Delhi District Court
State vs Neeraj Kumar on 16 February, 2026
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SYED ZIHAN ALI WARSI:
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 04 :
NEW DELHI DISTRICT : PATIALA HOUSE COURTS : NEW
DELHI
SC 31/2019
STATE Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR
FIR No. 396/2018
PS: SAGARPUR
u/s. 307/506/324 IPC
DLND010007962019
STATE VS. NEERAJ KUMAR
SC No. : 31/2019
Date of offence : 03.10.2018
Date of filing of charge-sheet : 28.12.2018
Accused : Neeraj Kumar
S/o Sh. Kishan Pal
R/o RZ-16/230, J-Block,
West Sagarpur,
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 1 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:38:05
Warsi +0530
2
New Delhi.
Offence : 307/506 and 324 IPC
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Convicted
Date of committal : 09.01.2019
Date of arguments : 23.01.2026
Date of Judgment : 16.02.2026
JUDGMENT
1. Accused was committed for trial vide order dated
09.01.2019 by court of Ms. Manisha Tripathy, Ld. MM-03,
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
2. On 11.01.2019, police report under Section 173 of
the Cr.P.C. was put before Sh. Rakesh Syal, ASJ-04, PHC, New
Delhi with a view to put accused on trial.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 2 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:38:27
Warsi +0530
3
3. Charge under Section 307/506 IPC was framed
against accused Neeraj on 15.02.2019 and charge under Section
324 IPC was framed against accused Neeraj on 30.04.2019.
4. Brief facts on the basis of which charge sheet was
filed in the present matter are as follows :-
In the intervening night of 03-04.10.2018 ASI Nand
Kishore received a call from duty officer vide DD No. 44A. On
receiving the said DD when he alongwith HC Mahender were
going to the spot, on the other way, another call vide DD no. 45A
was received from Shakuntala Hospital regarding admission of
injured Amit. When they went to Shakuntala Hospital, they came
to know that injured was referred to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital
and from there they came to know that injured was referred to
DDU Hospital. When the police officials reached DDU Hospital,
injured was unfit for statement. The father of the injured met
them and IO ASI Nand Kishore recorded his statement. In the
statement, the complainant Rajpal Singh stated that he residing at
RZ-17/A/230, J-Block, Sagarpur (West), New Delhi. On
03.10.2018, at about 10.00 PM, his son Amit Kumar received aState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 3 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally
signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali WarsiAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:38:38
+0530
4phone call and his son was talking in a loud voice. Then, his son
told him that their neighbour Neeraj was abusing him on the
issue of parking and also threatened to kill him. On hearing this,
the complainant and his son went to the gate of their house and
saw that accused Neeraj was standing in the street and was
saying that they have parked their vehicle wrongly. He
challenged them to come out of their house so that he can teach
them a lesson. Thereafter, the complainant and his son came out
of their house. Accused Neeraj started fighting with Amit. When
he tried to intervene, suddenly, Neeraj took out a knife from his
pocket and repeatedly stabbed on the chest and stomach of Amit
with the said knife and threatened that if he again parks his
vehicle, he would kill him. Thereafter, Neeraj ran away from the
spot. The complainant brought his son to Shakuntala Hospital,
Sagar Pur. As per MLC, the following Injuries were found on the
person of Amit Kumar:
(1) Clear lacerated wound 4cm below liphoid process with active
bleeding, (2) Clear lacerated wound occipital region approx 8
cm, (3) Clear lacerated wound at left axillary 2/1 cm and (4)
Clear lacerated wound at umbilical region 2/1 cm. The injuriesState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 4 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Syed Digitally
signed by Syed
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:38:46
+0530
5were opined to be grievous. On the basis of statement of
complainant Rajpal Singh statement, FIR u/s 307/506 IPC was
lodged.
4.1. It is also relevant that after they returned to the spot
i.e. H No. 17/230, J Block, Sagarpur, where blood was lying and
after just entering the house, one red color blood stained t-shirt
having cuts on front side was lying. In the meantime IO received
call of father of injured Amit i.e. Rajpal that he had also
sustained injuries and want to get his medical examination. IO
left for the hospital. Then he returned to the spot and seized the
blood sample and pulanda of blood stained clothes of injured
Amit Kumar and Rajpal, which were already duly sealed at Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital. Thereafter, IO prepared the rukka and got
the FIR registered through him. During investigation on
04.10.2018, accused Neeraj was apprehended who lead the police
officials to the second floor of H No. 16/230, and from the
kitchen, he got recovered one buttondar knife, which he had kept
in between utensils. After investigation, charge sheet was filed
against the accused Neeraj Kumar u/s 307/506 IPC.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 5 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:38:55
Warsi +0530
6
5. Charge on 15.02.2019 was framed against the
accused Neeraj Kumar for offence u/s 506 IPC as he threatened
the complainant Raj Pal Singh and his son Amit with injury to
their person, while stating that he would teach them a lesson as
well as charge for offence u/s 307 IPC as he repeatedly stabbed
Amit on his chest and stomach with a knife, thereby causing
dangerous injuries to him, with such intention or knowledge and
under such circumstances that if, he by that act, caused death of
Amit, he would be guilty of murder. Charge on 30.04.2019 was
framed against the accused Neeraj Kumar for offence u/s 324
IPC as he voluntarily caused hurt with a knife, an instrument for
stabbing and cutting, on the left arm and hand of complainant Sh.
Rajpal Singh.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
6. The prosecution in order to prove its case has
examined the following witnesses:
S. No. Name of PW Exhibit Nature of
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 6 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:39:05
Warsi +0530
7
document/article
1. PW-1 Ex.PW1/A, Statement complainant,
Sh. Raj Pal Singh Ex.PW1/ME-1, Baniyan, Pajama and
Ex.PW1/ME-2, knife
Ex.PW1/ME-3
2. PW-2 Ex.PW2/ME-1, T-shirt
Sh. Amit Ex.PW2/ME-2, Short/half pant,
Ex.PW2/D1 statement of Amit
Kumar
3. PW-3 Ex.PW3/A SOC Report bearing
Insp. Rakesh No. 1100/2018
Kumar
4. PW-4 Ex.PW4/A, Seizure Memos
HC Mahender Ex.PW4/B, Arrest memo, Personal
Singh Ex.PW4/C, search memo,
Ex.PW4/D, Disclosure statement,
Ex.PW4/E, sketch of buttondar
Ex.PW4/F, knife,
Ex.PW4/G, seizure memo of
Ex.PW4/H, pullanda,
Ex.PW4/I, parcel S1,
Ex.PW4/P1, parcel S2,
Ex.PW4/P2, parcel S3,
Ex.PW4/P3,
5. PW-5 Ex.PW5/A-1 to Photographs and CD
HC Amit Ex.PW5/A-14,
Ex.PW5/A-15
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 7 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
signed by Syed
Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:39:15
+0530
8
6. PW-6 Ex.PW6/A, MLC,
Sh. Ashwini Ex.PW6/B Authority Letter
Kumar Rai
7. PW-7 – –
Dr. Prem Arora
8. PW-8 Ex.PW8/A Discharge summary of
Dr. Anurag Dadu patient Amit Kumar
9. PW-9 Ex.PW9/A MLC of injured Amit
Dr. D.P. Dhami Kumar
10. PW-10 Ex.PW10/A, Endorsement,
ASI Nand Kishore Ex.PW10/B, Site plan,
Ex.PW10/C, Statement of injured
Ex.PW10/D, Amit Kumar,
Ex.PW10/E MLC of complainant
Rajpal,
Attested copy of DD
No. 44A & 45A
11. PW-11 Ex.PW11/A, Detailed report of FSL
Ms. Poonam Ex.PW11/B, (Biology),
Sharma Ex.P-11/1, Allelic report,
Ex.P-11/2 Liquid blood sample of
injured Amit, liquid
blood sample of injured
Rajpal
After recording statement of accused, the following defence
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 8 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:39:26
+0530
9witness was examined.
