defence counsel.
12. PW3 HC Naresh deposed that in the year 2022,
he was posted at PS Mandir Marg, New Delhi. In the
intervening night of 02/03.10.2022, he was on
patrolling duty on patrolling motorcycle bearing No.
DL-1SAD-1053 alongwith HC Vinod. During night
patrolling at around 02:20 am, they were present at
Mandir Marg, T-Point, R.K. Ashram site. They saw Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:12:58 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 21 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
22
that three persons on one motorcycle, without helmet,
were coming from Gurumani Akhada side towards
R.K. Ashram Metro Station on Pachkuiya Road.
They were riding wrong side of the road from
Connaught Place towards Hanuman Murti side. On
seeing them, they turned their motorcycle from
Mandir Marg T-Point towards road going to
Connaught Place from Hanuman Murti. On
suspicion, they gave signal to stop them and chased
them and got them stop just before R.K. Ashram,
Metro Station. They asked them document of
motorcycle and reason of wrong side driving and
reason of triple riding. They did not show any
document and did not tell reason of triple riding and
wrong side riding. They started doing altercation with
them. Meanwhile, one scooty in suspicious condition
was passing through from there. HC Vinod, on
patrolling motorcycle, chased that scooty and got
Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:00 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 22 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
23
stopped the said scooty near R.K. Ashram Metro
Station. Aforesaid three motorcycle riders were
altercating with him and making video of the spot
and meanwhile HC Vinod, after verifying the
documents, came back to him. HC Vinod tried to
intervene. One rider from the aforesaid three persons
started manhandling with HC Vinod stating that the
police officials have no authority to verify the
documents and it was the job of Traffic Police.
Meanwhile, one pillion rider had escaped from the
spot and remaining two riders became more
aggressive stating that they will teach lesson to police
officials that day and assaulted them. One rider who
was in the middle asked rider who was riding the
motorcycle to bring a stone piece to hit police
officials. On his asking, he brought a cemented stone
from the footpath and hit on the head of HC Vinod.
Suddenly, HC Vinod, to save himself, moved towards
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:03 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 23 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
24
backside. The stone piece hit on the nose of HC
Vinod. Blood was started oozing from his nose.
13. He had informed HC Lalu Ram who also came
at the spot alongwith Ct. Shobhit. He with the help of
HC Lalu Ram and Ct. Shobhit apprehended both the
aforesaid riders and thereafter informed the duty
officer of PS Mandir Marg. PCR Van came at the
spot. The name of aforesaid motorcycle riders were
revealed as Rohit Soni (who was riding the
motorcycle and brought the stone piece and threw the
stone on HC Vinod) and Ravi Soni (who asked Rohit
Soni to bring the stone piece). SI Vikas Chand
alongwith HC Balkari also came at the spot. HC
Vinod was sent to Lady Hardinge Hospital for his
treatment alongwith HC Lalu Ram. He apprised Sl
Vikas Chand the entire facts of incident and also
showed the cemented stone. Crime team was called
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:06
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 24 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
25at the spot. Some exhibits were prepared. He did not
remember the registration number of the motorcycle
on which aforesaid three accused persons came at the
spot, however, it was black colour Hero Splendor
Plus. The said motorcycle was also seized at the spot.
Both the accused persons, Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni,
were brought to police station. After interrogation, IO
arrested both the accused persons. He correctly
identified the accused Ravi Soni. He was unable to
identify remaining two accused persons.
14. Permission was granted to Ld. Addl. PP for the
State to ask leading question regarding registration
number of the motorcycle and to draw the attention of
the witness towards the remaining two accused
persons namely Rohit Soni and Sheetal. During
examination by the Ld. Addl. PP, PW3 deposed that it
is correct that the registration number of the
Digitally
Syed Syed
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:13:12
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 25 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
26motorcycle of accused persons was DL5-SCW-1897.
He identified his signatures on the seizure memo of
the motorcycle at Point A. Seizure memo Ex.PW3/A.
Attention of the witness was drawn towards accused
persons namely Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni, who were
present in the court. He deposed that he was not sure
about the identity of remaining two accused persons.
On leading question for Ld. Addl. PP, he deposed that
the registration number of motorcycle of accused
persons was DL5-SCW-1897 and he identified his
signatures on the seizure memo of motorcycle.
Seizure memo is marked as Ex. PW3/A.
15. PW3 during his cross-examination deposed that
on that day he was not medically examined by the IO.
He had worked with HC Vinod for about two years.
HC Vinod never told him that a complaint u/s 156(3)
Cr.P.C was filed against him by the accused persons.
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:13:19
+0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 26 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
27
He was not aware at to whether he was also arrayed as
an accused in the said complaint. His duty hours were
from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am. He deposed that it is
correct that the spot is a busy place and many persons
and vehicles were moving there. It is correct that no
barricades were present at the place of incident. He
could not tell at what time SI Vikas Chand alongwith
HC Balkari came at the spot. HC Balkari remained at
the spot till the crime team carried out the proceedings
at the spot. He did not know as to when he left the
spot. He did not remember as to how long SI Vikas
Chand left the spot. He remained at the spot till the
completion of the work carried out by the crime team.
Accused persons did not manhandled with him,
however they had altercation with him. At around
2:00 am HC Lalu Ram alongwith Ct. Shobhit reached
at the spot. In his presence SI Vikas Chand had
interrogated with accused persons. He did not conduct
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:23
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 27 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
28the personal search of accused persons. He did not
know as to what was found in the personal search of
accused persons. He deposed that it is correct that at
the time of personal search he was present with the
IO. Till the time he remained at the spot, only the IO
was having the car at the spot. All proceedings of the
crime team took place in his presence. He could not
tell as to how many seals were affixed on the exhibits.
He could not tell whether he signed any exhibit at the
place of occurrence. He could not tell whether HC
Vinod was hospital due to the alleged incident. IO
recorded his statement in the PS on 03.10.2022 only
once, after that no statement was recorded by the IO.
No photographs/video was ever created by the IO at
the place of occurrence. Vol. crime team might have
prepared the same. As per his knowledge, HC Vinod
never consumed liquor. He denied all the suggestions
given by Ld. defence counsel.
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:26 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 28 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
29
16. PW4 Ct. Shobhit Kumar deposed that he is
posted at PS Mandir Marg for about last two years.
During the intervening night of 02-03.10.2022, he
alongwith HC Lalu Ram was on patrolling duty on
motorcycle make Eagle 22A. On receipt of telephone
from HC Naresh, he alongwith HC Lalu Ram reached
at Pachkuiya Road near R.K. Ashram Metro Station.
They saw there that the two persons were
manhandling with HC Naresh. HC Vinod was found
sitting on the footpath and blood was oozing from his
nose. He alongwith HC Lalu and HC Naresh Kumar
apprehended those two persons. They came to know
that those two persons were quarreling with HC
Naresh and HC Vinod and had hit a stone to HC
Vinod. IO/SI Vikas Chand alongwith HC Balkari
came to the spot. HC Lalu Ram took HC Vinod to
Lady Harding Medical Hospital. Name of said two
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:29
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 29 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
30persons who were apprehended by them were
revealed as Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni. He correctly
identified both accused persons.
17. PW4 during his cross-examination deposed
that at around 02:15 am, when he alongwith HC Lalu
Ram were present near Hanuman Murti, HC Naresh
had informed HC Lalu Ram on his personal mobile
number. Spot was at around 100 meter away from the
T-point. When they reached at the spot, HC Balkari
and SI Vikas Chand were not present at the spot. HC
Vinod was present at the spot. HC Lalu Ram had
taken HC Vinod to the hospital. He did not
accompany him to the hospital. He could not tell the
factum of crime team whether they visited the spot or
not. He did not see any official of the crime team at
the spot. He remained at the spot for about 10
minutes and left the spot after ten minutes. When he
Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:32 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 30 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
31
reached the spot, he came to know that dispute arises
due to some documents of the vehicle. HC Lalu Ram
informed the PS about the scuffle of the incident. He
did not inform or register any complaint or DD entry
to the SHO regarding the incident. He denied all the
suggestions given by Ld. defence counsel.
