Delhi District Court
State vs Israr on 21 July, 2025
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
IN THE COURT OF MS. NISHA SAHAY SAXENA
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
NORTH DISTRICT: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
In the matter of:-
(Sessions Case No. 31/2021)
CNR No. DLNT01-000531-2021
FIR No. 345/2020
Police Station : Bhalswa Dairy
Under Section : 307 IPC
State V/s Israr
S/o Abdul Salam
R/o C-96, JJ Colony,
Bhalswa Dairy, Delhi.
.... Accused
Date of committal to 27.01.2021
this court
Date of final 15.07.2025
arguments
Date of Judgment 21.07.2025
Appearance : Sh. A.K. Mishra, Ld. Chief PP for the
State.
Sh. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Counsel for
accused.
JUDGMENT
FACTUAL MATRIX AND CASE GENESIS
The Incident
Nisha
Sahay
1. The criminal proceedings originated from events that Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:43:44 +0530
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 1 of 43
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
transpired on May 31, 2020, at approximately 2:30 PM in the
Bhalswa Dairy area of Delhi. The incident began as a
seemingly routine commercial transaction that escalated into a
violent confrontation with serious criminal implications.
2. Iyynar, son of Duraisammy, approached the chicken
shop operated by the accused Israr for the purpose of
purchasing chicken. What began as a commercial interaction
rapidly deteriorated into a dispute concerning the pricing of
chicken. The disagreement escalated when Israr, allegedly
under the influence of alcohol, physically assaulted lyynar by
slapping him, causing visible injury and bleeding.
3. Following this initial altercation, lyynar returned to
his residence and informed his wife, Painama, about the
incident. The situation further escalated when Painama,
accompanied by her husband, returned to Israr’s shop to
confront him about his behavior toward her spouse.
4. Upon confronting Israr about his treatment of her
husband, Painama faced aggressive behavior from the accused.
Israr threatened her with violence, stating in Hindi, “budhi tu
yahaan se bhag ja, nahi to tujhe chhuri maar dunga” (old
woman, run away from here, otherwise I will stab you with a
knife). The situation became increasingly volatile when Deva,
Nisha
the son of the complainant, arrived at the scene upon learning Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 2 of 43
Date: 2025.07.22
14:43:52 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
of the ongoing dispute.
5. The verbal confrontation transformed into a life-
threatening assault when Israr retrieved a chicken-cutting knife
(chopper) from his shop. He launched a violent attack. The first
victim was Painama, whom he stabbed in the neck and head
region with the meat cleaver, causing severe injuries. When
Deva attempted to rescue his mother from the attack, Israr
turned the weapon on him, inflicting a wound to his arm. The
violence continued when Raju, a neighbor who attempted to
intervene and protect the victims, also became a target of Israr’s
aggression, sustaining injuries to his back from the same
weapon. Following the attack, Israr fled the scene. The severity
of the injuries necessitated emergency medical intervention,
with all victims being transported to BJRM Hospital for
treatment.
INVESTIGATION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
6. The matter was reported to the police through DD
No. 20A, pursuant whereto ASI Buta Ram along with HC
Tarun reached at BJRM Hospital and recorded the statement of
complainant Iyynar, leading to the registration of the FIR.
7. During the investigation, the accused Israr was
arrested by the IO and his disclosure statement was recorded. Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 3 of 43 Date: 2025.07.22
14:43:59 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
Upon completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed
against the accused, and after cognizance was taken by the Ld.
Magistrate, the case was committed to the Sessions Court for
trial.
CHARGE
8. Charge was framed against the accused Israr for
offences punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. The accused pleaded not guilty to charge and
claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
9. During trial, prosecution examined seventeen witnesses
in all.
S.No Witness Description of testimony
1. PW 1 Ms. Painama Injured.
2. PW 2 Deva Injured.
3. PW 3 Raju Injured.
4. PW 4 Ms. Shabbo Eye Witness.
5. PW 5 Retired SI Duty Officer who proved FIR.
Ravinder Kumar
6. PW 6 Innar Complainant.
7. PW 7 HC Tarun Joined investigation with IO.
8. PW 8 HC Deepak MHC(M)
9. PW 9 Dr. Avanish Medically examined the injured Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 4 of 43 Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:07 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
Tripathi. persons.
10. PW 10 Retired ASI DD Writer.
Mahipal
11. PW 11 SI Sandeep Filed charge-sheet.
12. PW 12 Dr. Deepak Proved MLCs of injured.
Chugh
13. PW 13 SI Deepak Took the injured persons to
hospital for collection of their
blood sample.
14. PW 14Ct.Jitendra Deposited case property with FSL.
15. PW 15 Rajvinder Proved MLCs of injured persons.
Singh
16. PW 16 SI Chander Collected attested copies of MLS
Pal Singh and seizure of blood.
17. PW 17 ASI Rajesh Obtained FSL result.
Documents relied upon by the prosecution :
S.No. Nature of document Exhibit
1. Seizure memo of blood stained clothes Ex. PW 1/A.
of PW1
2. Clothes of PW 1 Ex. P1.
3. Statement of Ms.Painama recorded by Ex. PW 1/B.
police.
4. Seizure memo of blood stained clothes Ex. PW 2/A.
of PW2.
5. Clothes of PW 2. Ex. P2.
6. Seizure memo of blood stained clothes Ex. PW 3/A.
of PW3. Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 5 of 43 Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:16 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
7. Clothes of PW 3. Ex. P3.
8. Knife. (Inadvertently exhibited as Ex. Ex. P3.
P3 instead of Ex. P4).
9. Endorsement of IO on statement of Ex. PW 6/A.
injured.