1. DW-1 – –
Sh. Basant Kumar
Tanwar
ADMITTED DOCUMENTS
7. On 09.01.2024, the accused has admitted following
documents u/s 294 Cr.P.C.
a) The FIR as Ex.P1,
b) Certificate under S. 65-B as Ex.P2,
c) Copy RC no. 208/21/18 as Mark P3 and the
acknowledgment as Ex.P4.
7.1. In view of the submissions on admitted documents,
the formal recording of the testimony of PW HC Bhagwan Shai
and Ct. Satish is dispensed with.
8. PW-1 Rajpal deposed that on 03.10.2018 at about 10
pm, his son Amit received telephonic call from someone. His son
was talking to that person in a loud noise. When he asked his son
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 9 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:39:37
Warsi +0530
10as to whom he was talking, his son told him that it is accused
Neeraj, who had called him. PW-1 further deposed that his son
told him that accused Neeraj was abusing him on the pretext of
parking and was threatening to kill him and had called him
outside the house. PW-1 further deposed that accused Neeraj
came at their gate and abused them. He knocked their gate and
asked his son to come out from the house and threatened that he
would see him. PW-1 further deposed that when his son opened
the door of the house, he was also there. Accused Neeraj pulled
his son Amit outside their house and scuffled with him. Accused
took out a knife and caused knife injuries on the chest and
abdomen of Amit repeatedly. PW-1 further deposed that when he
tried to hold accused Neeraj and intervened into the matter,
accused attacked upon him by the knife. He caused 3-4 injuries
on his left hand by the knife which he had raised to save himself
from his attack. PW-1 further deposed that accused raised the
knife in the air and ran away. He threatened them and stated that
if, they park their vehicle in the vacant plot, he would kill them.
PW-1 further deposed that after receiving injury his son Amit
became unconscious. He took his son Amit to Shakuntala
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 10 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:39:45
+0530
11Hospital in a private vehicle and after first aid, he was referred to
Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and then to DDU Hospital. PW-1
further deposed that police reached the hospital and recored his
statement Ex.PW1/A. He was given treatment at Mata chanan
Devi hospital. He handed over his blood stained clothes to the
doctor. He identified his clothes i.e. his baniyan and pyjama as
Ex.PW1/ME1 and Ex.PW1/ME2. He also identified the knife
with which accused caused injury to his son and him as
Ex.PW1/ME3.
8.1. PW1 during his cross examination deposed that
accused has residing in his neighbourhood for around 15 years.
He did not know who owns the vacant plot wherein he had
parked his car. There were three vehicles parked in the plot on
that day, one belonged to us, one to Neeraj and one was
belonging to someone else. His car was parked besides the car of
Neeraj. It is correct that my car was not parked behind the car of
Neeraj. The incident had happened on account of parking the car
and not on account of parking of motorcycle. At the time of
incident, none of our neighbours was present. The entire incident
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 11 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:39:53
+0530
12after opening the gate was over within 2-3 minutes. He raised
alarm but by that time accused had fled. He did not call the
police and rather, he immediately rushed his son to the hospital.
For the first time, he disclosed about the involvement of accused
in this case to the police in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital on
03.10.2018. He had met the police on their first visit to Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital. His statement was recorded in Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital on his second visit. He had stated to the
police that he had also received injuries on his hand when
accused had attacked him. Confronted with statement Ex.PW1/A
where it was not so recorded. He denied the suggestion that he
had informed the police on 05.10.2018 through telephone that he
had also received injuries in the incident.
8.2. Amit was taken to hospital in his car and they were
accompanied by 6 or 7 boys of the locality. He did not inform the
police that 6 or 7 boys of the locality had accompanied us. Amit
was wearing a half shirt and half pant/Kaccha. The clothes of
Amit were seized in the hospital. He had seen the knife at the
time when the accused had attacked him and when he had fledState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 12 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:40:00
Warsi +0530
13
while waving that knife. The knife was around 6 inches in length.
He did not know whether prior to that day, there had been any
quarrel between Neeraj and Amit and therefore, he could not
admit or deny that two days prior to the incident there had been a
quarrel between Neeraj and Amit. He denied all the suggestions
given by Ld. defence counsel.
9. PW-2 Amit deposed that on 03.10.2018, accused
called him on his mobile phone and asked him as to where he had
parked his vehicle. When he told the accused that he had parked
his vehicle on the vacant plot, accused Neeraj asked him to
remove his vehicle from there. A dispute took place between him
and accused Neeraj on phone. PW-2 further deposed that accused
asked him to come downstairs. He alongwith his father came
downstairs. When they opened the gate of their house, accused
Neeraj was standing outside their house. He abused them. PW-2
further deposed that accused started scuffling with him. His
father intervened into the matter. Accused took out a knife and
attacked upon his chest and on abdomen repeatedly. He sustained
injuries on his chest and abdomen and blood started oozing out
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 13 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:07
+0530
14from his injuries. He fell down and became unconscious. On
gaining consciousness, he came to know that he was taken to
Shakuntala Nursing Home, then to Mata Chanan Devi and then
to DDU Hospital. PW-2 identified his t-shirt and short / half pant
which he was wearing at the time of incident as Ex.PW2/ME1
and Ex.PW2/ME2. He could not identify the knife by which
accused caused injury to him.
9.1. Ld. Addl. PP was permitted to put one leading
question with regard to identification of the knife to PW2. During
examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, accused deposed that
he could not identify the knife as the accused had stabbed him
with a knife in a spur of moment and there was no time to
observe the knife. It may be that the injury was caused to him by
the knife produced by the MHCM.
9.2. PW2 during his cross examination deposed that he
knew Neeraj since his childhood. Prior to that day, he did not
have any quarrel with Neeraj. Prior to that day, there had been no
quarrel regarding parking. He did not exactly remember but on
that day it is possible that his vehicle and Neeraj’s vehicle wereState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 14 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:15
+0530
15parked in front of or behind each other’s vehicle. He denied the
suggestion that he had stated to the police that the dispute was
regarding parking of a motorcycle. He denied the suggestion that
he had stated to the police that Neeraj had called him and asked
him to move his car as he had to take his motorcycle out.
Confronted with portion A to A of statement u/s.161 Cr.PC
Ex.PW2/D1 where it is so recorded. He did not know how many
vehicles were parked in the vacant plot on the day of incident.
The incident had happened at the gate of his house and he was
not able to step out. His statement was recorded by the police in
Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He did not remember the date on
which his statement was recorded. He did not know how he
reached the hospital. After he had received the injuries, he did
not know what happened thereafter. His father had not received
injuries till the time he was in senses. Confronted with portion B
to B of statement u/s.161 Cr.PC Ex.PW2/D1 where it is so
recorded.
10. PW3 Inspector Rakesh Kumar deposed that on
04.10.2018 he was posted as crime team Incharge at Dwarka
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 15 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:22
+0530
16South West District. On that day at about 2:30 AM he received a
call from control room upon which he alongwith AS1 Kulbhusan
(Fingerprint expert) and HC Amit (photographer) reached at the
spot i.e. RZ 17/230 J Block. West Sagarpur. In the street, blood
was lying in front of said house. One red colour blood stained T-
shirt was lying inside the house just after entry the house. He
inspected the spot. Photographer clicked the scene of crime.