18. PW5 HC Balkari deposed that in the year 2022,
he was posted at PS Mandir Marg. During intervening
night of 02-03.10.2022, he was on emergency duty
with SI Vikas Chand. On receipt of a call regarding an
assault of the police officials who were on patrolling
duty near R.K. Ashram Metro Station was received.
He accompanied SI Vikas Chand and reached near
R.K. Ashram Metro Station where police officials
namely HC Vinod alongwith PCR staff and HC
Naresh were found present at the spot and HC Naresh
produce two accused persons namely Rohit Soni and
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:35 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 31 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
32
Ravi Soni. He correctly identified both accused
persons. HC Vinod was sent to Lady Harding Medical
Hospital for his treatment alongwith HC Lalu Ram. Sl
Vikas Chand called crime team at the spot. Crime
team officials inspected the spot. Some exhibits were
lifted and seized from the spot. Motorcycle of the
accused persons bearing last digit 1897 was seized
vide memo, already Ex.PW3/A. SI Vikas Chand
proceeded to the hospital alongwith HC Vinod and he
remained at the spot. After sometime, SI Vikas Chand
came back to the spot. All the case property and both
the accused persons were taken to police station.
IO/SI Vikas Chand recorded the statement of HC
Vinod and made his endorsement and got the present
FIR registered. After interrogation, IO/SI Vikas Chand
arrested both the accused persons, Ravi Soni and
Rohit Soni, vide arrest memo, already Ex.PW1/B and
Ex.PW1/C, respectively and conducted their personal
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:41
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 32 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
33search vide memo Ex.PW5/A and Ex.PW5/B. Both
the accused persons were got medically examined.
They made efforts to trace the third associate of the
accused persons whose name was revealed as Sheetal
and he was served with notice u/s 41A Cr.P.C.
Thereafter, they came back to the PS. He correctly
identified the accused Sheetal. On 12.11.2022,
accused Sheetal came to PS and joined the
investigation. On 18.11.2022, on the instruction of the
IO, he took the exhibits of the present case from
MHC(M) and deposited the same in FSL Rohini.
Copy of the road certificate is Mark A. Seizure memo
pertaining to lifting of exhibits from the spot is
Ex.PW5/C.
19. PW5 during his cross-examination deposed
that the information was received at around 1:30 am.
Vol. Information was received vide DD No. 7A. He
Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:45 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 33 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
34
did not remember the exact time. After receiving the
information, they reached at the spot in their private
vehicle. He did not remember whether it was car or
motorcycle. He did not remember the names of the
police officials from PCR staff. HC Vinod, HC
Naresh, HC Lalu Ram and Ct. Shobhit were found at
the spot on duty on the eagle bikes. He did not
remember the exact time as to how long he remained
at the spot. He left the spot with SI Vikas Chand after
he came back from the hospital. He came back to PS
alongwith SI Vikas Chand. He did not remember the
exact time. He could not tell the vehicle on which HC
Vinod was taken to hospital. IO recorded his
statement three times i.e. on 03.10.2022, 12.11.2022
and 18.11.2022. His statement was recorded on
03.10.2022 at the PS. Statement of HC Vinod was
recorded on 03.10.2022 in the PS. He did not
remember the time of recording of statement. He
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:13:48
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 34 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
35deposed that when they reached at the spot, many
vehicles as well as some persons were passing
through at the spot. In his presence, no public person
was joined the investigation by the IO. He did not
remember the make of the crime team vehicle. He
cannot tell the shape and type of stone recovered. He
cannot tell the address of the accused Sheetal or the
vehicle by which they visit the house of the accused
Sheetal. He cannot tell how many government vehicle
was provided by the government to their police
station. He cannot tell exact time of recording of
statement of HC Vinod by IO or registration of FIR.
He cannot tell name of police officials present at time
of medical examination of accused persons or the
vehicle by which they went to the hospital. He did not
remember as to how many seals were affixed on the
sealed parcel. Exhibits were sealed by IO/SI Vikas
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:51
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 35 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
36Chand. He denied all the suggestions given by Ld.
defence counsel.
20. PW6 Dr. Sadaf Saleem deposed that he was
working as SR with LHMC. He can identify the
handwriting and signatures of Dr. Sonali and Mr.
Moazzam Mojahid as he had seen them writing and
signing. On 03.10.2022, one patient by the name of
Vinod was admitted in the hospital vide MLC bearing
No. 2177 in emergency. He was initially examined by
Dr. Sonali, SR on duty. As per MLC, he had suffered
lacerated injury 2×2 cm over right dorsum of nose.
The X-ray of his nose was done and it was opined that
there was a fracture of the nasal bone. He had
identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Sonali
Melhotra and Dr. Moazzam Mojahid. The MLC
Ex.PW6/A and signed by Dr. Moazzam Mojahid at
Point A and by Dr. Sonali at Point A on the ENT notes
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:13:54
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 36 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
37Ex.PW6/B. As per the opinion of the concerned
doctor, the nature of injury suffered is grievous in
nature.
21. PW7 HC Lallu Ram deposed that on the
intervening night of 02/03.10.2022, he was posted at
PS Mandir Marg as Head Constable. At that time, he
was on patrolling duty on Eagle 22 motorcycle and
Ct. Shobhit was on Eagle 22A motorcycle. They both
were on patrolling in the area of their PS. At about
02:30 am, he received a call from HC Naresh and he
asked him to come at P.K. Road near R.K. Ashram
immediately. He alongwith Ct. Shobhit immediately
reached at P.K. Road near R.K. Ashram on their
motorcycles. On the spot, they saw that two boys were
fighting with HC Naresh. HC Vinod was sitting on the
footpath and his nose was bleeding. He alongwith HC
Naresh and Ct. Shobhit apprehended both the boys.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:13:56
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 37 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
38He correctly identify accused Rohit Soni and Ravi
Soni. HC Naresh told him that the accused persons
were coming on the motorcycle and when HC Naresh
asked them for the documents of their motorcycle, the
accused persons were started fighting with them. HC
Naresh called in PS and gave the information. After
sometime, the police officials from PS and officials of
PCR 13A came at the spot. Thereafter, he took HC
Vinod at the Lady Harding Hospital for his treatment.
After his treatment, he took him to PS. IO recorded
his statement.
22. PW7 during his cross-examination deposed that
there was a street light at the spot. There was no
public witness near the place of incident when he
reached at the spot. There was no barricading at the
spot. The accused persons were on black colour
splender motorcycle but he did not remember the
Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:13:59 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 38 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
39
registration number. He was posted at PS Mandir
Marg from 2020 to November 2023. He denied all
the suggestions given by Ld. defence counsel.
23. PW8 Dr. Rahul Choudhary deposed that he
had studied in Lady Harding Hospital from 2019 to
2022 and thereafter, from 2022, he had started as Sr.
Resident in the said hospital. During his studies and
his tenure as Sr. Resident in the Lady Harding
Hospital, he had worked with Dr. Meenakshi Singh.
He was well acquainted with her handwriting and
signatures as he had seen her handwriting during the
normal course of duties. He identified the signatures
of Dr. Meenakshi Singh at Point A on UHID
20220225178 already Ex.PW1/D. He also identified
her handwriting on Ex.PW1/D.
Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:01 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 39 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
40
24. PW9 Sh. Ankit Chaturvedi deposed that he was
working as Jr.F/ACE (CFD) since 2016. On
18.11.2022, one sealed parcel was received in FSL in
connection with present FIR No. 203/2022, PS
Mandir Marg and the same was marked to him for
forensic examination. The parcel was duly sealed with
the seal of “VC” and there were three seals. He
opened the parcel and found two mobile phones. First
mobile phone was Redmi, model No. M2003J15S1
marked as MP1 containing two SIM cards of Jio and
Airtel marked as SC1 and SC2 respectively, and also
having micro SD 4GB card marked as MC1. The
second mobile phone Realme marked as MP1 (the
Realme mobile phone was inadvertently marked as
MP1 in his report but the same is mentioned as MP2
in his opinion). The Realme mobile phone containing
two SIM cards of Airtel and Jio marked as SC3 and
SC4. On 04.07.2023, he gave his detailed examination
Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:05 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 40 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
41
report Ex.PW9/A (running into two pages) bearing his
signatures on each page at point A. During
examination, he prepared one pen drive marked as
PD-A with folders “MP1 VIDEO”. “MC1-VIDEO”
respectively. As per his examination, no video file
dated 03.11.2022 could be found and retrieved from
Ex.MP1 and MC1. The Ex.MP2 was password
protected and the same could not be examined.