10. FIR. Ex. PW 5/A.
11. Endorsement on rukka. Ex. PW 5/B.
12. Certificate u/s 65 B Evidence Act. Ex. PW 5/C.
13. Complaint made by complainant. Ex. PW 6/A.
14. Site Plan of the spot. Ex. PW 6/B.
15. Arrest memo of accused. Ex. PW 6/C.
16. Personal Search memo of accused. Ex. PW 7/A.
17. Disclosure statement of accused. Ex. PW 7/B.
18. Pointing out memo. Ex. PW 7/C.
19. Sketch of knife. Ex. PW 7/D.
20. Seizure memo of seal. Ex. PW 7/E.
21. Entries qua deposit of case property Ex. PW 8/A &
with Malkhana. Ex. PW 8/B.
22. RC vide which case property was sent Ex. PW 8/C.
to FSL
23. Copy of acknowledgment / receipt. Ex. PW 8/D.
24. MLC of injured Deva. Ex. PW 9/A.
25. MLC of injured Painama. Ex. PW 9/B.
26. MLC of injured Raju. Ex. PW 9/C.
27. DD No. 20 A. Ex. PW 10/A.
28. seizure memo of blood samples and Ex. PW 13/A.
sample seals.
28. Certified copies of MLS of Raju, Deva Ex. PW 13/B. Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 6 of 43 Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:23 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
and Painama. Ex. PW 13/C
and Ex. PW
13/D
DEFENCE CASE
10. In his statement under Section 313 CrPC, the accused
Israr denied all allegations and claimed false implication. His
defence centered on the assertion that he was the victim of mob
violence rather than the perpetrator of the alleged crime.
11. According to his statement, the accused claimed that
on the day of the incident, a worker named Raju was managing
his shop when an altercation occurred with a customer named
Iyynar. The accused further claimed that approximately 25-30
people, led by the complainant, came to his shop and
physically assaulted him with fists, kicks and sticks, causing
injuries throughout his body and head.
12. In support of his defense, the accused examined one
Manoj @ Kaju as DW 1.
13. I have heard arguments advanced by Sh. A.K.
Mishra, Ld. Chief . Public Prosecutor for the State, and Sh.
Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Ld. Counsel for accused and have
considered the rival contentions put forth by both the parties,
gone through the relevant case law and have scrutinized the
Nisha
Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 7 of 43 Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:32 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
evidence adduced by the prosecution including the written
submissions filed by the defence.
ANALYSIS & REASONING
Delay in FIR Registration
14. Ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that the
first and the foremost lacuna in the prosecution case is that
there is a delay in registration of the FIR, as the alleged
incident took place at about 2.30 PM and the FIR was
registered at about 22.05 PM. Per contra, Ld. Chief PP for the
State has argued that there is no delay in lodging the FIR, as
the matter was immediately reported to the police vide DD No.
20 A, pursuant whereto the police reached at the spot but by
that time, the injured had already been removed to the hospital.
Since the wife and son of complainant were given stab injuries
and he himself was slapped and misbehaved by the accused, it
is quite possible that he took some time to give his statement. I
find myself in agreement that the recording of the FIR at 22.05
PM, does not form a ‘delay’ in registration of the FIR.
15. While the incident occurred at 2:30 PM and the FIR
was registered at 22:05 PM, this delay was not fatal to the
prosecution’s case for following reasons:
(i) The matter was immediately reported to police
through DD No. 20A. Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 8 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:40 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
(ii) The injured parties required immediate medical
attention, which would naturally delay formal
statement recording.
(iii) The severity of injuries, particularly to the primary
victim, made immediate statement recording
impractical.
(iv) The time required for medical treatment and
stabilization of victims was reasonable.
The delay was justified by circumstances and did not
constitute a material defect in the prosecution’s case.
Sterling Witnesses.
16. The star and the sterling witnesses of the prosecution
are the injured person Ms. Painama (PW 1), Deva (PW 2), Raju
(PW 3) and complainant Iyynar (PW 6). In case Rai Sandeep
Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2012) 8 SCC 21, wherein it has
been observed as under :
“In our considered opinion, the ‘sterling witness’
should be of a very high quality and caliber whose
version should, therefore, be unassailable. The Court
considering the version of such witness should be in a
position to accept it for its face value without any
hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the
status of the witness would be immaterial and what
would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement
made by such a witness. What would be more
relevant would be the consistency of the statement
right from the starting point till the end, namely, at Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 9 of 43 Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:48 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israrthe time when the witness makes the initial statement
and ultimately before the Court. It should be natural
and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua
the accused. There should not be any prevarication in
the version of such a witness. The witness should be
in a position to withstand the cross- examination of
any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and
under no circumstance should give room for any
doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons
involved, as well as, the sequence of it. Such a
version should have co-relation with each and
everyone of other supporting material such as the
recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of
offence committed, the scientific evidence and the
expert opinion. The said version should consistently
match with the version of every other witness. It can
even be stated that it should be akin to the test
applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where
there should not be any missing link in the chain of
circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the
offence alleged against him. Only if the version of
such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all
other similar such tests to be applied, it can be held
that such a witness can be called as a ‘sterling
witness’ whose version can be accepted by the Court
without any corroboration and based on which the
guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the
version of the said witness on the core spectrum of
the crime should remain intact while all other
attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and
material objects should match the said version in
material particulars in order to enable the Court
trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve
the other supporting materials for holding the
offender guilty of the charge alleged.
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 10 of 43 by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:44:57 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
17. In the case in hand, all the four material witnesses
examined by the prosecution fit the bill of a sterling witness, to
the hilt. They have supported the prosecution case, which is
based on the complaint Ex. PW 6/A of the complainant, in total
letter and spirit, to the last digit.