Fingerprint expert tried to lift the chance print but same could not
be lifted. ASI Nand kishor from PS Sagarpur alongwith other
staff was already presented at spot before his reaching. He also
directed him to lift the Exhibit from the spot which has been
mentioned by him in his SOC report. The SOC report bearing
No. 1100/2018 Ex. PW3/A bearing his signature at point A.10.1 PW3 during his cross examination deposed that
after receiving information in the control room, he was directed
on wireless set from control room. He did not remember whether
he had disclosed about his going to spot alongwith ASI
Kulbhushan and HC Amit on 04.10.2018. His statement was
recorded by IO/ASI Nand Kishore in Dwarka, Sector-9 on theState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 16 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:30
+0530
17same day i.e. on 04.10.2018. When they were at the spot, one
person in civil dress was present there but he was not confirm
whether he was police official or some public person. The said
person was not interrogated in front of him. At the spot, the
house inside which one bloodstained T-shirt was lying, had been
disclosed by IO of belonging to injured. He did not meet any
family member of the injured at the spot at that particular time.
He alongwith other police officials stayed there for about half an
hour. He suggested the IO to collect the blood sample and the IO
collected the same in his presence. He denied all suggestions
given by Ld. defence counsel.
11. PW4 HC Mahendra Singh deposed that on the
intervening night 03-04.10.2018 he was posted at PS Sagarpur
and was on emergency duty from 8:00 PM to 8:00 AM with ASI
Nand Kishor. At about 11:25 PM ASI Nand Kishor received a
call from duty officer vide DD No. 44A and while they were
going to the spot, on the way another call vide DD No. 45A was
received from Shakuntala Hospital West Sagarpur regarding
admission of injured Amit. They reached at Shakuntala HospitalState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 17 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally
signed by Syed
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Zishan
Warsi
AliAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:38
+0530
18and there came to know that injured has already been shifted to
Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and when they reached there, they
came to know that he was referred to DDU Hospital. They
reached DDU Hospital and at the time injured Amit was found
under treatment there. IO tried to record his statement but Doctor
declared him unfit for giving his statement. In the Hospital father
of injured met them and the IO ASI Nand Kishor recorded his
statement. They returned to the spot. In the street in-front of H.
No. 17/230 J block, Sagarpur blood was lying and after just
entering the said house one red colour blood stained T-shirts
having cuts on front side was lying. Crime team was also called
by the IO. Crime team inspected the spot. Photographer took the
photograph of the spot. IO had lifted the exhibits from the spot
and same were seized and sealed with the seal of NK and seized
vide seizure memo ExPW4/A bearing his signature at point A.
Blood stain T-shirt was also seized after converting into pullanda
and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B bearing his
signature at point A. In the meantime IO received phone call of
Rajpal father of injured that he had also sustained injuries and
want to get his medical examination and at that time he was atState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 18 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Syed Digitally
signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali WarsiAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:40:53
+0530
19Mata Chanan Hospital. IO leaving him at the spot went to
hospital. IO returned to the spot from hospital and he seized the
blood sample and pullanda of the blood stained cloths of injured
Amit Kumar as well as of injured Rajpal singh which were
already duly sealed at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and the same
were seized separately vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/C and
Ex.PW4/D bearing his signature at point A respectively.
Thereafter, IO prepared a Rukka and handed over to him for
registration of FIR. He went to PS and after getting the case
registered he returned to the spot and handed over copy of FIR
alongwith original rukka to IO/ASI Nand Kishor. On 04.10.2018
accused Neeraj was apprehended from J block West Sagarpur.
He was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW4/E and his personal
search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW4/F bearing his
signature at point A respectively. IO also recorded his disclosure
statement which is Ex.PW4/G bearing his signature at point A
and in pursuance of the disclosure statement accused led them to
second floor of H. No. 16/230 and from the kitchen he got
recovered one buttondar knife from which he had kept in
between the utensils. IO prepared the sketch of it which isState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 19 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:41:01
+0530
20Ex.PW4/H bearing his signature at point A and converted into
pullanda which was duly sealed with the seal of NK and seized
vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/1 bearing his signature at point A.
After that they returned to the PS. IO recorded his statement. He
identified the case property shown to him. MHC(M) produced
the case property. MHC(M) has produced the case property i.e. 5
sealed parcels bearing details of FSL no.2018/20-11711 and bio
no. 3109/2018. Out of 5 parcels i.e. S1, S2 and S3 parcels are
duly sealed with the seal of “P Sh. FSL Delhi” and two parcels
i.e. S4 and S9 are duly sealed with the seal of court i.e. “RS”.
Parcel S1 was opened which contains one blood stain gauze and
witness identifies the same as lifted from the spot and the same
Ex.PW-4/P1. Parcel S2 was opened, which contains one blood
stain earth material and witness identifies the same as lifted from
the spot and the same Ex.PW-4/P2. Parcel S3 was opened which
contains earth control and witness identifies the same as lifted
from the spot and the same Ex.PW-4/P3. Parcel S4 was also
opened which contains blood stain T-shirt and witness identifies
the same as seized from the spot and the said T-shirt was already
Ex.PW/2/ME-1. Parcel S9 was opened which contains knife andState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 20 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:41:11
+0530
21witness correctly identifies the same as got recovered by the
accused from the kitchen of second floor of his house and the
said/knife was already Ex.PW-1/ME-1.
11.1. PW4 during his cross-examination deposed that as
per DD no. 44A, a call at about 11:25 PM was received by DO
and the same was marked to ASI Nand Kishore. The departure
was already made in the call by the DO. The departure used to be
entered as per the call received in the PS. There was a difference
of about 15 minutes when DD no. 45A was received and the
same was also informed by DO. He could not say whether the
DD no. 45A was based on information of/by any individual about
any incident. He also said that IO Nand Kishore may be aware
about it. He along with ASI Nand Kishore reached at Shakuntala
Hospital around 11:40-11:50 PM. He stated that in Shakuntala
Hospital, they got no information about injured/complainant or
any incident pertaining to the present case. He could not say who
informed about the shifting of patient from Shakuntala Hospital
to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital in Shakuntala Hospital. He also
said that, IO must be knowing about the particulars detailed byState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 21 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:41:21
Warsi +0530
22him and information received by him. He was following the
instructions of IO only. He did not remember the time when they
reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. They immediately went
to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital from Shakuntala Hospital when
they came to know about the shifting of the injured. In Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital they came to know that injured was
shifted to DDU Hospital. No MLC was received from Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital about the shifting of the injured. He did
not remember by what time, he reached DDU Hospital from
Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. No MLC was received in DDU
Hospital. He did not remember upto what duration they stayed at
DDU Hospital. It was night at that time. He did not remember as
to whether the statement of father of the injured was taken in his
presence or not. He also said that statement was recorded in his
presence. He had not signed on the said statement. He personally
had not met the injured in DDU Hospital. They returned to the
spot but he did not remember the exact time. When he reached
the spot, SHO, PS Sagarpur and Crime Team came there. He
could not admit or deny the suggestion as to whether at the
arrival of Crime Team, he was not present at the spot. IO hadState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 22 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:41:30
+0530
23called the photographer. He denied the other suggestion given by
the Ld. defence counsel.
12. PW5 HC Amit deposed that on 04.10.2018 he was
posted as photographer in the district. On that day he was on duty
(on 03.10.2018) from 08:00 AM to 08:00 AM (next day). On
04.10.2018 at 02:30 AM he received a call and joined SI Rakesh
in the office to go Sagarpur, New Delhi. They went in their govt.
vehicle and reached at the spot at about 03:00 AM. He saw that
in front of H. No. RZ-17/230, J-Block, West Sagarpur blood was
lying and a red colour T-shirt with soaking of blood was also
lying there. He took photograph of the same from different angle.
After developing of those photographs on A-4 size paper, he
handed over the same to the IO. He did not remember, if he had
given those photographs in CD also. He has brought the
coloured print outs of 14 digital photographs of the scene of
incident dated 04.10.2018 along with CD of the same. The said
photographs Ex.PW-5/A-1 to Ex.PW-5/A-14 and CD Ex.PW-
5/A-15. It is also relevant to mention here that, the photographs
objected by the defence as they are not part of the record or
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 23 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:41:40
+0530
24authenticated by IO.