25. PW9 during his cross-examination deposed
that he could not say about the exact dates of other
videos. During examination of MP2, he used the tools
present in the laboratory to break and bypass the
phone but the same could not break and bypass. Vol.
Since then, now they have some other tools available
in FSL to break and bypass the mobile phones, might
be with those tools, the phones which having the pin
number may break and bypass. He deposed that no
Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:08 +0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 41 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
42video of the incident could be retrieved from either of
the mobile phones.
26. PW10 SI Vikas Chand deposed that on the
intervening night of 02/03.10.2022, he was posted at
PS Mandir Marg as SI. On that night, he was on
emergency duty from 07:00 pm to 07:00 am. At about
03:00 am, he received DD No. 7A regarding that HC
Vinod was beaten by some boys while doing his
duties near R.K. Ashram. Thereafter, he alongwith HC
Balkari reached at Mandir Marg T-Point where HC
Naresh, HC Vinod, HC Lallu Ram, Ct. Shobhit and
the PCR staff were present. Accused Ravi and Rohit
were under the custody of Ct. Shobhit and HC Lallu
Ram. He correctly identify accused Ravi Soni and
Rohit Soni present in the court today. HC Naresh
narrated him the incident that he alongwith HC Vinod
were on night patrolling duty and the accused RohitSyed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:11 +0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 42 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
43and Ravi alongwith their another associate were
coming on one motorcycle from the wrong side and
when they stopped them and inquired with them,
accused Rohit hit stone on the face of HC Vinod. He
had seen that the blood was oozing out from the face
of HC Vinod. Immediately, he sent HC Vinod to Lady
Harding Hospital alongwith HC Lallu. He also called
crime team at the spot. He seized the blood sample
with the help of gauge and put them in a brown
envelope and sealed with the seal of “VC” and given
serial number as Ex.1 and Ex.2. He also seized the
cemented stone and kept the same in a transparent
poly bag and sealed with the seal of “VC” and given
serial number as Ex.3. He prepared the seizure memo
of all the exhibits which is already Ex.PW5/C. He also
seized the motorcycle bearing No. DL-5SCW-1897
vide seizure memo already Ex.PW3/A. He left Ct.
Balkari and PCR staff members at the spot who look
Syed
Zishan
Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date:
2026.02.20
17:14:15
+0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 43 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
44
after the case property and the accused persons and
reached at Lady Hardinge Hospital. HC Vinod was
not fit for statement at that time. He collected the
MLC of HC Vinod. He again came back at the spot.
When he came back at the spot, Ct. Balkari was
present with the case property i.e. motorcycle and the
accused Rohit and Ravi were already taken to the PS
by the PCR staff. He took the case property alognwith
Ct. Balkari to PS. He checked the IDs of the accused
Ravi and Rohit and also checked the ownership
documents of the motorcycle. After sometime, HC
Vinod also came at the PS and after that he recorded
his statement which is already Ex.PW1A. Thereafter,
he made his endorsement on rukka which is
Ex.PW10/A and handed over the same to DO for
registration of FIR. He also interrogated the accused
persons. HC Naresh who was present in the PS
disclosed that the accused persons had also prepared
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:14:17
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 44 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
45one video in their mobile phone. Thereafter, he seized
the mobile phone of accused Rohit and Ravi vide
seizure memo Ex.PW10/B. He arrested accused Ravi
vide arrest memo already Ex.PW1/B. He arrested
accused Rohit vide arrest memo already Ex.PW1/C.
Personal search of accused Ravi is already Ex.PW5/A.
Personal search of accused Rohit is already
Ex.PW5/B. He also recorded the disclosure statement
of accused Ravi and Rohit Ex.PW10/C and
Ex.PW10/D respectively. He also conducted the
search of their associate namely Sheetal. He took
accused Rohit and Ravi at Tanga Stand Nand Nagri in
the search of their associate. When they reached at
Tanga Stand, accused Rohit and Ravi identified
accused Sheetal. He served notice u/s 41A Cr.P.C.
Same is Ex.PW10/E and also instructed him to join
the investigation and come at PS. The accused Rohit
and Ravi were brought at PS. On the next day, both
Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:20 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 45 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
46
the accused persons were produced before Ld. MM
from where they were sent to JC. On 12.11.2022,
accused Sheetal came at PS to join the investigation.
He prepared his interrogation report which is
Ex.PW10/F. During investigation, the blood sample of
HC Vinod was taken at Lady Hardinge Hospital to
send the FSL alongwith exhibits. On 09.11.2022, he
sent the exhibits alongwith blood sample to FSL vide
RC No. 132/21/22 through HC Girdhar. On
18.11.2022, he sent the mobile phones to the FSL
Rohini through HC Balkari vide RC No. 134/21/22.
He also took the opinion on the MLC which was
given as grievous. On 27.11.2022, he also took the
complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. The blood sample of
the accused alongwith the blood on gauge and
cemented stone lifted from the spot were sent to FSL.
The FSL report dated 30.06.2023 has been received
and filed in the form of supplementary charge-sheet. Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:23 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 46 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
47
He identified the mobile phone of accused Rohit Soni
and Ravi Soni, if shown to him. MHC(M) had
produced sealed envelope duly sealed with seal of
‘FSL Delhi’. Seal was intact and out of which mobile
phone make Redmi Note 9 with multicolor black
cover and another mobile make Realme Blue color.
He correctly identified the same. Same are
Ex.PW10/P1 and Ex.PW10/P2, respectively. Identity
of motorcycle bearing No. DL5-SCW-1897 was not
disputed by Ld. Defence Counsel. Pen drive received
from FSL present in the file was played in the
computer system installed in the court. In the said pen
drive two folder in the name of MP-1 Video and MC-
1 Video were found. The same were opened but no
video relating to the incident was found in them. He
submitted that incident was of 03.10.2022 and he
inadvertently sent the request to FSL to retrieve the
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:14:27 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 47 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
48
data in the above stated mobile phones relating to
03.11.2022. The said pen drive is Ex.PW10/P3.
27. PW10 during his cross-examination has
deposed that he was present in the police station and
and reached at the spot at around 2:15 am, where he
met HC Vinod, HC Lallu, HC Naresh, Ct. Shobhit and
PCR staff and sent HC Vinod with HC Lallu to
LHMC Hospital as HC vinod suffered from injury. He
further deposed that HC vinod discharged from the
hospital in the afternoon on that day and was not
aware whether HC Vinod again went to the hospital
for further treatment. He further deposed that both the
accused were produced before the concerned Ld. MM
on 04.10.2022. He further deposed that crime team
lifted the blood sample from the spot in his presence
and he further deposed that he himself seized the
mobile phones of both the accused persons. He do not
Digitally
Syed signed by
Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:14:31
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 48 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
49remember when the seized mobile phone was sent to
FSL. He stated that when accused Rohit Saini and
Ravi Saini empowered they were in right direction.
But also said first of all they were coming from wrong
direction. He denied all the suggestions given by Ld.
Defence Counsel.
28. PW11 ACP Anil Samota deposed that on
27.11.2022, he was posted as ACP, Sub Division
Connaught Place, New Delhi District. On that day, the
case of the present case was placed before him to give
complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. He perused the file and on
perusal, he found that accused persons obstructed
police officials namely HC Vinod and HC Naresh in
performance of their official duties and also caused
injuries to HC Vinod and due to which HC Vinod was
medically examined. During treatment, concerned
doctor opined injuries as grievous. His complaint u/s
195 Cr.P.C. in this regard is on the file is Ex.PW11/A. Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:14:34
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 49 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
50
29. PW11 during his cross-examination admitted
that incident had not taken place in his presence.