18. PW 1 Ms. Painama categorically deposed that on
31.05.2020 at about 2 – 2:30 pm, her husband had gone to
purchase chicken (meat) from the shop of the accused and they
had an altercation on the issue of price of chicken and the
accused slapped her husband due to which her husband started
bleeding. She further deposed that after her husband returned
home and told her about the entire incident, she went to the
shop of the accused to confront him, but the accused
misbehaved with her as well stating that “budhi tu yahaan se
bhag ja, nahi to tujhe chhuri maar dunga”. In the meantime,
on coming to know about the incident, her sons also came there
running.
19. PW 1 further deposed that the accused brought the
knife which was being used by him for cutting meat, and
stabbed with the same on her neck and on back side of her head
(witness had also shown the injury marks on her neck and head
stating that she was not able to move her left hand property due
to the said injury). PW 1 further deposed that when her son Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 11 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:07 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. IsrarDeva tried to save her, accused stabbed her son Deva as well
on his left hand. When their neighbour Raju tried to intervene,
he was also stabbed by the accused on the left side of his back
with the same knife. She became unconscious and was taken
to the hospital. Her blood stained clothes were seized vide
seizure memo Ex. PW1/A. She further deposed that her son
Dev and Raju were discharged from the hospital, but she was
referred to Max Hospital, where she remained admitted for
about three days.
20. On being cross examined by the learned Chief
Prosecutor for the State, PW 1 deposed that the police had
recorded her statement when she was discharged from hospital.
She denied the suggestion that she along with her husband
went to the shop of the accused but volunteered that her
husband reached the shop of accused after few minutes of her
reaching there.
21. In her cross examination, PW 1 denied the
suggestion that when her husband disclosed the incident of
slapping, she along with her son Deva, Raju and other
neighbours visited the shop of the accused to beat him. She did
not know as to who had taken her to the hospital. She
remained conscious for about five minutes after receiving stab
injuries and thereafter she became unconscious. She had
Nisha
Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 12 of 43 Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:15 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israrvisited the shop of the accused alone. Nobody came to rescue
them when the accused was stabbing them.
22. PW 2 Deva corroborated the version of his mother
Ms. Painama (PW1) and deposed that on 31.05.2020 at about
2:00 pm, when his father had gone to purchase the chicken
(meat) from the shop of the accused, an altercation took place
between his father and accused, where-after accused slapped
his father. He further deposed that one boy, who was passing
through, went to his house and told about the incident to his
mother. Thereafter, his mother left the house for the shop of
the accused, and on the half way, her father met his mother. On
coming to know about the incident, his mother asked his father
to stay there for a while and that she would go to the shop of
the accused for having a talk with him. Thereafter, his mother
went to the shop of the accused and when she was asking the
accused regarding his behaviour, the accused took out a
chicken knife and threatened her to leave otherwise he would
stab her, a crowd gathered there at the spot.
23. PW 2 further deposed that in the meantime, his
sister telephonically informed him about the incident and he
immediately reached there and saw that the accused was
carrying and waiving a chicken knife in his hand. He further
Nisha
deposed when he reached near the accused, he stabbed knife on Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 13 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:23 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israrhis hand and on the neck of his mother. PW 2 further
categorically deposed that when Raju came to save them, he
was also stabbed by the accused, and after stabbing them, the
accused ran away from there. Thereafter one of the friends of
his sister took the mobile phone of his sister and called the
police at 100 number. He along with Raju went to the hospital
on bike, where Police visited and made inquiries from them.
Police seized his blood stained clothes and recorded his
statement.
24. In his cross examination by Ld. Chief PP, PW 2
deposed that he cannot say as to whether his father returned to
the house from the shop of the accused and told about the
incident, as he was not present at the spot. He admitted it to be
correct that when he reached at the shop of the accused, his
mother was asking the accused as to why he slapped his father,
on which accused started abusing her in filthy language and
said “your entire family has come here, I will not spare
anyone”. He further admitted it to be correct that the accused
stabbed with chicken knife on the neck and head of his mother
with an intention to kill her and that when he came to rescue
his mother, accused attacked on him as well with knife and the
knife hit his left hand. He further admitted it to be correct that
when his neighbour Raju came to save them from accused, he
was also hit on his back with knife by the accused. Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 14 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:31 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
25. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the
accused, PW 2 deposed that his parents together went to the
spot and his sister followed them to see as to what had
happened and she saw the accused attacking on them, where-
after she informed him telephonically through her mobile
phone. PW 2 further deposed that accused Israr did not know
him prior to the incident in question. Raju is his friend, and on
that day, Raju had gone to the market and saw the accused Israr
hitting him and his mother with knife and he tried to save them
from the accused. He denied the suggestion that he along with
his mother, sister, Raju and 15-20 persons had visited the spot
to quarrel and beat up the accused. He further denied the
suggestion that when they were giving beatings to the accused,
his mother fell down on the ground and sustained injuries.
26. The call at 100 was made from the mobile phone
of his sister and she had informed the police. He further
deposed that he and Raju were taken to hospital on separate
bikes by their two friends/neighbours, who were known to him
by faces and not by names, and they had brought their bikes on
seeing them in injured condition and took them to the hospital.
27. The third injured Raju entered the witness box as
PW3 and deposed that on 31.05.2020 at about 2:30 pm or 3:00 Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 15 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:40 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
pm, he had gone to market, where he saw that the accused Israr
was attacking with knife on his friend Deva’s mother, and
when he (PW 3) tried to save her, he also sustained injuries. He
further deposed that Deva’s sister informed the police at 100
number. He was taken to BJRM Hospital by some public
persons, where he was got medically examined and his blood
stained inner and t-shirts were seized by the police.
28. In his cross examination by Ld. Chief PP, PW 3
admitted it to be correct that he saw the accused Israr
quarreling with Deva and his parents and that the accused Israr
was attacking upon them with a knife. He further admitted it to
be correct that that when he tried to save them, accused Israr
attacked upon him with a chicken knife with intention to kill
him. He further admitted it to be correct that the accused had
attacked on Deva and his mother with knife with an intention to
kill them.
29. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the
accused, PW 3 deposed that he knew Deva for the last 3-4
years prior to the incident in question. He had gone to general
grocery shop situated on 60 foota road near B-Block to
purchase something. He further deposed that when he was
returning from the said shop, he saw the quarrel in question. He
further deposed that since Deva was his friend, he tried to save Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 16 of 43 by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:51 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
him and his mother from accused Israr. He had no enmity with
accused Israr, and he was not known to him prior to the
incident in question. He was taken to the hospital on a bike by
a public person who was not known to him. The said public
person is in the business of building material in the market.
30. PW 4 Ms. Shabbo deposed that she did not
remember the date, month and year, but it was two years back
in the noon hours, when she was standing near the meat shop,
one person namely Iyynar, who resided in his neighbourhood,
came there to buy chicken, but some altercations took place
between him and the meat seller namely Israr and accused Israr
slapped Iyynar. She further deposed that in the meanwhile,
wife of Iyynar also reached there and asked the accused Israr as
to why he slapped her husband, where-after accused Israr
stabbed with knife (chicken cutting knife) on the neck of his
wife. In between Deva i.e. son of Iyyar also reached there at
the spot for saving his parents from the accused Israr, but
accused Israr gave stab blow to Deva as well. Thereafter, she
made a call at 100 number.
31. In her cross examination by Ld. Chief PP, PW 4
deposed that she did not see Raju at the place of incident as she
left the spot for her house after dialing at 100 number. She
Nisha
correctly identified the knife which was used by the accused Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 17 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:45:58 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
Israr while committing the crime in question as Ex. P-3.
32. In her cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the
accused, PW 4 deposed that the house of injured Iyynar was
situated at a distance of 5 minutes by walk and the shop of
accused Israr is situated opposite to her parental house. The
injured Iyynar was known to her prior to the incident as she
and his wife used to travel in the same bus to reach their work
place. She further deposed Deva had reached the spot after 15-
20 minutes. Accused Israr had stabbed with knife Iyynar’s
wife in presence of Deva. She had called at 100 number while
the crime was being committed by the accused Israr. She
admitted that Deva and his parents had also hit the accused by
pelting stones towards him. Accused Israr had stabbed first
and thereafter Deva and his parents started pelting stones
towards him. Police had not recorded her statement anywhere.
The knife of the accused fell down on the ground when the
accused hit Deva’s mother and that the accused did not pick up
the same in her presence. She left the spot for her house after
the quarrel was over.
33. PW 6 Sh. Iyynar (Innar) deposed that on 31.05.2020
at about 2:30 pm, he had visited the chicken shop of accused
Israr for purchasing chicken, where an altercation took place
Nisha
between him and accused Israr, who was under the influence of Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 18 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:05 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
liquor at that time. Accused started beating him with fists and
legs and thereafter, he returned to his house and explained
everything to his wife. He further deposed that thereafter his
wife came at the shop of accused Israr and confronted him, on
which accused gave knife blow on the neck of his wife. PW 6
further deposed that in the meantime he and his son also
reached there and accused Israr gave knife blow on the hand of
his son as well. Accused also gave knife blow on the stomach
of his son’s friend. He further deposed that he gave a
complaint to the police. Accused also abused them in filthy
language and threatened to kill them with chicken cutting
knife.
34. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the
accused PW 6 deposed that the accused had reached his shop
within 10-15 minutes on his scooty. He denied the suggestion
that he started abusing accused and his worker in filthy
language or that due to this, scuffling took place between him
and the accused. He further denied the suggestion that accused
pushed his wife, his son and Raju etc. in order to save himself
or that due to this reason, they fell down and sustained
injuries. He admitted it to be correct that his son and son’s
friend Raju were taken to the hospital by their friends in auto-
rickshaw. One girl had made a call to the police by dialing 100
number. He did not know her name. He further deposed that
Nisha
Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 19 of 43 Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:13 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
Shiva is son of his brother in law (saale ka beta) and that he
had not seen as to whether Shiva had also accompanied them to
the shop of accused.
35. To sum up, the prosecution’s case is built upon the
testimony of seventeen witnesses, each contributing specific
elements to the overall narrative of events. The witnesses
ranged from the directly injured parties to the police officers,
medical professionals and forensic experts.
36. PW 1 Ms. Painama (injured) provided detailed
testimony about the sequence of events leading to her severe
injuries. She testified that she confronted the accused about his
treatment of her husband, leading to threats and ultimately the
violent attack. Her testimony included specific details about the
nature of the threats made by Israr and the manner in which he
attacked her with the chicken knife, causing injuries to her neck
and head that required extended hospitalization.
37. PW 2 Deva’s (Son) testimony corroborated his
mother’s account while providing additional perspective on the
events. He testified about arriving at the scene to find his
mother being threatened, witnessing the attack, and sustaining
injuries himself when attempting to intervene. His testimony
was particularly valuable in establishing the sequence of events Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 20 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:24 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
and the accused’s intent.
38. PW 3-Raju’s (Neighbour) testimony provided an
independent perspective as a neighbor who attempted to
intervene. His account of being injured while trying to protect
the other victims added credibility to the prosecution’s case and
demonstrated the extent of the accused’s violent behavior.
39. PW 6-lyynar (Complainant): As the original
complainant, Iyynar’s testimony established the initial context
of the dispute and provided crucial background information
about the events leading to the violent confrontation.
40. PW 4 Ms. Shabbo (Independent Eye witness)
provided external validation of the events. Her account of
witnessing the initial altercation and the subsequent violence
added credibility to the prosecution’s narrative.