12.1. PW5 during his cross-examination admitted that he
has taken the photographs Ex.PWQ-5/A-1 to Ex.PW-5/A-14
from his computer system. He need not to take permission to
take out the print outs from the system as the system is
maintained in his office. The incharge of the system is In-Charge
Crime Team. He stated that he has taken permission from the
Incharge to take the print outs from the system for the purpose of
presenting it in the Hon’ble Court. He admitted that he has no
written direction by any authority or by the court to take the print
outs from system kept in his office and submitted before the
court.
12.2. PW6 Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai deposed that he has
been authorized by the Medical Superintendent Dr. A.C. Shukla
to appear on behalf of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar as he has left the
services of the hospital and his present whereabout are not
known. He has seen the MLC No. 9621/18 dated 03.10.2018 of
Amit Kumar S/o Sh. Rajpal Singh, aged about 39 years. As perState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 24 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:41:53
+0530
25MLC on that day at 11:25 PM Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar had
examined the injured Amit Kumar with alleged history of stab
injury. He can identify the signature and handwriting of Dr.
Sumit Vidyasagar as per record brought by him. The said MLC
Ex. PW-6/A bearing the signature of Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar at
point A. The authority letter Ex.PW-6/B.12.3. PW6 during his cross-examination deposed that he
is working in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital since 2006 as Admin
Supervisor and Legal Coordinator. Dr. Sumit Vidyasagar had
joined the hospital in September 2018 and left the hospital in
January 2019. All the doctors who joined the hospital put
signature in his presence and he can identify the signature and
handwriting of all the doctors. The MLC Ex.PW-6/A was not
prepared in his presence. He denied the suggestion that he could
not identify the signature and handwriting of Dr. Sumit
Vidyasagar and he was instructed by the medical superintendent
to give statement in this regard.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 25 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed
Syed
by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Warsi
Zishan Ali
Ali Date:
Warsi 2026.02.16
19:42:03
+0530
26
13. PW7 Dr. Prem Arora deposed that in the year 2018,
he was posted at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janakpuri, Delhi as
a Senior Consultant. Dr. Anurag Dadu, MS Consultant (Surgery)
was in his team. He has seen MLC of injured Amit Kumar dated
03.10.2018 already Ex.PW6/A. Opinion regarding nature of
injury has been given by Dr. Anurag Dadu on the basis of
hospital record sheet and as per his opinion, nature of injury
sustained by injured was grievous. The MLC bears signature of
Dr. Anurag Dadu at point ‘A’. He has seen Dr. Anurag Dadu
writing and signing documents during the course of his duty.
14. PW8 Dr. Anurag Dadu deposed that as per MLC, on
03.10.2018, at around 11:25 pm, one patient by the name of Amit
Kumar was brought to the hospital with the alleged history of
stab injury. On local examination, following injuries were found:
(i) CLW approx 4 cm below liphoid process i.e. active bleeding.
(ii) CLW at critical region approx 8 cm.
(iii) CLW at Left Axiliary region approx 2/1 cm.
(iv) CLW at umbilical region approx 2/1 cm.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 26 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:42:15
+0530
2714.1. The MLC was already Ex.PW6/A and the nature of
injury as per the MLC is grievous. The MLC bears his signature
at Point A. After the emergency ward, the patient was referred to
surgical department for surgery. He and Dr. Prem Arora (already
examined as PW-7) performed the operation / procedure
Exploratory Laprotomy with repair of multiple intentional
perforation with peritoneal lavage with left side intercostals tube
drainage on 04.10.2018. The patient was discharged from the
hospital on 06.10.2018. The discharge summary of the patient
Amit Kumar duty signed by Dr. Prem Arora at Point A
Ex.PW8/A.14.2. PW8 during his cross-examination admitted that he
could not tell who had written at Point X on the MLC,
Ex.PW6/A, that the injury was caused by knife (stab injury). He
could not tell who had brought the patient to the hospital and as
to whether any police official had accompanied him as he was
posted as Surgical Department and not in the emergency. At the
time when the patient was brought for surgery, he was consciousState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 27 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:42:24
Warsi +0530
28and oriented. The nature of injuries as per the MLC were caused
with some sharp pointed object. He could not tell whether the
said injuries were caused by the knife or not, as knife was never
produced before him.
15. PW9 Dr. D.P. Dhami deposed that on 03.01.2018,
one patient namely Amit Kumar was admitted in Emergency
ward of Shakuntala Hospital with the alleged history of multiple
stab wounds. He was conscious and oriented when he was
admitted in the hospital. Since, he had suffered multiple stab
wounds, after giving first aid, he was referred to higher center for
further investigation and management. As per the MLC of
injured, the opinion is dangerous. The MLC Ex.PW9/A bearing
his signature at point A.15.1. PW9 during his cross-examination deposed that at
the time when patient Amit Kumar was brought to the hospital,
he had seen the injuries suffered by him. It was four in number.
The opinion given by him on MLC was after perusing the
injuries sustained by the patient. It is correct that he has not
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 28 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:42:34
+0530
29mentioned the kind of injuries sustained by the patient upon
MLC, Ex.PW9/A. He did not remember as to whether the patient
was brought by some policemen to the hospital or not. He said
his father Mr. Rajpal brought the patient to the hospital. Since the
facilities in the hospital were not proper to treat the patient as per
the injuries suffered, hence the patient was referred for better
treatment to higher center. He denied the suggestion that the
patient’s father Rajpal insisted him to refer the patient to another
hospital. He opined the nature of injury as dangerous as all stab
injuries are dangerous in nature. He denied the suggestion that
all stab injuries are not dangerous in nature rather the depth of
injury and place at body decides the nature of injury. The patient
as well his father informed that the injury has been sustained by a
knife. It is correct that the name of weapon of offence has not
been mentioned by him in Ex.PW9/A. Since he was not
confirmed about the weapon of offence, hence he did not
mention the same in Ex.PW9/A. He denied the suggestion that
the opinion about the nature of injury has been suggested by the
father of the patient and he had not personally examined injuries
sustained by patient. He denied the suggestion that due to suchState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 29 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:42:47
+0530
30reason, he did not mention how many injuries were sustained by
the patient and on which part of the body of the patient.
16. PW10 ASI Nand Kishore deposed that in the year
2018, he was posted at PS Sagarpur as ASI. In the intervening
night of 03/04.10.2018, he was on emergency duty from 08:00
pm to 08:00 am. On receipt of DD No. 44A, he alongwith Ct.
Mahender reached Shakuntala Hospital where he obtained the
MLC of injured Amit Kumar S/o Rajpal. Injured was not found
in the hospital. He came to know that injured Amit Kumar had
been shifted to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He alongwith Ct.
Mahender reached at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where also he
obtained MLC of injured from the hospital, whereupon nature of
injury was opined as grievous. However, injured was not found
there and he was reported to have been shifted in DDU Hospital.
Thereafter, they reached DDU hospital. Injured was found under
treatment there. Injured was stated to be unfit for statement. Sh.
Rajpal Singh (father of injured) met him in the hospital. He
narrated the entire facts of the incident. He recorded his
statement, Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Mahender
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 30 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:43:03
+0530
31came to the spot i.e. RZ-17/A/230, J-Block, West Sagarpur,
Delhi where in front of the house. Blood was found lying there.
He called crime team officials at the spot. One blood-stained t-
shirt was also found lying there. Crime team officials inspected
the spot and clicked the photographs. Blood was also lying inside
the house. He lifted earth control as well as blood-stained earth
control from the spot vide memo, Ex.PW4/A, bearing his
signature at Point B. He also seized the blood-stained t-shirt vide
memo, Ex.PW4/B, bearing his signature at Point B. During those
proceedings, complainant Rajpal Singh informed telephonically
that he had also sustained injury in the said incident and he was
taking treatment in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He left Ct.