30. PW12 Ms. Seema Nain deposed that on
09.11.2022, she was posted at RFSL, Chanakyapuri as
Assistant Director (Biology). On that day, a letter
from SHO PS Mandir Marg relating to FIR No.
203/22, PS Mandir Marg was received in her office
with four sealed parcels for examination. The same
were marked to him for examination. The seals of the
parcels were intact. She examined the said parcels and
prepared her detailed report and thereafter returned
the parcels with his report to SHO with the seal of
‘SNN RFSL CH. PURI DELHI’. The report is on the
file. Same is Ex.PW12/A.
31. PW13 Dr. Tushar Shailt deposed that he was
working as Resident Doctor in the LHMC hospital
Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
Ali 2026.02.20
17:14:36
Warsi +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 50 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
51since July 2020. During his tenure, he also worked
under the supervision of Dr. Om Prakash, Sr. Resident
(General Medicine). He was well acquainted with his
handwriting and signatures as he had seen him writing
and signing during the normal course of duties. He
identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Om
Prakash, if shown to him. The MLC, already
Ex.PW6/A, was prepared by Dr. Om Prakash. His
signatures are at Point B on the said MLC. As per the
MLC, the injured suffered lacerated injury – approx 2
x 2 cm present over dorsum of nose associated with
bleeding from nose (Epistaxis). Thereafter, the patient
was referred to ENT Department.
32. PW14 Dr. Mohit Kumar deposed that he was
working as Radiologist in the Lady Hardinge Medical
College/Hospital hospital since 2022. During his
tenure, he also worked under the supervision of Dr.
Rangjung Dolma, Sr. Resident Radio Diagnosis. He Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:14:39
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 51 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
52was well acquainted with his handwriting and
signatures as he had seen his handwriting during the
normal course of duties. He identified the signatures
of Dr. Rangjung Dolma at Point A. He also identify
his handwriting on Ex. PW14/A at Point B as ‘the
nature of injury is given as grievous from radio
diagnosis side as fracture of bilateral nasal bone’.
33. PW14 during his cross-examination deposed
that he was present with Dr. Rangjung Dolma on
03.10.2022 when he was prepared the report Ex. PW-
14/A.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
34. After completion of prosecution evidence, all
incriminating material as appearing in the evidence
was put to all the accused persons under Section 313
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:14:42
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 52 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
53Cr.P.C. They stated that they have falsely implicated
in the present case. Accused Ravi and Rohit have also
stated that all police persons were drunk at that time
of incident. They stopped us and demanded some
money, we refused and they registered false FIR
against us.
ARGUMENTS
35. Ld. Addl. PP for the State submits that the
testimonies of injured eye witness PW1 HC Vinod
Kumar is corroborated by the medical evidence and
the medical evidence has been duly substantiate by
the evidence of PW6 Dr. Sadaf Saleem, PW8 Dr.
Rahul Chaudhary, PW12 Dr. Tushar Shailt and PW14
Dr. Mohit Kumar. He also submits that the case of the
prosecution is further strengthened by other eye
material witness i.e. PW3 HC Naresh and the
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:14:53
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 53 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
54testimonies of all the prosecution witnesses remained
consistent regarding the sequence of occurrence with
regard to driving of motorcycle by three persons
without helmet and stopping of them for the purpose
of checking and while HC Vinod Kumar was checking
in discharge of his duty then not only he was
obstructed but was assaulted with the cemented stone
to deter him from his duty and in the said occurrence
grievous hurt was caused to HC Vinod Kumar
(PW1). Ld. Addl. PP for the State has also submitted
that the complaint u/s 195 CrPC is duly proved by
PW11 ACP Anil Samota and prayed for conviction of
the accused persons as the prosecution has proved its
case beyond reasonable doubt.
36. Ld. LAC for accused persons has
submitted that the injured / complainant PW1 HC
Vinod Kumar in his statement / testimony has levied
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:15:09 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 54 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
55
only omnibus allegations against the accused persons
as he has not stated any specific overtact on the
accused persons. He also submits that the version of
prosecution case cannot be believed as the prosecution
is alleging that the accused sitting in the middle of the
bike i.e. pillion rider told the accused driving the bike
to bring the stone and it is against the human nature
because in the natural course of events the pillion
rider will go and bring the stone and make the attack
and not asked the driver of the vehicle to bring the
stone because if the rider has to go and bring the stone
then first pillion rider has to get down from the bike
while during the course of quarrel the person who is
in a better position to grab the thing and attack will do
the act and not asked the person who was driving the
bike. He further submits that the place of incident as
well as the direction of coming and going of accused
bike are narrated differently by the prosecution
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:12
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 55 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
56witnesses in their testimony. He further submits that
for accused Sheetal no charge in the present case is
attracted as per the prosecution story itself two
accused persons i.e. Ravi and Rohit were mishandling
with HC Vinod then in the meanwhile the third
accused person ran away from the spot and only
thereafter the accused (as per the allegation) Ravi
Soni has instigated the accused Rohit Soni to bring the
stone and Rohit Soni brought the stone and threw it on
PW1. HC Vinod Kumar. He also submits that other
eye witness PW3 has neither identified nor
recognized either Ravi Soni or Sheetal. He also
submitted that X-ray was delayed and on the basis of
after thought statement the investigation was
conducted. He also submitted that, it were the police
officials at the place of occurrence who demanded
bribe from the accused persons as they were going to
the Mandir for offering prayers as it was Asthami
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:15
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 56 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
57night and no god fearing or a person going to offer
prayer will indulge into criminal activity. He also
submits that the accused were not hardened criminals
and were having no need to flee away or attack the
police person on duty as they are from poor society
and daily bread earners and not even a single case
either before the date of incident or till date is on
record against the accused persons. He also submits
that medical evidence has not corroborated the
testimony of prosecution witnesses and the victim has
immediately return on duty in police station is
inconsistent with the medical evidence. The
complainant being the police officials themselves and
the investigation conducted by them in a prejudicial
manner and not fair investigation was done by the
investigating officer. In the testimony of prosecution
witnesses there are major discrepancies and
contradictions regarding the event and place of
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:18
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 57 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
58incident. No independent witness, any CCTV footage,
scientific evidence, FSL report, weapon of offence is
produced by the prosecution in its support and false
case has been created against accused persons as they
refused to pay bribe and falsely implicated. He
submits that the prosecution has failed to established
its case beyond reasonable doubt and accused persons
are entitled for acquittal. In support of his arguments,
he has also submitted written arguments.
Heard the arguments and perused the record.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
37. The case of the prosecution hinges upon the
testimonies of material witnesses namely
injured/victim PW1 HC Vinod Kumar; the eye
witness PW3 HC Naresh; PW4 Ct. Shobit Kumar;
PW7 HC Lalu Ram; PW10 SI Vikas Chand; PW6 Dr.
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 58 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
59
Sadaf Salim; PW8 Dr. Rahul Chaudhary; PW13 Dr.
Tushar Shailt; PW14 Dr. Mohit Kumar and PW11
ACP Anil Samota.
38. Before proceedings further as the case of
prosecution is based on two sets of evidence i.e.
against accused No. 1 Rohit Soni and 2 Ravi Soni as
they were alleged to attack on PW1 HC Vinod Kumar
as well as they were apprehended at the place of
incident while accused No. 3 Sheetal was
apprehended later on and in the testimonies it is also
came that during the course of incident / meanwhile
he ran away from the place of incident. Thus in the
following paras the appreciation of evidence against
accused No. 1 Rohit Soni and 2 Ravi Soni is done
together while that of Sheetal is done separately.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:21
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 59 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
60(APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE QUA
ACCUSED ROHIT SONI AND RAVI SONI)
39. In the testimony of PW1 HC Vinod Kumar i.e.
the injured complainant. He has stated that in the
intervening night of night of 02/03.10.2022, he was
on patrolling duty on motorcycle alongwith HC
Naresh and at around 2:00 – 2:30 am they were
present at Mandir Marg T-Point, Panchkuiya Road.