41. Police Officers (PW 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17):
Multiple police officers testified regarding various aspects of
the investigation, including the registration of the FIR,
evidence collection, witness statement recording, and the
handling of forensic evidence.
42. Medical Professionals (PW 9, 12, 15): Medical
Nisha
witnesses provided crucial testimony regarding the nature and Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 21 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:34 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
extent of injuries sustained by the victims, supporting the
prosecution’s contention about the severity of the attack and the
potential for fatal consequences.
Documentary Evidence
43. The prosecution relied on extensive documentary
evidence to support their case, including:
(i) Seizure memos of blood-stained clothing from all
victims.
(ii) Medical reports and injury certificates.
(iii) The weapon used in the attack (chicken knife).
(iv) Police procedural documents including the FIR,
memo, and disclosure statements.
(v). Forensic Science Laboratory reports.
(vi) Site plans and investigative materials.
Credibility of witnesses
44. The issue, as to the evidentiary value of injured witness
was addressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in judgment titled as
Jarnail Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2009) 9 SCC 719, where in
it was held that :
“Darshan Singh (PW-4) was an injured witness. He
had been examined by the doctor. His testimony
Nisha
could not be brushed aside lightly. He had given Sahay
full details of the incident as he was present at the Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 22 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:43 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Isrartime when the assailants reached the tube well.
In Shivalingappa Kallayanappa v. State of
Karnataka 1994 Supp (3) SCC 235, this Court has
held that the deposition of the injured witness
should be relied upon unless there are strong
grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of
major contradictions and discrepancies, for the
reason that his presence on the scene stands
established in case, it is proved that he suffered the
injury during the said incident.
45. As regards the credibility and appreciation of evidence
of an injured witness, it is settled that the injured is the most
important witness in any particular case, and the fact that he
sustained injuries, if any, is generally proof of the presence of
the injured at the spot of occurrence. Minor contradictions in
the testimony of the injured, are of no consequence, in as much
as they do not erode the credibility of the witness. In routine,
the testimony of the injured is disregarded only when the
testimony of the injured suffers from glaring infirmities and
material contradictions, which go to the root of the matter, to
wipe out or put in doubt, the very genesis of the prosecution
case.
46.. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the injured
persons were present at the spot and that a quarrel took place
Nisha
between them. Ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 23 of 43 by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:46:53 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
prosecution has cross examined all the three material witnesses
i.e. PW 1, PW 2 and PW 3 as they have not supported the
prosecution case in its entirety and they have turned hostile.
47. However, after going through the testimony of these
witnesses, I am of the considered opinion that all these three
witnesses along with PW 6 have corroborated each other and
have supported the prosecution case on all material aspects, but
were cross examined by prosecution as they being layman,
forgot to depose about some part of the incident or the actual
sequence of incident or the manner in which the incident took
place. Further more, it needs to be observed that the ‘law of a
hostile witness’ is very clear. In Raja v. State of Karnataka
(Supra), Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:
“That the evidence of a hostile witness in all
eventualities ought not stand effaced altogether
and that the same can be accepted to the extent
found dependable on a careful scrutiny.”
48. In Koli Lakhman Bhai Chanabhai v. State of Gujarat
(1999) 8 SCC 624, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:
“It is settled law that evidence of hostile witness
also can be relied upon to the extent to which it
supports the prosecution version. Evidence of
such witness cannot be treated as washed off the
record. It remains admissible in the trial and there
is no legal bar to base his conviction upon his
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 24 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:03 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Isrartestimony if corroborated by other reliable
evidence.”
49. Ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that there are
major contradictions in the testimony of material witnesses qua
their reaching at the spot or their going to hospital or by the
mode through which they went to hospital. It is further
contended that even in the testimony of independent witness
PW 4 Ms. Shabbo, there are material contradiction in as much
as at one point of time, she deposed that she left the spot for her
house after dialing at 100 number and in the second breath, she
deposed that she left the spot for her house after the quarrel
was over.
50. Ld. Counsel for accused has contended that though as
per prosecution case, daughter of complainant was present at
the spot and was an alleged eye witness, she has neither been
cited as a witness in the list of witnesses, nor she has been
examined in the court, which proves fatal to the prosecution
case.
51. However, it is to be kept in mind that the Hon’ble
Higher Courts have consistently held that it is not the quantity
Nisha
of witnesses but the quality of evidence that determines the Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 25 of 43 by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:13 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
strength of the prosecution’s case. Testimonies must be
consistent, reliable, and corroborated by other evidence.
Minor Contradictions or discrepancies in Witness Statements
52. Ld. Counsel has argued that the accused deserves to be
given the benefit of doubt as there are material discrepancies in
the prosecution case. He has relied upon Anoop Joshi Vs. State,
1992 (2) C.C. Cases 314 (HC). However, minor discrepancies
and inconsistencies in the testimony of prosecution witnesses
do not make them discredit worthy.
53. Minor contradictions or discrepancies in witness
statements are natural and do not automatically imply that the
testimony is planted, rehearsed, or unreliable. Such small
contradictions are often considered part of the human memory’s
fallibility and the trial process rather than deliberate falsehoods.
54. Minor inconsistencies or small contradictions in
witness testimony should not overshadow the truth of their
statements. Memory lapses, stress, and time gaps between
incident and trial are common reasons for such variations.
Minor contradictions that do not strike at the core of the
testimony or change the fundamental facts of the case do not
Nisha
discredit a witness. Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 26 of 43 Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:22 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
● Recognition of Minor Contradictions as Natural:
Minor contradictions, especially where witnesses are
examined after a considerable time, are natural and do
not necessarily affect the credibility of the testimony.
Minor variations do not lead to rejection of the entire
evidence but are examined in the context of the case’s
totality.