Mahender at the spot and reached Mata Chanan Devi Hospital
where he obtained the MLC of Rajpal Singh. In the hospital,
concerned doctor gave two blood samples and two separate
parcels containing clothes of Rajpal Singh and his injured son
Amit Kumar. He seized the same vide memo, Ex.PW4/C and
Ex.PW4/D, bearing his signatures at Point B. Thereafter, he came
back to the spot. He made his endorsement, Ex.PW10/A, bearing
his signature at Point A and gave the same to Ct. Mahender. HeState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 31 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally
signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali WarsiAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:43:16
+0530
32went to PS and got the present FIR registered. Complainant
Rajpal came to the spot and shown the place of incident. He
prepared site plan at his instance, Ex.PW10/B, bearing his
signature at Point A. After registration of the FIR, Ct. Mahender
came back to the spot and gave the copy of FIR and tehrir to
him. He arrested accused Neeraj Kumar (correctly identified
accused Neeraj) on the same day from his house vide memo,
Ex.PW4/E, bearing signature of accused at Point B and his
signature at Point C. He conducted his personal search vide
memo, Ex.PW4/F. During interrogation, he had admitted his
involvement and disclosed that he had thrown the weapon of
offence i.e. knife on the way after committing the incident and he
could get recovered the same. He recorded his disclosure
statement, Ex.PW4/G. Thereafter, on sustained interrogation, he
further disclosed that he had concealed the knife in his house and
can get recovered the same. Thereafter, at his instance, one knife
was recovered from the kitchen situated at the second floor of his
house. He prepared the sketch of the said knife, Ex.PW4/H. He
seized the same vide memo, Ex.PW4/I. On 05.10.2018, he
recorded the statement of injured Amit Kumar and the sameState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 32 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:43:25
Warsi +0530
33Ex.PW10/C. He obtained the nature of injury sustained by
complainant Rajpal and his son Amit Kumar. MLC of injured
Amit Kumar of Shakuntala Hospital is Ex.PW9/A. MLC of
injured Amit Kumar of Mata Chanan Devi Hospital is already
Ex.PW6/A and his discharge summary is Ex.PW8/A. MLC of
complainant Rajpal is Ex.PW10/D. He sent the exhibits to the
FSL vide road certificate. Attested copy of DD No. 44A and 45A
are collectively Ex.PW10/E.16.1. Further, PW10 deposed that on conclusion of the
investigation, he found sufficient evidence against accused
Neeraj Kumar and filed charge-sheet against him accordingly for
the offences punishable u/s 307/506 IPC. By that time, FSL
result was awaited. He identify the case property, shown to him
as MHC(M) produced parcel No. S4 bearing particulars of the
FSL and sealed with the court seal. Seal was removed. On
opening the parcel, one blood-stained t-shirt was taken out and
shown to him and he identifies the same as seized from the spot
vide memo, Ex.PW4/B. The t-shirt is Ex.PW2/ME-1. MHC(M)
produced parcel No. S9 bearing particulars of the FSL and sealedState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 33 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:43:34
+0530
34with the court seal. Seal was removed. On opening the parcel,
one knife was taken out and shown to the witness who identifies
the same as recovered at the instance of the accused vide memo
Ex.PW4/I. The knife is Ex.PW1/ME-1. (the Court made the
observation: in the testimony of PW-1, knife is exhibited as
Ex.PW1/ME-3, however, in the testimony of PW-4, same is
exhibited as Ex.PW1/ME-1).
16.2. PW10 during his cross examination deposed that he
received information of the present incident at about 11:30 pm on
03.10.2018. This information was intimated through duty officer,
however, he did not remember his name. He did not know
whether any call on 100 number was made by accused Neeraj
regarding the incident. He did not make any DD entry of
departure from PS to attend the call regarding the said incident.
He also said that, he had already left the PS to attend some
another call. He was appointed IO in this case on oral direction of
SHO at the same time when the information from DO was
received. The information received at that point of time was
about some quarrel taken place at RZ-17, West Sagarpur, New
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 34 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:43:46
+0530
35Delhi. He did not go to the spot just after receipt of aforesaid DD
as he received another DD No. 45A in respect of the MLC in the
Shakuntala Hospital. This call was also received by DO and
informed to him. He was about 11:45 pm. It is correct that till
11:45 pm, he had information about some quarrel and there was
no further information regarding the incident. He reached
Shakuntala Hospital at about 11:00 pm alongwith Ct. Mahender.
He also said about 12:00 midnight. He did not meet any person
related with either of the victims or resident of the place of
incident. He inquired the doctor present in Shakuntala hospital,
whose name he did not remember, about the victim or his
associates. He informed that the family members of the victim
had brought the patient to the hospital, however, he did not
disclose as for what reason the victim was taken by family
members to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He collected MLC at
Shakuntala hospital. He did not record the statement of the
resident doctor there. At around 12:30 am on 04.10.2018, he
reached Mata Chanan Devi Hospital alongwith Ct. Mahender. He
did not find victim or his relatives even in Mata Chanan Devi
Hospital. He did not record statement of any doctor as to knowState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 35 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:43:53
+0530
36the reasons of not getting admitted or taking treatment at the
hospital. He reached DDU hospital at around 01:00 am on
04.10.2018. He did not prepare any document in DDU hospital.
Till that time also, he did not have any specific information about
the incident. In DDU hospital, he asked about the victim wherein
one person namely Rajpal approached him and disclosed that he
is father of the victim namely Amit. Since victim was unfit for
statement, he could not record his statement on that day. He
could not say whether as per the MLC of Shakuntala Hospital
and Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, the victim was fit for statement.
No other public witness of the present case was present in the
hospital when he recorded the statement of Rajpal. He recorded
his statement at around 1 am on 04.10.2018. No MLC was
prepared at DDU Hospital. He did not record the statement of
the concerned doctor as to why no MLC was prepared. He did
not do any other investigation at DDU hospital and he
straightaway came to the spot after recording the statement of
father of victim at DDU Hospital. He denied the suggestions of
the defence and no material contradiction were brought on record
by the defence in his further cross examination.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 36 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:44:04
Warsi +0530
37
17. PW11 Ms. Poonam Sharma deposed that on
18.12.2018, she was working as Assistant Director (Biology)
FSL, Rohini, Delhi. On that day, nine sealed parcel out of which
five parcels S1 to S4 and S9 were sealed with the seal of NK and
four parcels Mark S5 to S8 were sealed with the seal of MCDH.
Seals were intact and tallied with the forwarding letter. She
examined the aforesaid exhibit and gave her detailed report is
Ex.PW11/A bearing her signature at point A. The report of
allelic is Ex. PW11/B bearing her signature at point A. She can
identify the case property if shown to her. One sealed parcel
Mark S1 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M).
Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain
one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container, it is
found to contain gauze cloth piece having brown stains. Witness
identified the gauze piece to be blood gauze piece examined by
her. Same is already Exhibited as Ex. PW-4/P1. One sealed
parcel Mark S2 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by
MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to
contain one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container,
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 37 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:44:15
+0530
38it is found to contain earth material. Witness identified the earth
material as blood stained earth material to be examined by her.
Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW4/P2. One sealed parcel
Mark S3 sealed with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M).
Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found to contain
one plastic container. On opening of the plastic container, it is
found to contain earth material. Witness identified the earth
material as earth control to be examined by her. Same is already
exhibited as Ex. PW4/P3. One sealed parcel Mark S4 sealed with
the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On
opening of the same it is found to contain one blood stained t-
shirt. Witness identified the aforesaid t-shirt to be of injured Amit
as per forwarding letter and the same to be examined by her.
Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW2/ME-1. One sealed parcel
Mark S5 sealed with the seal of P.Sh. FSL DELHI is produced
by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same it is found
to contain dark brown foul smelling liquid in a tube. Witness
identified the liquid blood sample of injured Amit to be the same
which was examined by her. Same is now exhibited as Ex. P-
11/1. One sealed parcel Mark S6 sealed with the seal of Court isState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 38 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:44:27
Warsi +0530
39
produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same
it is found to contain one blood stained short/ half pant. Witness
identified the half pant to be of injured Amit and same was
examined by her. Same is exhibited as Ex.PW2/ME2. One sealed
parcel Mark S7 sealed with the seal of P.Sh. FSL DELHI is
produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same
it is found to contain dark brown foul smelling liquid in a tube.
Witness identified the liquid blood sample of injured Rajpal to be
the same which was examined by her. Same is exhibited as Ex.P-
11/2. One sealed parcel Mark S8 sealed with the seal of Court is
produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact. On opening of the same
it is found to contain one baniyan and pazama. Witness identified
the baniyan and pazama to be of injured Rajpal and same were
examined by her. Same is already exhibited as Ex. PW1/ME1
and PW 1/ ME2 respectively. One sealed parcel Mark S9 sealed
with the seal of Court is produced by MHC(M). Seals are intact.
On opening of the same it is found to contain one knife. Witness
identified the same as Exhibited PW1/ME3 to be same which
was examined by her.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 39 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:44:47
+0530
4017.1. PW11 during her cross examination deposed that it
is correct that DNA profile could not be generated from Ex. S2,
S3, S6 and S9 i.e. knife (voluntarily due to degradation/
inhibition DNA profile could not be generated). She had opened
all the samples on 03.09.2018. Voluntarily again said it was
bio/DNA No. however, the exhibits were opened on 15.01.2019.
He had put the bio no. i.e. 3109/18 on 15.01.2019 on the tags
affixed on the exhibits.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
18. After completion of prosecution evidence, all
incriminating material as appearing in the evidence was put to
the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He pleaded innocence and
stated that complainant has falsely implicated him in the present
case. He had not stabbed, Amit, rather he had gone to save him
as he was involved in scuffle with his drivers who were drunk at
that time. There is no recovery on his instance. The witnesses are
in enmity with him as they are neighbours and Amit is also
involved in running private taxi like him. There is a business
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 40 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Date:
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:45:00
Warsi +0530
41rivalry and before this incident, he had already been involved
with him twice earlier for which there was compromise in the
police station. And the quarrel happened between Amit and his
drivers. He was arrested due to previous enmity.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE
19. DW1 Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar deposed that he
knew the accused for the last about more than 20 years as he was
also in the business of taxi driving. He used to go to the accused
to take car on rent whenever needed. In the same respect, on
03.10.2018, at about 09:00-09:30 pm, he had gone to the accused
place to take his Swift Dzire car on rent. When he reached at the
accused house, there was some scuffle going on at the plot where
the cars of accused Neeraj were parked. He called Neeraj who
also, after hearing the noise, came down from his house. He tried
to disperse the quarrel going on in between 4-5 persons present
there. After 2-3 minutes, all the persons went from the spot and
he talked to Neeraj. Neeraj also suffered some injury in his hand
during the course of dispersing of this scuffle. Neeraj told that
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 41 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:45:24
Warsi +0530
42the scuffle was going between the drivers of Amit who is
neighbor of Neeraj and who is also in the business of running
taxi for schools. The drivers used to drink in the parking lot and
on this issue previously also there are nuisance in the area. Since
the car of Neeraj was parked behind the car of said Amit and all
persons fled away from the spot, he returned back without taking
the car. He also went to the PS when he came to know that
Neeraj has been called in the PS on the allegation of his being
involved in the said offence and he was falsely implicated in this
case. However, the police did not take his statement. He had
come to depose about the truth what he saw at the spot.
19.1. In the cross examination, it has came that, he had not
brought any proof to show that he has a business of taxi. He did
not remember the registration number of the said taxi car. He had
no documentary proof showing that he had taken taxi of Neeraj
3-4 times prior to the incident. Neighbors had also reached at the
spot. He could not tell the name of the persons who were present
at the spot. He did not have any knowledge as to how many taxis
Amit was having at the time of incident. He was not told byState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 42 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:45:36
Warsi +0530
43anyone that drivers used to drink in the parking lot and on this
issue previously also there was nuisance in the area. He did not
remember as to how many times he had gone to the house of
Neeraj in day time and how many times he had gone in night
time. On 04.10.2018, at about 4/5:00 pm, he had gone to PS
Sagarpur. He did not remember the name of the police official to
whom he met and had told about the innocence of accused
Neeraj. He had not gone to any senior police officials or any
other authority to tell that accused Neeraj was falsely implicated
in this case. He had not made any written complaint to any
authority for the same. It is correct that he was not a summoned
witness. He had come to the court on the asking of accused.
ARGUMENTS
20. Ld. Addl. PP for the State submits that injured
witnesses PW1 Rajpal and PW2 Amit remained consistent in
their testimony and their MLCs, as proved by other expert /
doctor evidence, has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the
accused Neeraj was the aggressor, he called Amit and called
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 43 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:45:47
Warsi +0530
44victim from the house and attacked with knife, in a pre planned
manner, multiple times on vital parts like chest and stomach and
also caused injuries to the father of Amit i.e. Rajpal. The defence
was not able to cast any doubt on the prosecution story and the
accused is liable for conviction and punishment under Section
307, 324 and 506 IPC.
21. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel for the accused
submits that the mode and manner of the offence is not
established by the prosecution. And there was no mensrea to
commit the offence charged against the accused which is evident
from the rukka itself wherein the complainant PW-1 stated that
“dobara gadi khadi ki to jaan se maar dunga” meaning thereby
even as per prosecution’s case there was no intention to cause
death on the part of the accused. This submission is subject to, if
in worst scenario the prosecution case be believed, however, his
original submission is that the accused has not committed the
offence.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 44 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Date:
Ali Warsi 2026.02.16
19:46:00 +0530
45
22. He also submits that the prosecution failed to prove
its case as spot is disputed, the recovery of blood stained t-shirt
of victim is planted, weapon of offence not proved, no
independent witness to support the place of crime as well as
version of the complainant, the vehicle is which victim was
allegedly taken to the hospital has not been seized nor any
witness has been examined to support the version of prosecution,
no fingerprint of the accused on the alleged weapon of offence
has been found and no corroboration of disclosure statement of
accused with any piece of evidence and the victim was fit for
statement at the time of admission in the hospital / prepared of
MLC, however, his statement has been recorded with delay of
one day. Lastly, Ld. Counsel has submitted that the case in the
worst case is not u/s 307 IPC but is the case u/s 325 IPC if the
case of the prosecution be believed in toto.
23. It is also submitted that the accused is falsely
implicated due to previous rivalry while he was injured by other
drivers. He has also relied upon the following judgments:-
1. Sarju Prasad Vs. State of Bihar MANU/SC/0342/1964
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 45 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:46:33
Warsi +0530
46
2. Jai Narain Mishra and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar
MANU/SC/0122/1971
MANU/SC/8439/2006
Heard the arguments and perused the records.
APPRECIATION AND ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE
(Evidence has to be examined whether the alleged
facts are proved, disproved or not proved on the anvil the
principle of beyond reasonable doubt)
APPRECIATION AND FINDING FOR SECTION 307 AND
506 IPC.
24. To determine whether the act of accused falls within
the ambit of Section 307 IPC, it is relevant to reproduce Section
307 IPC which reads as:-
“Section 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 punishedState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 46 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:46:43
+0530
47with 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 1[imprisonment for life],
or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
Attempts by life-convicts.– 2[When any person
offending under this section is under sentence
of 2[imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused, be
punished with death.]”
24.1. Thus, essential consideration to be proved by the
prosecution for Sec 307 IPC are:-
i. The nature of that act; ii. The intention or knowledge of the person; iii. The circumstances under which the act is done; iv. It by that act death is caused he would be guilty of murder.