They saw that on a motorcycle three persons were
coming from wrong side without helmet and on
seeing them they changed their side from wrong
towards right side. And when after chasing and
stopping them during inquiry with regard to triple
riding without helmet and wrong side and pursuing
the document of motorcycle and driving licence, the
motorcycle rider refused to show any documents and
when he saw three riders arguing with HC Naresh and Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:23
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 60 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
61he intervened, they started arguing with him and said
police officials harassed them and they will teach
lesson to police officials. One of the pillion rider
asked the motorcycle rider to bring a stone and they
will teach a lesson to the police officials. The person
who was driving the motorcycle brought a cemented
stone piece and threw aiming his head which hit on
his nose. Blood started oozing from his nose.
Meanwhile, one pillion rider, out of the aforesaid
three persons managed to run away from the spot.
Due to injury on his nose, he felt dizziness and he sat
on footpath in a side. He further deposed the fact with
regard to going to Lady Hardinge Medical Hospital
for his medical examination. It is also deposed by
him that on interrogation name of those two persons
were revealed as Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni and the
accused persons were also correctly identified by the
witness.
Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:15:26 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 61 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
62
40. The deposition of PW1 is corroborated and
strengthened by the testimony of eye witness PW3,
HC Naresh. He corroborated the testimony of PW1
HC Vinod and deposed about the specific role of the
accused persons. He stated that, the name of the
motorcycle riders were revealed as Rohit Soni (who
was riding the motorcycle and brought the stone piece
and threw the stone on HC Vinod) and Ravi Soni
(who asked Rohit Soni to bring the stone piece). He
also identified accused Ravi Soni in the court but
unable to identify remaining two accused persons. It
has also came in his deposition that one pillion rider
had escaped from the spot and remaining two riders
became more aggressive. In the testimony of PW4 Ct.
Shobhit Kumar he has stated that on receipt of
telephone from HC Naresh he alongwith HC Lalu
Ram reached at Panchkuiyan Road, near R.K. Asharm
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:28
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 62 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
63metro station, he saw that the two persons were
mishandling with HC Naresh. HC Vinod was found
sitting on the footpath and blood was oozing from his
nose. He alongwith HC Lalu and HC Naresh Kumar
apprehended those two persons and name of those two
persons were revealed as Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni
and both were correctly identified by him in the court.
41. The MLC bearing No. 2177 i.e. Ex.PW6/A was
proved through PW-6, Dr. Sadaf Saleem who has
identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Sonali
Melhotra and Dr. Moazzam Mojahid on MLC i.e.
Ex.PW6/A and ENT notes i.e. Ex.PW6/B respectively.
He has also stated that on 03.10.2022, one patients by
the name of Vinod was admitted in the hospital vide
MLC bearing No. 2177 in emergency. He was initially
examined by Dr. Sonali, SR on duty. As per MLC, he
had suffered lacerated injury 2×2 cm over right
Digitally
Syed signed
Syed
by
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:31
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 63 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
64dorsum of nose. The X-ray of his nose was done and it
was opined that there was a fracture of the nasal bone.
He has also stated that as per the opinion of the
concerned doctor, the nature of injury suffered is
grievous in nature. The cross-examination of witness
was not done by the Ld. Defence Counsel. The
testimony of PW-6 Dr. Sadaf Saleem is also
corroborated by the testimony of Dr. Tushar Shailat,
PW-13 as he has identified the handwriting and
signatures of Dr. Om Prakash, who has prepared the
MLC i.e. Ex.PW6/A and he has also corroborated that
as per the MLC the injured suffered lacerated injury-
approx 2×2 cm present over dorsum of nose
associated with bleeding from nose (epistaxis) and the
patient referred to ENT Department. The injury and
nature of injury is further corroborated by the
testimony of Radiologist, PW-14 Dr. Mohit Kumar as
he has identified the signatures of Dr. Rangjung
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:33
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 64 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
65Dolma as well as his handwriting on X-ray
examination, Ex.PW14/A in which ‘the nature of
injury is given as grievous from radio diagnosis side
as fracture of bilateral nasal bone’. On perusal of
Ex.PW14/A, at Point B, fracture of the nasal bone is
shown and the date on Ex.PW14/A is of 03.10.2022
i.e. date of incident and the MLC No. 2177 is also
mentioned on the X-ray department report. Thus, the
X-ray and MLC are of the same person namely Vinod
and the MLC and X-ray report are proved by the
medical and expert witnesses. It is also relevant,
prosecution witnesses, PW1 HC Vinod and PW3 HC
Naresh had stated that in the intervening night of
02/03.10.2022, they were on a patrolling duty and the
testimonies were also corroborated by the other
witnesses that they were on patrolling duty. PW11
ACP Anil Samota has also stated that on perusal of the
file of complaint u/s 195 CrPC, he found that accused
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:36
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 65 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
66persons obstructed police officials namely HC Vinod
and HC Naresh in performance of their official duties.
Thus, it is established that PW-1 HC Vinod and PW3
HC Naresh were on official duty on the date, time and
place of incident. The defence has failed to shaken the
credibility of the witnesses.
42. When read as a whole, the testimonies of the
aforesaid material witnesses PW-1 HC Vinod Kumar,
PW-3 HC Naresh, PW-4 Ct. Shobhit Kumar as well as
the MLC of PW-1 HC Vinod Kumar and the
testimonies of PW-6 Dr. Sadaf Saleem, PW-13 Dr.
Tushar Shailat, PW-14 Dr. Mohit Kumar their
testimonies remained consistent, cogent,
corroborating the mode and sequence of occurrence of
the incident and injury suffered by the victim. And,
the testimonies inspire confidence on material counts.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:38
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 66 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
67
43. On careful perusal of the testimonies, there are
minor variations in the testimonies of PW-1 HC
Vinod, PW-3 HC Naresh, PW-4 Ct. Shobhit Kumar
but those minor variations are not material. Thus, this
court finds it difficult to agree with Ld. Counsel for
accused that due to material contradictions in the
testimony of prosecution witnesses the prosecution
case has no legs to stand on. In the opinion of this
court, it is not possible for a truthful witness to
remember exact time and sequence of events as due to
long passage of time the memory fades and due to
court atmosphere and cross-examination an
environment of pressure is created and it is natural
that the witness will get anxious. Minor variations in
the testimony of witnesses is immaterial as in the
present case the witnesses has remained consistent
with regard to the occurrence of incident, their
presence at the incident and the injuries has further
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:41
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 67 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
68corroborated / strengthened the occurrence of incident
and their presence as well as witnessing the incident.
44. That the minor variations and
contradictions will not make the testimony of witness
unbelievable as held in :-
Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of
Gujarat (1983) 3 SCC 217 it was held as follows:
“5. … We do not consider it appropriate or
permissible to enter upon a reappraisal or
reappreciation of the evidence in the context of
the minor discrepancies painstakingly
highlighted by the learned counsel for the
appellant. Overmuch importance cannot be
attached to minor discrepancies. The reasons
are obvious:
(1) By and large a witness cannot be
expected to possess a photographic
memory and to recall the details of an
incident. It is not as if a video tape is
replayed on the mental screen.
(2) Ordinarily it so happens that a
witness is overtaken by events. The
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:44
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 68 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
69witness could not have anticipated the
occurrence which so often has an
element of surprise. The mental faculties
therefore cannot be expected to be
attuned to absorb the details.
(3) The powers of observation differ
from person to person. What one may
notice, another may not. An object or
movement might emboss its image on
one person’s mind, whereas it might go
unnoticed on the part of another.
(4) By and large people cannot
accurately recall a conversation and
reproduce the very words used by them
or heard by them. They can only recall
the main purport of the conversation. It
is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a
human tape-recorder.
(5) In regard to exact time of an
incident, or the time duration of an
occurrence, usually, people make their
estimates by guess work on the spur of
the moment at the time of interrogation.
And one cannot expect people to make
very precise or reliable estimates in
such matters. Again, it depends on the
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:15:46 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 69 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
70
time-sense of individuals which varies
from person to person.