● Avoiding Overemphasis on Trivial Contradictions
The Court cautions against giving undue weight to minor
contradictions that do not have a material effect on the
case, which could result in miscarriage of justice.
Contradictions or omissions unrelated to the core issues
should not be magnified to disbelieve witnesses.
● Impeachment of Witness Credibility
Only contradictions that are material enough to affect the
reliability of the testimony can be used to significantly
impeach a witness’s credibility. Mere differences in
peripheral details may be disregarded. Witnesses are not
rendered entirely unbelievable for trivial inconsistencies.
The court weighs the contradiction’s effect on the
reliability and overall case strength.
● Statements to Police vs. Court Testimony Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
SaxenaFIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 27 of 43 Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:32 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. IsrarStatements given to police during investigations (under
Section 161 CrPC) cannot be treated as substantive evidence
but can only be used for cross-examining the witness for
contradictions. Even then, only material contradictions are
relevant. The Supreme Court emphasized limiting the use of
police statements to contradict a witness rather than discredit
the whole testimony.
● The “Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus’ Principle
55. The principle that a witness false in one part is false
in all parts does not generally apply in Indian criminal law.
Courts can rely on portions of testimony found credible despite
minor discrepancies elsewhere.
56. In case Rammi Alias Rameshwar Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 3544, it has
been observed as under:
“When eye-witness is examined at length it is
quite possible for him to make some
discrepancies. No true witness can possibly
escape from making some discrepant details.
Perhaps an untrue witness who is well tutored can
successfully make his testimony totally non-
discrepant. But courts should bear in mind that it
is only when discrepancies in the evidence of a
witness are so incompatible with the credibility of
his version that the court is justified in jettisoning Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 28 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:40 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israrhis evidence. But too serious a view to be adopted
on mere variations falling in the narration of an
incident (either as between the evidence of two
witnesses or as between two statements of the
same witness) is an unrealistic approach for
judicial scrutiny.
It is a common practice in trial courts to make out
contradictions from previous statement of a
witness for confronting him during cross-
examination. Merely because there is
inconsistency in evidence it is not sufficient to
impair the credit of the witness. No doubt Section
155 of the Evidence Act provides scope for
impeaching the credit of a witness by proof of
inconsistent former statement. But a reading of the
Section would indicate that all inconsistent
statements are not sufficient to impeach the credit
of the witness.’
57. In Tahsildar Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 1959 SC
1012, it was held that to contradict a witness would mean to
“discredit” a witness. Therefore, unless and until the former
statement of this witness is capable of “discrediting” a witness,
it would have little relevance. A mere variation in the two
statements would not be enough to discredit a witness.
58. No doubt, the prosecution is required to prove its
case beyond reasonable doubt. However, this standard does not
demand absolute certainty or flawless evidence, but rather Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 29 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:49 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
requires that the prosecution present evidence so compelling
that any reasonable person would be convinced of the
accused’s guilt.
59. Beyond reasonable doubt falls short of mathematical
certainty or scientific precision. Courts recognize that human
affairs rarely yield perfect evidence, and demanding such
perfection would make criminal convictions nearly impossible.
Instead, this standard requires evidence that leaves the court
firmly convinced that the accused, and no other person,
committed the alleged crime. The doubts must be “reasonable
meaning it should be based on logic, common sense, and
evidence, and not mere speculation or unfounded suspicion.
60. The legal system acknowledges that investigations
will inevitably contain imperfections. Crime scenes may be
contaminated, physical evidence might be incomplete, and
procedural errors can occur during investigations. These
natural inadequacies do not automatically invalidate a case or
suggest innocence. What matters is whether, despite these
imperfections, the totality of evidence still points convincingly
toward the accused’s guilt.
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 30 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:47:58 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
61. Witnesses may contradict each other on minor
details, forget specific sequences of events, or provide
incomplete accounts. These natural human limitations do not
negate the value of witness testimony or suggest that the
accused is innocent.
62. Inconsistencies in peripheral details do not
necessarily undermine the core truth of what occurred. A
witness who cannot remember the exact time of an incident or
the precise color of clothing worn may still provide reliable
testimony about the essential facts of the crime.
63. The beyond reasonable doubt standard strikes a
careful balance between protecting the innocent and enabling
the conviction of the guilty. It acknowledges that perfect
evidence is unattainable while still requiring the prosecution to
present a convincing case. Natural imperfections in
investigations and human testimony are expected and
acceptable, provided the evidence collectively and
convincingly establishes guilt. This standard ensures that
convictions rest on solid foundations while remaining
achievable in the real world of imperfect evidence and fallible
human observation.
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 31 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:06 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
Forensic Evidence Evaluation
64. The next contention raised on behalf of accused is
that the FSL result does not support the prosecution case as no
DNA profile could be generated from the source knife. Perusal
of FSL report dated 05.05.2022 reveals that DNA profile
generated from blood sample of injured Deva matched with
DNA profile generated from his blood stained shirt and
Baniyan, which were seized by the police. Similarly, FSL
report concluded that blood stains found on the clothes of Ms.
Painama and Raju were their own blood’s stains. No doubt,
DNA profile could not be generated from knife, and the reason
assigned is to the effect that it may be due to degradation /
inhibition.
65. Forensic evidence is crucial in investigations,
offering valuable assistance in identifying suspects,
determining the nature, time, and location of a crime, and even
providing insights into the motive. However, it’s important to
recognize that it often serves as corroborative or assistive
evidence rather than establishing a fact definitively.
Nisha
66. In the present case, in the light of testimony of Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 32 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:16 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
material witnesses and undisputed recovery of weapon of
offence, it cannot be held that the FSL result does not support
the prosecution case or proves fetal to the prosecution case.
67. On the defence’s argument regarding the inability to
generate a DNA profile from the weapon, it is noted that :
(i). DNA profiles were successfully generated from blood
samples of all victims.