25. For attracting Section 307 IPC the importance is of
the intention or knowledge and not the consequences of the
actual act done for the purpose of carrying out the intention. The
court has to consider whether the act, irrespective of its result,
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 47 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:47:01
+0530
48was done with the intention or knowledge that such act death is
caused he would be guilty of murder.
26. Intention and knowledge may also be gathered from
weapon of offence used, nature of injuries and other attending
circumstances of the incident.
27. Now the present case and the evidence on record has
to be appreciated in the light of aforesaid principles i.e. whether
the prosecution has successfully proved the essential ingredients
of Section 307 IPC against accused Neeraj or not.
28. The important witness of the prosecution case is
injured / complainant PW1 Sh. Raj Pal and injured PW2 Amit.
PW1 Sh. Raj Pal, in his testimony has identified the accused and
deposed that on 03.10.2018 at about 10:00 pm his son Amit
received a telephone call and was talking to that person in a loud
voice and when he asked him who was calling him then his son
Amit told him that accused Neeraj who is their neighbour had
called him. Amit also told him that accused Neeraj was abusing
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 48 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:47:10
Warsi +0530
49him on the pretext of parking and was threatening to kill him and
calling him outside the house. Then accused Neeraj knocked at
their gate and asked his son to come out from the house and
further threatened that he would see him. His son Amit opened
the door of the house while he (PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh) was also
there, accused Neeraj pulled his son Amit outside of their house
and scuffled with him and took out knife and repeatedly caused
knife injuries on the chest and abdomen of Amit. When he (PW1
Raj Pal Singh) tried to hold the hand of accused Neeraj and
intervened in to the matter, then accused Neeraj attacked upon
him with the knife and he raised his left hand in order to save
himself from the attack of the accused and accused Neeraj caused
three / four injuries on his left hand by the knife. Then accused
raised the knife in the air and ran away while threatened them by
stating that if they parked their vehicle in the vacant plot he
would kill them. As Amit became unconscious after receiving
the injuries, he took his son Amit to Shakuntala Hospital in a
private vehicle from there after first aid to Mata Chanan Devi
Hospital, there to DDU Hospital where his son was medically
examined and he also examined in the hospital. And policeState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 49 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Digitally
signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali WarsiAli Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:47:20
+0530
50reached the hospital and recorded his statement. It is also stated
by him that in DDU hospital, one machine was not working so he
again took Amit to Mata Chanan Devi hospital where Amit was
given treatment and he was also given treatment at Mata Chanan
Devi Hospital. His clothes were stained with the blood as he was
wearing vest and trouser at the time of incident. The clothes were
taken by the doctor concerned.
29. On perusal of Ex.PW1/A i.e. the statement of PW1
Rajpal Singh his testimony in the court has duly corroborated his
statement i.e. Ex.PW1/A recorded on 04.10.2018. Further he has
identified Ex.PW1/ME-1, Ex.PW1/ME-2 and Ex.PW1/ME-3
which are baniyan, pajama and knife respectively.
30. Injured witness PW2 Amit Kumar, son of PW1
Rajpal has corroborated and thereby further strengthened the
testimony of his father PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh who identified
accused Neeraj and deposed that accused Neeraj called him on
his mobile phone as his vehicle was parked in a vacant plot near
his house and accused Neeraj asked him to remove his vehicle
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 50 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:47:30
Warsi +0530
51from there and dispute between him and Neeraj took place on
phone. Then accused Neeraj asked him to come down stairs and
he alongwith his father went downstairs and opened the gate of
their house where accused Neeraj was standing outside and
abused them, started scuffling with him and when his father
intervened then accused Neeraj took out a knife and attacked
upon his chest and abdomen repeatedly. He sustained injuries on
his chest and abdomen and blood started oozing out from his
injuries he fell down and became unconscious. It is also deposed
by him that Mata Chanan Devi Hospital where he gained his
consciousness police recorded his statement. Further he has
identified Ex.PW2/ME-1 and Ex.PW2/ME-2 which are t-shirt
and short / half pant respectively.
31. The deposition of PW1 Rajpal Singh and PW2 Amit
Kumar is further strengthened by the MLC Ex.PW6/A of PW1
Amit Kumar which is proved by the testimonies of Sh. Ashwini
Kumar Rai, office supervisor – cum – legal coordinator, Mata
Chanan Devi Hospital, who identified signature of Dr. Sumit
Vidhya Sagar and PW7 Dr. Prem Arora, posted at BLK MAX
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 51 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:47:39
+0530
52Super Specialty hospital, Pusa Road, Delhi who identified
signature of Dr. Anurag Dadu on MLC and PW8 Dr. Anurag
Dadu, Sr. Consultant, Mata Chanan Devi Hospital who in his
testimony has corroborated the injuries caused to injured PW1
Amit as shown in his MLC Ex.PW6/A. The relevant portion of
the testimony of PW8 Dr. Anurag Dadu is as:-
“As per MLC, on 03.10.2018, at around 11:25 pm, one
patient by the name of Amit Kumar was brought to the hospital
with the alleged history of stab injury. On local
examination, following injuries were found:
(i) CLW approx 4 cm below liphoid process i.e. active bleeding.
(ii) CLW at critical region approx 8 cm.
(iii) CLW at Left Axiliary region approx 2/1 cm.
(iv) CLW at umbilical region approx 2/1 cm.
32. The MLC is already Ex.PW6/A and the nature of
injury as per the MLC is grievous. The MLC bears his signature
at point A. The defence was not able to impeach these
testimonies in cross examination.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 52 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:47:49
+0530
53
33. In the testimony of PW9 Dr. D.P. Dhami, Director
(Medical) Shakuntala Hospital, it is deposed that on 03.10.2013
one patient Amit Kumar was admitted in Emergency Ward of
Shakuntala Hospital with the alleged history of multiple stab
wounds and as per the MLC of injured the opinion is dangerous
and the MLC Ex.PW9/A is proved by PW9. In cross examination
the testimony remained unshaken.
34. By the deposition of PW4 Mahender Singh he
corroborated the fact that he was on emergency duty and DD No.
44 (A) and DD No. 45 (A) are calls from duty officer and
Shakuntala Hospital respectively. He has further corroborated
that in the hospital the father of injured met them and the IO ASI
Nand Kishore recorded his statement and IO had lifted the
exhibits from spot and IO received phone call of Rajpal father of
injured that he has also sustained injuries. He proved seizure
memo of exhibits from the spot i.e. Ex.PW4/A and seizure memo
of blood stained t-shirt Ex.PW4/B, seizure memo of blood
stained clothes of injured Amit Kumar Ex.PW4/C, blood stained
clothes of injured Rajpal Singh Ex.PW4/D, arrest memo of
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 53 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:47:58
Warsi +0530
54Neeraj Ex.PW4/E, search memo of accused Neeraj Ex.PW4/A,
disclosure statement of accused Neeraj Ex.PW4/G, sketch of
buttondar knife Ex.PW4/H as prepared by IO, Ex.PW4/P1, P2,
P3 i.e. one blood stain gauze, one blood stain earth and material
i.e. earth control respectively. Further, IO PW10 ASI Nand
Kishore has proved his endorsement on Ex.PW10/A i.e.
endorsement on rukka, Ex.PW10/B site plan / spot map,
Ex.PW10/D MLC of complainant Rajpal and Ex.PW10/E (colly)
attested copy of DD No. 44A and DD No. 45A and his testimony
remained irrebutable in cross examination.