(6) Ordinarily a witness cannot be
expected to recall accurately the
sequence of events which takes place in
rapid succession or in a short time span.
A witness is liable to get confused, or
mixed up when interrogated later on.
(7) A witness, though wholly truthful, is
liable to be overawed by the court
atmosphere and the piercing cross-
examination made by the counsel and
out of nervousness mix up facts, get
confused regarding sequence of events,
or fill up details from imagination on
the spur of the moment. The
subconscious mind of the witness
sometimes so operates on account of the
fear of looking foolish or being
disbelieved though the witness is giving
a truthful and honest account of the
occurrence witnessed by him–perhaps
it is a sort of a psychological defence
mechanism activated on the spur of the
moment.”
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:48
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 70 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
71
45. In view of the aforesaid discussion as well as
the settled position of law with regard to appreciation
of the testimony of witnesses as held in Bharwada
Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat (supra). It
cannot be expected that the prosecution witness or the
accused persons has acted with prudence and
calculations that who will bring the stone and threw,
as during the course of quarrel the people acts with
instinct and not with prudence. Again, minor
variations describing the directions of the coming and
going of the bike is also not material as they are
normal errors of observations and not material
discrepancies and normal errors do not corrode the
credibility of the evidence of prosecution as also held
by Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v.
Smt. Kalki and another, AIR 1981 SC 1390, which
reads as follows:
“Normal discrepancies in evidence are those
which are due to normal errors of Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:15:51
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 71 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
72observations, normal errors of memory due to
lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as
shock and horror at the time of occurrence and
these are always there however honest and
truthful a witness may be. Material
discrepancies are those which are not normal
and not expected of a normal person. Courts
have to label the category to which a
discrepancy may be categorised. While normal
discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of
a party’s case, material discrepancies do so.”
46. The submission of the Ld. Defence Counsel that
the witnesses being the police persons has conducted
the investigation in a prejudicial manner is also not
acceptable as only being police witnesses, it does not
mean that they are not acting honestly. The
presumption of honesty is equally implied for the
police witnesses as well as it applies for the common
persons and to distrust the police personnel testimony
only on the ground that they are police persons is not
proper judicial approach until and unless an evidence
of sterling quality is shown that they had conducted
Digitally
Syed Syed
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi +0530
17:15:53State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 72 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
73the investigation prejudicial to the accused persons. It
is also observed in State of Gujarat v. Raghunath
Vamanrao Baxi, “AIR 1985 SUPREME COURT
1092:
“In appreciating oral evidence, in criminal
cases, the question in each case is whether the witness
is a truthful witness and whether there is anything to
doubt his veracity in any particular matter about
which he deposes. Where the witness is found to be
untruthful on material facts that is an end of the
matter. Where the witness is found to be partly
truthful or to spring from tainted sources, the court
may take the precaution of seeking some
corroboration, adequate and reasonable to meet the
demands of the situation, but a court is not entitled to
reject the evidence of a witness merely because they
are government servants, who, in the course of their
duties or even otherwise, might have come into
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:15:57
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 73 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
74contact with investigating officers and who might
have been requested to assist the investigating
agencies.”
47. It cannot be lost sight, that the complaint u/s
195 Cr.P.C. i.e. Ex.PW11/A is proved by ACP Anil
Samota, PW-11 who has stated that on 27.11.2022 the
present case was placed before him to give complaint
u/s 195 Cr.P.C. and after perusal of the file he found
that accused persons obstructed police officials
namely HC Vinod and HC Naresh in performance of
their official duties and also caused injuries to HC
Vinod and due to which HC Vinod was medically
examined. During treatment, concerned doctor opined
injuries as grievous. On perusal of Ex.PW11/A
complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C., the testimony of PW-11
ACP Anil Samota is found reliable and Ld. MM-07
vide order dated 01.12.2022 has taken cognizance of
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:00
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 74 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
75the offences mentioned in the charge-sheet in view of
the complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. after finding prima facie
sufficient material on record to proceed. Thus, it is not
the case that at the time of taking cognizance of the
offence, the complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. has not been
considered or the complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. is made
without considering the facts of the case in a
prejudicial manner.
48. The submission of the Ld. Counsel that in the
pen drive videos were not found with regard to the
incident, is also not appreciable when ocular
testimony corroborated by medical documents is
found to be reliable and remained irrebutable.
49. It is also relevant here to mention that the
defence with regard to asking of bribe in lieu of triple
riding is not established by defence as no witness has
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:03
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 75 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
76been produced in defence. The submission of the Ld.
Counsel for the accused persons that no independent
public witnesses were examined by the prosecution is
also not sustainable because the possibility cannot be
ruled out that even in normal circumstances members
of public are very reluctant to accompany a police
party. Therefore, the submission of the defence
counsel cannot be accepted even the core prosecution
case, witnesses testimonies had remained unshaken by
the defence. It is relevant to consider here that quality
of evidence is important than the quality of evidence
for proving or disapproving the fact and appreciation
of evidence is on the principle which make the court
to believe in the existence or non-existence of a fact
that is proved or not proved or disapproved. The test
is for the trustworthiness and credibility of evidence is
very well explained in the observation of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Kuna @ Sanjaya Behera Vs. State
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:05
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 76 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
77of Odisha, 2017 SCC Online Supreme Court 1336
that the conviction can be based on the testimony of
single eye witness if he or she passes the test of
reliability and that is not the number of witnesses but
the quality of evidence that is important.
50. Sharing of common intention between co-
accused Ravi and Rohit is apparent as HC Vinod had
deposed that the accused started arguing with him and
said police officials harassed them and they will teach
lessons to police officials and the pillion rider asked
the motorcycle rider to bring a stone and they will
teach a lesson to the police officials and the person
brought a cemented stone piece threw aiming his head
which hit on his nose. Another eye witness HC Naresh
has also corroborated the testimony of HC Vinod and
HC Vinod has also identified both the accused
persons.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:08
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 77 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
78
51. It is also relevant to consider Section 34
IPC, which reads as:
“34. Acts done by several persons in
furtherance of common intention.–
When a criminal act is done by several
persons in furtherance of the common
intention of all, each of such persons is
liable for that act in the same manner as if it
were done by him alone.”
It is settled that, Section 34 has been enacted on
the principle of joint liability in the doing of a
criminal act. The section is only a rule of evidence
and does not create any substantive offence. The law
is explained by the superior courts as in “Krishnan
And Anr vs State Of Kerala on 2 September, 1996
AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 383, 1996 (10) SCC Syed
Zishan Ali
508 Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:11 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 78 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
79
“Question is whether it is obligatory on the
part of the prosecution to establish commission of
overt act to press into service section 34 of the Penal
Code. It is no doubt true that court likes to know
about overt act to decide whether the concerned
person had shared the common intention in question.
Question is whether overt act has always to be
established? lam of the view that establishment of an
overt act is not a requirement of law to allow section
34 to operate inasmuch as this section gets attracted
when a criminal act is done by several persons in
furtherance of common intention of all”. What has to
be, therefore, established by the prosecution is that all
the concerned persons had shared the common
intention. Court’s mind regarding the sharing of
common intention gets satisfied When overt act is
established qua each of the accused. But then, there
may be a case where the proved facts would
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:14
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 79 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
80themselves speak of sharing of common intention : res
ipsa loquitor, Now, take this case, The appellant is a
school teacher. He is sup-posed to be armed with a
pen and not a knife. He would be normally found in
his school and not on a road at night, and that too in
the company of another who is also armed with knife.
Not only this, seeing the deceased coming, the
appellant and the co-accused came out from behind a
tree and proclaimed to the deceased they were waiting
for him. Thereafter, the deceased is be- laboured, and
let it be conceded, only by the co-accused. Question is
whether the appellant had also the intention which
had animated the co- accused in causing the death?