(ii). The profiles matched their respective blood-stained
clothing.
(iii). The failure to generate a profile from the weapon was
explained by possible degradation or inhibition.
(iv). Forensic evidence serves as corroborative rather than
definitively establishing facts.
(v) The recovery of the weapon and witness testimony
provided sufficient evidence.
Accordingly, this court concludes that forensic
limitations are not fatal to the prosecution case.
68. The accused during his statement u/s 313 CrPC has
not disputed that an altercation took place between him and Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed by
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 33 of 43 Nisha Sahay Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:25 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
complainant Iyynar on the issue of rate of chicken. It is
submitted by the accused that after an altercation took place
between them, accused went to his house and after about 10
minutes around 25-30 people came along with him
(complainant) and they gave him beatings with fist, kicks and
Lathies, and he sustained injuries all over his body but his
MLC was not got prepared by the police officials. He has
claimed his false implication in the present case.
69. However, the accused has not assigned any reason as
to why he would be falsely implicated in the present case or
why he was beaten by 25-30 people. If he got injuries, where
was he treated.
70. Sh. Manoj @ Kaju, who entered the witness box as
DW1 did not remember the exact date of incident. Further he
deposed regarding a verbal altercation between accused and
one Raj, specifically deposing that there was no physical
scuffle between them. In his cross examination by Ld. Chief
PP, DW 1 further specified that there was only one incident in
his presence between accused and Raj, and there was no
involvement of ladies from either side, nor any weapon was
used by any one during the incident.
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 34 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:35 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
71. From the testimony of the defence witness, it cannot
be ascertained that he was deposing about the incident in
question or any other incident between accused and one Raj. In
view of same, his testimony is of no help for the accused in the
present case.
72. The MLC of injured Painama Ex. PW 9/B shows that
on her medical examination one puncture wound on left side of
her neck and one sharp incised wound on her occipital region
approx 7 x 2 x 1 cm were found. MLC pertaining to injured
Deva reflects that he was having CLW 2 x 0.5 cm on left arm
ventral aspect. Injured Raju sustained puncture wound 0.5 x
0.5 cm. The nature of injuries suffered by all the three injured
persons has been opined to be simple.
73. Accordingly, I find that the prosecution, with the
help of the material witnesses and the corroboratory evidence
of the police officials and the doctor concerned, is able to prove
its case against the accused that it was he, who gave knife
blows to the injured persons, as detailed in the prosecution
case, beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt.
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 35 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:44 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
OFFENCE U/S 307 IPC
74. The accused has been charged for the offence
punishable u/s 307 IPC. For ready reference, Section 307 IPC
is being reproduced herein below :
307. Attempt to murder.–Whoever does any act with
such intention or knowledge, and under such
circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he
would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to
fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act,
the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for
life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore
mentioned.
75. Intention, knowledge and motive are the most
important aspects under criminal law in determination of the
consequences of various acts. Evidently, from the bare reading
of Section 307 IPC, these aspects are vital in the instant case
too. As such, a brief legal position concerning these words and
how these should be read and interpreted is given herein
below:-
Intention – “Criminal intention” simply means the
purpose or design of doing an act forbidden by the
criminal law without just cause or excuse. The
intention of the accused to produce a particular
consequence shows his intention to do that act. An
act is intentional if it exists in idea before it exists
in fact, the idea realizing itself in the fact because
of the desire by which it is accompanied. The word
‘intent’ does not mean ultimate aim and object. Nor Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 36 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:48:55 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israris it used as a synonym for ‘motive’. Where the
Legislature makes an offence dependent on proof
of intention, the court must have proof of facts
sufficient to justify it in coming to the conclusion
that the intention existed. No doubt one has usually
to infer intention from conduct, and one matter that
has to be taken into account is the probable effect
of the conduct. But that is never conclusive. As a
general rule, every sane man is presumed to intend
the necessary or the natural and probable
consequences of his acts, and this presumption of
law will prevail unless from a consideration of all
the evidence the court entertains a reasonable doubt
whether such intention existed. This presumption,
however, is not conclusive nor alone sufficient to
justify a conviction and should be supplemented by
other testimony. An accused must be judged to
have the intention that is indicated by his proved
acts. The burden of proving guilty intention lies
upon the prosecution where the intent is expressly
stated as part of the definition of the crime.
Criminal intent as a psychological fact has to be
proved even in regard to offences under the Special
Acts unless it is specifically ruled out or ruled out
by necessary implication.
Knowledge – Where knowledge of a fact is an
essential ingredient of an offence it must be
distinctly proved. There are certain offences in the
Penal Code where the accused who commits those
offences is punished irrespective of the fact
whether he had knowledge or not. Where a
particular act is forbidden the question of
knowledge becomes immaterial.
Motive - Motive is not to be confused with Nisha
intention. If a man knows that a certain Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 37 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:03 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
consequence will follow from his act, it must be
presumed in law that he intended that consequence
to take place although he may have had some quite
different ulterior motive for performing the act. The
motive for an act is not a sufficient test to
determine its criminal character. By motive is
meant anything that can contribute to give birth or
even to prevent, any kind of action. Motive may
serve as a clue to the intention; but although the
motive be pure, the act done under it may be
criminal. Purity of motive does not purge an act of
its criminal character. An act which is unlawful
cannot, in law, be excused on the ground that it was
committed from a good motive.
Motive, though not a sine qua non for bringing the
offence home to the accused, is relevant and
important on the question of intention.