According to me, it would definitely be permissible to
draw the inference that both the accused had shared a
common intention and the criminal act in question
had been done in furtherance of the intention. section
34 does not require anything more to get attracted. Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:17 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 80 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
81
Lest it be thought that this view is being taken for the
first time by this Court, reference may be made to
ChiniaPulla Reddy v. State of Andhra SUPREME
COURT REPORTS {1996] SUPP.5 S.C.R. Pradesh,
[1993] Supp, (3) SCC 134. There also A-l, out of the
two accused, alone had stabbed the deceased twice
which had resulted in the death of the concerned
person. But then, having noted that A-2 Was also
armed with knife and had gone to the house of the
deceased and was present in the middle of the night at
the spot, this Court upheld the conviction of A-2
under section 302/34, even though he had not by
himself caused any specific injury to the deceased.
(See para 11). May it be pointed out that Chinta
Pulla‘s case is incidentally very close on facts to the
one at hand.
So, even if it were to be conceded that appellant Vijay
Kumar had not caused the head injury, his conviction
under section 302/34 does not suffer from any
infirmity.”
52. Now coming to case at hand the manner of Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:20 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 81 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
82
assault which was caused to HC Vinod by accused
Rohit Soni on the direction of accused Ravi Soni and
the accused persons has also stated that they want to
teach police persons a lesson clearly establishes that
they have acted in furtherance of their common
intention to teach police person a lesson by causing
injury which was formed at the spur of the moment.
53. In their testimony, PW1 HC Vinod and PW3
HC Naresh, it is stated by them that they saw on
motorcycle three persons were coming from wrong
side without helmet. Further the accused Rohit Soni
was identified by HC Vinod and in the testimony of
PW 3 HC Naresh, he has also stated that motorcycle
rider identity was revealed as Rohit Soni, who was
riding the motorcycle. It is also stated by them that
one pillion rider had escaped from the spot and
remaining two riders had become aggressive. Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:24
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 82 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
83However, their testimony has remained irrebutable in
cross-examination and thus looking to the testimonies
of witnesses and recovery of motorcycle it is
established by prosecution beyond reasonable doubt
that accused Rohit Soni was found riding motorcycle
with two pillions without helmet on the date of
incident and he committed the offence under Section
128/194 (C) M.V. Act.
54. Aforesaid discussions led this court to the
conclusion that the prosecution has been successful in
proving its case against accused No. 1 Rohit Soni and
accused No. 2 Ravi Soni, beyond reasonable doubt.
With regard to voluntarily obstructing public servant
HC Vinod and HC Naresh in discharge of public
function and causing assault to HC Vinod and HC
Naresh to deter them from discharge of their duty and
voluntarily causing grievous hurt to HC Vinod to deter
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:27
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 83 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
84him from his duty in furtherance of their common
intention. Accordingly, both the accused Rohit Soni
and Ravi Soni are held guilty and convicted for the
offence u/s 186, 353, 333 r/w Section 34 of IPC and
Accused Rohit Soni is also held guilty and convicted
for the offence u/s 128/194 (C) M.V. Act.
55. However, in the testimonies of PW1 HC Vinod
and PW3 HC Naresh or any other witness on behalf of
prosecution it has not came on record that Accused
Rohit was driving the bike in a rash and negligent
manner so as to endanger human life or likely to cause
hurt or injury to any person. Thus, the prosecution has
failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that offence
u/s 279 of IPC was committed by Accused Rohit and
he is hereby acquitted of offence u/s 279 IPC.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:30
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 84 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
85(APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE QUA
ACCUSED SHEETAL)
56. For accused Sheetal, in the testimony of PW-1
HC Vinod, it is stated by him that the person who was
driving the motorcycle bring a cemented stone and
threw aiming at his head which hit his nose. Blood
started oozing from his nose. Meanwhile, one pillion
rider out of the aforesaid three persons managed to
run away from the spot. On perusal of his statement
Ex.PW1/A, it is recorded that “karke wapis HC
Naresh ke paas aaya toh paya we teeno ladke HC
Naresh ke sath bahas baji kar rahe the, jab maine
beech bachao karne ki koshish ki toh we teeno mujhse
bhi bahas baji wa hathapaai karne lage wa kahne lage
ki tumhare paas kaagjaat aadi check karne ki authority
nahi hai yah toh traffic police ka kaam hai, isi dauran
piche baithe ladko mein se ek ladka mauke se khisak
gaya tatha banki dono ladke ekdam se aggressive ho Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:32 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 85 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
86
gaye.” Thus, from the joint reading of Ex.PW1/A
(statement of HC Vinod) and the testimony of PW-1
HC Vinod before this court, it is crystal clear that
accused Sheetal was not present i.e. left the place of
incident when the incident of assault occurred. It is
also relevant that all the accused persons were
correctly identified by HC Vinod Kumar and the
accused Rohit Soni and Ravi Soni are arrested in his
presence and accused Sheetal was escaped from the
spot. Thus, it is crystal clear that accused Sheetal has
not participated in the incident at the moment when
the victim HC Vinod was injured by the stone.
57. In the statement of HC Naresh, he also stated
that the three motorcycle riders were altercating with
him and making video of the spot and meanwhile HC
Vinod after verifying the documents came back to him
and tried to intervene then one rider from the three
Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:35 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 86 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
87
persons started manhandling with HC Vinod stating
that the police officials have no authority to verify the
documents and it was job of traffic police. Meanwhile,
one pillion rider had escaped from the spot and
remaining two riders became more aggressive. And he
identified accused Ravi Soni and he has not identified
the rest of the two accused persons and he also stated
that he is not sure about the identity of remaining two
accused persons.
58. In the testimony of PW-4 Ct. Shobhit Kumar,
he has also corroborated the testimony of PW-1 HC
Vinod and HC Naresh but he stated that he saw there
that the two persons were manhandling with HC
Naresh and HC Vinod was found sitting on the
footpath and blood was oozing from his nose and he
alongwith HC Lalu and HC Naresh Kumar
apprehended those two persons. Thus, in the Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:37 +0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 87 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
88
testimony of the prosecution witnesses, no overt act is
assigned to the accused Sheetal or any common
intention to cause injury to HC Vinod is came in the
testimony of any of the witnesses with regard to
accused Sheetal. The conduct of accused Sheetal itself
shows that even if it is presumed that he was present
at the spot, then also there is no whisper that he has
any intention to cause any injury to the police persons
or uttered any single word in aggression. As his
identity is also not corroborated by other prosecution
witnesses except HC Vinod, thus, it cannot be said
that the prosecution has established its case beyond
reasonable doubt.
59. When there is a possibility of two views, then it
is settled principle of law that the benefit of doubt be
given to the accused as the view favouring the
accused must be adopted. This principle is based on
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:40
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 88 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
89the presumption of innocence that the benefit of doubt
goes to the accused if the prosecution has failed to
establish its case beyond reasonable doubt as no one
has to be convicted based on suspicion when the
evidence is not of sterling quality which lead only to
the guilt and guilt of the accused. The honrable
Supreme Court has also observed in Ghurey Lal Vs.
State of U.P., 2008 (10) SCC 450:
“61. In B.N. Mutto & Another v. Dr.
T.K. Nandi (1979) 1 SCC 361, the
Court observed thus:
“It stems out of the
fundamental principle of our
criminal jurisprudence that
the accused is entitled to the
benefit of any reasonable
doubt. If two reasonably
probable and evenly
balanced views of the
evidence are possible, one
must necessarily concede the
existence of a reasonable
doubt. But, fanciful and Syed Syed
Digitally
signed by
Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi +0530
17:16:43State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 89 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
90remote possibilities must be
left out of account. To entitle
an accused person to the
benefit of a doubt arising
from the possibility of a
duality of views, the possible
view in favour of the accused
must be as nearly reasonably
probable as that against
him. If the preponderance of
probability is all one way, a
bare possibility of another
view will not entitle the
accused to claim the benefit
of any doubt. It is, therefore,
essential that any view of the
evidence in favour of the
accused must be reasonable
even as any doubt, the
benefit of which an accused
person may claim, must be
reasonable. “A reasonable
doubt”, it has been
remarked, “does not mean
some light, airy,
insubstantial doubt that may
flit through the minds of any
of us about almost anything
at some time or other, it does
not mean a doubt begotten Syed
Zishan Ali
Warsi
Digitally signed by
Syed Zishan Ali
Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:45 +0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 90 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
91by sympathy out of
reluctance to convict; it
means a real doubt, a doubt
founded upon reasons.
[Salmond J. in his charge to
the jury in R.V. Fantle
reported in 1959 Criminal
Law Review 584.]”……….
{emphasis supplied}
…..66. In Bhagwan Singh & Others v. State of
M.P. (2002) 4 SCC 85, the Court repeated one of the
fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence
that if two views are possible on the evidence
adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the
accused and the other to his innocence, the view
which is favourable to the accused should be
adopted. The Court observed as under:-
“7. The golden thread which runs through
the web of administration of justice in
criminal case is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the
case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused
and the other to his innocence, the view
which is favourable to the accused should
be adopted. Such is not a jurisdiction
limitation on the appellate court but a Judge Syed
Zishan
Ali Warsi
Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
17:16:48 +0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 91 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
92made guidelines for circumspection. The
paramount consideration of the court is to
ensure that miscarriage of justice is
avoided.”……..
……..77. The trial court categorically came to the
finding that when the substratum of the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses was false, then the prosecution
case has to be discarded. When the trial court finds so
many serious infirmities in the prosecution version,
then the trial court was virtually left with no choice
but to give benefit of doubt to the accused according to
the settled principles of criminal jurisprudence.”
60. As discussed in foregoing paragraphs of the
judgment the only allegation against accused Sheetal
is only accompanying the other co-accused persons
and no specific overtact is assigned to Accused
Sheetal. Even when the incident of assault took place
before that he has left the spot. As the presence at spot
of accused Sheetal is not established at the time of
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:16:50
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 92 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
93assault or at the time when the other two co-accused
persons has become aggressive as well as started
manhandling with the police personals. Also absence
of participation indicates that he has no prior meeting
of mind with other co-accused persons. And the
prosecution has failed to prove any offence or
common intention or knowledge or participation qua
Accused Sheetal beyond reasonable doubt. As
prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case
against accused Sheetal beyond reasonable doubt and
he is hereby acquitted for the charge under Section
186/353/34 IPC.
CONCLUSION
61. The accused persons namely Rohit Soni and
Ravi Soni are convicted for the offence u/s 186, 353,
333 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:16:53
+0530
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 93 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
94
62. Accused Rohit Soni is also convicted for the
offence u/s 128/194 (C) M.V. Act. Accused Rohit Soni
acquitted for Section 279 IPC.
63. Accused Sheetal is acquitted from all the
offences.
64. Be heard separately on the order on sentence.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
on 20th February 2026. Digitally signed by
Syed Syed Zishan Ali
Zishan Ali Warsi
Date: 2026.02.20
Warsi 17:17:00 +0530
(SYED ZISHAN ALI WARSI)
Addl. Sessions Judge-04
Patiala House Courts
New Delhi/20.02.2026
i. Chart of witnesses examined
Prosecution Name of Description
Witness No. witness
1. HC Vinod Kumar Complainant /
Injured
State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 94 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
95
2. SI Yudhbir Singh Participated in
Investigation
3. HC Naresh Eye Witness
4. Ct. Shobhit Kumar Participated in
Investigation
5. HC Balkari Participated in
Investigation
6. Dr. Sadaf Saleem Proved MLC of
Vinod dated
03.10.2022 i.e. Ex
PW6/A
7. HC Lallu Ram Participated in
Investigation
8. Dr. Rahul Proved MLC dated
Choudhary 07.11.2022 of
Vinod i.e. Ex
PW1/D
9. Sh. Ankit FSL Report
Chaturvedi
10. SI Vikas Chand Investigating
Officer
11. ACP Anil Samota Complainant u/s
195 CrPC
12. Ms. Seema Nain Allelic Report
13. Dr. Tushar Shailat Proved MLC of
Vinod i.e. Ex
PW6/A
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:23
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 95 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
96
14. Dr. Mohit Kumar Radiologist
proved Ex. PW
14/A XÂRay
examination
report.
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:26
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 96 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
97ii. Chart of Exhibited documents
Exhibit No. Description of Proved by
Exhibit /Attested by
1. Ex.PW1/A, PW1, HC Vinod
statement of HC Kumar
Vinod Kumar,
Ex.PW1/B, arrest
memo of accused
Ravi Soni,
Ex. PW1/C, Arrest
memo of accused
Rohit Soni, PW1/D,
MLC of Vinod
dated 07.11.2022 &
PW1/DA, Site Plan
2. Ex. PW2/A, Report PW2, SI Yudhbir
regarding visit to Singh
the spot.
3. Ex.PW3/A, Seizure PW3, HC Naresh
Memo of
motorcycle
4. —- PW4, Ct. Shobhit
Kumar
5. Ex.PW5/A, PW5, HC Balkari
Personal search
memo of accused
Ravi Soni,
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:30
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 97 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
98Ex.PW5/B,
Personal search
memo of accused
Rohit Soni, &
PW5/C Seizure
Memo regarding
lifting of exhibits.
6. Ex.PW6/A, MLC PW6, Dr. Sadaf
bearing no. 2177 Saleem
dated 03.10.2022 of
Vinod,
Ex.PW6/B, ENT
Notes
7. —- PW7, HC Lallu
Ram
8. —- PW8, Dr. Rahul
Chowdhary (proved
Ex. PW1/D)
9. Ex.PW9/A, PW9, Sh. Ankit
Examination report, Chaturvedi
10. Ex.PW10/A, PW10, SI Vikas
Endorsement on Chand
rukka, Ex.PW10/B,
siezure memo of
mobile phone,
Ex.PW10/C,
disclosure statement
of accused Ravi,
Digitally
signed by
Syed Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:33
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 98 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
99Ex.PW10/D,
Disclosure
statement of
accused Rohit,
Ex.PW10/E, Notice
u/s 41A CrPC, Ex.
PW10/F,
interrogation report,
11. Ex. PW11/A, PWÂ11, ACP Anil
Complaint u/s Samota
195 CrPC
12. Ex. PW12/A, PWÂ12, Ms.
Report Seema Nain
13. ÂÂÂÂ PWÂ13, Dr.
Tushar Shailat
(proved MLC,
Ex. PW6/A).
14. Ex. PW14/A, PWÂ14, Dr.
Report XÂray Mohit Kumar
examination
Digitally
Syed signed
Syed
by
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
Ali Date:
2026.02.20
Warsi 17:17:35
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 99 of 101
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
100
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
1. —- PW1, HC Vinod
Kumar
2. —- PW2, SI Yudhbir
Singh
3. —- PW3, HC Naresh
4. —- PW4, Ct. Shobhit
Kumar
5. —- PW5, HC Balkari
6. —- PW6, Dr. Sadaf
Saleem
7. —- PW7, HC Lallu
Ram
8. —- PW8, Dr. Rahul
Choudhary
9. —- PW9, Ankit
Chaturvedi
10. Ex.1-blood sample PW10, SI Vikas
gauge, Ex.2- blood Chand
sample gauge,
Ex.3- cemented
stone
Ex PW10/P1,
mobile phone make
Redmi Note 9,
Ex.PW10/P2,
Digitally
Syed signed
Syed
byZishan Ali
Zishan Warsi
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:38
+0530State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 100 of
101ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
101mobile phone
Realme &
Ex.PW10/P3, pen
drive.
11. ÂÂÂÂ PW11, ACP Anil
Samota
12. ÂÂÂÂ PW12, Ms.
Seema Nain
13. ÂÂÂÂ PW13, Dr.
Tushar Shailat
14. ÂÂÂÂ PW14, Dr. Mohit
Kumar
Digitally signed
Syed by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Zishan Date:
Ali Warsi 2026.02.20
17:17:42 +0530(SYED ZISHAN ALI WARSI)
Addl. Sessions Judge-04
Patiala House Courts
New Delhi/20.02.2026State Vs. Rohit Soni and Ors. Page no. 101 of
101ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