Though the prosecution is not bound to prove
motive for the crime, absence of any motive is a
factor which may be considered in determining the
guilt of the accused. Thus, if there is really no
motive and the crime is completely motiveless then
that circumstance can be taken into consideration
along with the evidence of prior insanity. But if the
actual evidence as to the commission of the crime
is believed, then no question of motive remains to
be established. It is not the bounden duty of the
prosecution to prove motive with which a certain
offence has been committed. It is sufficient if the
prosecution proves by clear and reliable evidence
that certain persons committed the offence,
whatever the motives may be which induced them
to commit that offence. For, motive is a fact very
often within the special knowledge of the person
doing the act and thus it becomes extremely Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 38 of 43 Digitally signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:16 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Isrardifficult to ascertain the motive in a given case but
that does not mean that the offence was not
committed.
The question of motive is not material where there
is direct evidence of the acts of the accused and the
acts themselves are sufficient to disclose the
intention of the actor. But in cases of circumstantial
evidence, absence of motive is a factor in favour of
the accused.
76. In view of the legal proposition detailed above, the
facts of the present case are required to be tested in order to
ascertain the culpability of accused Israr for the offence u/s 307
IPC, with which he is charged.
77. Ld. Chief PP for the State submitted that though the
nature of injury is simple, it is injury alone which is not
material and what is material is the intention and knowledge,
which is to be inferred from the locus of injury, which is the
occipital region, on the neck and vital portion of the body as
regards injured Painama is concerned.
78. In order to prove offence under Section 307 IPC,
prosecution was required to prove that the injury was caused
with such intention or knowledge and under such
circumstances that if it had caused death, the act of accused
would have amounted to culpable homicide amounting to Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 39 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:25 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
murder. In this context, in a case reported as Ramesh V State
2010 (I) JCC 796, our Hon’ble High Court altered conviction
from 308/34 IPC to 323/34 IPC holding that assault was not
premeditated and merely because an injury was found on the
head, it cannot be said that such an injury was caused with the
intention to commit culpable homicide.
79. In a case reported as Raju @ Rajpal and others V
State of Delhi 2014 (3) JCC 1894, Hon’ble Delhi High Court
altered the conviction from Section 308 IPC to 323/34 IPC
holding that the nature of injuries were simple and injuries
were not caused with the avowed object or knowledge to cause
death. In Ashok Kumar and another V State of Delhi Crl.
Appeal No. 17/2011 decided on 20.02.2015 too, Hon’ble High
Court altered the conviction of Section 308 IPC to Section
323/34 IPC and held that injuries were opined by the doctor as
simple caused by a blunt object. Nature of injuries is not such
which will be sufficient to indicate that the appellants had any
intention or knowledge that by this act they would have caused
death of complainant.
80. Issue which arises for consideration is whether the
act of accused in causing injuries on the person of the victim,
attracts ingredients of offence under Section 307 IPC. In order
to constitute an offence under Section 307 IPC it is to be
Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 40 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:34 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
proved that the said act was committed by the accused with the
intention or knowledge to commit culpable homicide
amounting to murder and that the offence was committed under
such circumstances that if the accused, by that act, had caused
death, he would have been guilty of murder. The intention or
knowledge on the part of the accused, is to be deduced from the
circumstances in which the injuries had been caused as also the
nature of injuries and the portion of the body where such
injuries were suffered.
81. As far as the ‘knowledge’ is concerned, the court
finds that attack upon the injured Painama and other two
injured, by accused Israr was an outcome of uncontrolled
temper and heated emotions, rather than any intention or
knowledge that his act might cause death of victim. It is to be
kept in mind that whenever two persons start quarreling, as in
the case in hand, the quarrel commenced from a verbal
altercation, transgressed into a physical squabble, and when the
knife was used thereafter, it was because the aggressor had lost
control over his senses and therefore he resorted to use some
object, to continue the assault and the attack upon the victims.
The ‘intention’ to kill the victim was definitely missing in the
instant case, as there was no previous enemity between the
parties. In the case in hand, the accused and the complainant
had an altercation over the issue of rate of meat, which got Nisha
Sahay
Saxena
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 41 of 43 Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:44 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
aggravated and when the complainant along with his wife again
came at his shop followed by their son, a physical scuffle took
place and the accused picked up the knife and attacked upon
the injured persons. As discussed above, the nature of injuries
sustained by the injured persons is simple. The attack took
place on the spur of the moment.
82. In this case, no previous enmity or dispute
between the accused and the complainant could be proved.
There was no premeditation. The quarrel had taken place on a
trivial issue. The nature of injuries suffered by the injured
persons are found to be ‘simple’. Injuries were not caused with
and intention or or knowledge to cause their death. This court
finds that prosecution has failed to establish that the injuries
were caused with such intention or knowledge and under such
circumstances that if it had caused their death, the act of
accused would have amounted to culpable homicide amounting
to murder, and thus the ingredients of Section 307 IPC are not
attracted and the present case falls within the ambit of section
324 IPC.
83. In the result, the court is of the opinion that in the
present case, offence u/s 307 IPC is not proved. However, it
stands proved on record that it was the accused, who caused
Nisha
simple injuries to the injured persons Painama, Deva and Raju, Sahay
Saxena
Digitally signed
by Nisha Sahay
FIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 42 of 43 Saxena
Date: 2025.07.22
14:49:54 +0530
SC No. 31/2021 State Vs. Israr
and therefore, the prosecution has been able to bring home the
guilt of the accused for the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC.
84. Accordingly, accused Israr is hereby convicted for
the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC for causing simple injuries
to the injured persons namely Painama, Deva and Raju, with
dangerous weapon i.e. knife. Digitally
Nisha signed by
Nisha Sahay
Saxena
Announced in the open court today Sahay Date:
Saxena 2025.07.22
the 21st day of July, 2025. 14:50:04
+0530(NISHA SAHAY SAXENA)
Principal District & Sessions Judge (North)
Rohini Courts, DelhiFIR No. 345/2020 : PS Bhalswa Dairy Page 43 of 43