35. The prosecution case is mainly based on eye witness
in case of direct evidence, and the deposition of police witnesses
who were a part of the investigation is only ancillary to the eye
witness description given by the victims. The outcome of the trial
essentially hinges upon the eye witness account of the injured /
complainant i.e. PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh and his injured son PW2
Amit Kumar. The complainant injured, PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh in
his testimony has described the mode and manner how accused
Neeraj has caused injury to his son by stabbing multiple times i.e.State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 54 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:48:13
+0530
55repeatedly with knife on the chest and stomach of his son PW2
Amit Kumar and the same is corroborated by PW2 Amit Kumar
and an injured witness has great weightage and special status in
law. As injury to the witness is an inbuilt guarantee of his
presence at the scene and the injured person will not falsely
implicate any innocent person and let go the actual culprit
unpunished.
36. This position of injured witness can be understood
from the following judgments:-
36.1. In Shivalingappa Kallayanappa V State of
Karnataka, 1994 Supp (3) SCC 235 it was 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.
36.2. In State of MP V Mansingh, (2003) 10 SCC 414, the
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 55 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
Syed signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:48:36
+0530
56Supreme Court observed that the evidence of injured witnesses
have greater evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons
exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly. Minor
discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of otherwise
acceptable evidence.
36.3. In Abdul Sayeed V State of MP, (2010) 10 SCC
259, the Supreme Court held that the question of the weight to be
attached to the evidence of a witness that was himself injured in
the course of the occurrence has been extensively discussed by
this Court. Where a witness to the occurrence has himself been
injured in the incident, the testimony of such a witness is
generally considered to be very reliable, as he is a witness that
comes with a builtin guarantee of his presence at the scene of the
crime and is unlikely to spare his actual assailant(s) in order to
falsely implicate someone. Convincing evidence is required to
discredit an injured witness.
36.4. In State of Uttar Pradesh V Naresh, (2011) 4 SCC
324, evidentiary value to be attached to the statement of anState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 56 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:48:50
Warsi +0530
57injured witness was expressed in the following words:-
“The evidence of an injured witness must be given due
weightage being a stamped witness, thus, his presence
cannot be doubted. His statement is generally
considered to be very reliable and it is unlikely that he
has spared the actual assailant in order to falsely
implicate someone else. The testimony of an injured
witness has its own relevancy and efficacy as he has
sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence
and this lends support to his testimony that he was
present during the occurrence. Thus, the testimony of
an injured witness is accorded a special status in law.
The witness would not like or want to let his actual
assailant go unpunished merely to implicate a third
person falsely for the commission of the offence.”
37. Now, reverting back to the case in hand the injured
witnesses has consistently supported the allegation that accused
Neeraj has caused injuries to them and that too on the vital part
of PW2 Amit Kumar and he has also threatened them to kill them
while running away and the injuries are caused by sharp edged
weapon i.e. knife. This court of the view that as the injured
witness has special status in law. Until and unless there are major
contradictions and discrepancies in their testimonies they have to
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 57 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:48:59
+0530
58be relied on. Also in the present case no major contradiction or
discrepancies were brought on record by the defence so that there
testimonies can be discarded. There are only small variations in
statement of PW2, Amit regarding parking of motorcycle or car
or not stating by PW1 Rajpal Singh in Ex.PW1/A of injuries to
his hand. 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. And,
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 corroborated / strengthened the
occurrence of incident and their presence as well as witnessing
the incident.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 58 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:49:15
+0530
59
38. It is settled position of law that minor variations and
contradictions cannot lead to disbelieve a witness 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 witness 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 theState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 59 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:49:29
Warsi +0530
60main 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 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.”
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 60 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:49:37
+0530
61
39. This court is not able to agree with the submission of
Ld. defence counsel as no public person was included in the
investigation and the accused is falsely implicated. It is relevant
to consider here that quality of evidence is important than the
quantity 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 disproved. 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 of 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.
40. The defence of the accused that he has been
implicated on the basis of previous enmity and the quarrel has
took place between injured PW2 Amit Kumar and his drivers.
As no witness is produced to show to the identity of the drivers
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 61 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:50:19 +0530
62and only DW1 Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar was produced in
evidence and the testimony of DW1 Basant Kumar Tanwar does
not inspire the confidence as he narrated the incident that when
he reached at the accused house the scuffle was going on
between 4 to 5 persons and he called the accused who came
down from his house and dispersed the quarrel and Neeraj also
suffered some injuries in his hand during the course of dispersing
this scuffle and Neeraj told him that the scuffle was going
between the drivers of the Amit who are also in the business of
running of taxi in the schools and he also stated that the car of
Neeraj was parked behind the car of Amit. At the same time he
also stated that he went to the PS when he came to know that
Neeraj has been called in the PS on the allegation of his being
involved in the said offence and he has been falsely implicated in
this case. But the witness has not brought any proof to show he
is in business of taxi or he had taken taxi of Neeraj prior to the
incident and he was not able to tell the name of the persons who
were present at the spot. Thus the testimony of DW1 Basant
Kumar Tanwar is not sufficient to support the defence of the
accused or discredit the prosecution witnesses. It is also againstState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 62 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:50:31
Warsi +0530
63the prudence that why a person will implicate his Saviour and let
the real culprit go away. It is profitable to rely on Matibar Singh
Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015) 16 Supreme Court Cases 168:
“14. That brings us to the question whether there is any room for
our interference with the conviction of Matibar Singh, appellant,
as recorded by the High Court in the impugned judgment. We
must, at the outset, say that the High Court’s judgment, which has
been read out at length before us, has dealt with the evidence
adduced at the trial as also the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties with commendable clarity. We have,
therefore, no hesitation in affirming the reasoning and the
conclusions arrived at by the High Court. The fact that there was
previous enmity between the complainant’s party and the rival
group of which the accused happen to be members or
sympathisers is a factor that need to be taken as adverse to the
prosecution. Enmity is a double-edged weapon. It was because of
the said enmity that the victim was assaulted while he was on his
way to attend the function. The existence of such enmity lends
support to the prosecution case rather than demolish the same.
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 63 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:51:25
Warsi +0530
64The trial court was obviously in error in taking a contrary view
which the High Court has rightly corrected by the impugned
judgment. So also, the High Court was, in our opinion, perfectly
justified in holding that the deposition of the victim and the
eyewitnesses examined at the trial had not been shaken in cross-
examinations to render it unsafe for the Court to rest an order of
conviction against the accused persons.
15. The High Court has, in our opinion, correctly held that the
sequence of events leading to the incident as also the version
given by the witnesses was free from any infirmities, hence, fully
reliable. The fact that there was not even a suggestion either to
the victim of the assault or to the doctors examined at the trial
that the stab injuries sustained at the back were self-inflicted
clearly shows that the version of the complainant could not be
rejected just because the so-called independent witnesses had not
been examined. It is in any case difficult for us to accept that the
victim when assaulted in broad daylight would have allowed the
real offender to go scot-free to falsely implicate some innocent
persons.”
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 64 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:51:34
+0530
65Thus, in the opinion of this court the defence has
failed to establish previous enmity even if it is believed that
there was previous enmity then in the light of aforesaid
discussion, the same will go against the defence and in favour of
prosecution.
41. In the present case, the evidence of PW1 Rajpal
Singh and PW2 Amit Kumar is direct, cogent and credible. And
the manner in which accused Neeraj has called on phone of PW2
Amit and called him out of his house and repeatedly attacked him
with the knife, on vital parts, which was already kept by him
establishes that in pre planned manner with the motive to cause
life threatening injuries with dangerous weapon he has caused
injuries to the victim PW2 Amit. It is held in the case of
Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1956 SC 460:
“But it has repeatedly been pointed out by this Court that where
the positive evidence against the accused is clear, cogent and
reliable, the question of motive is of no importance.”
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 65 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:51:44 +0530
66
42. The submission of Ld. defence counsel that no
fingerprint of the accused on the alleged weapon offence is found
is also not sustainable as the weapon was recovered at the
instance of accused from his home amongst the utensils and the
recovery was made from a place which is in the knowledge of
accused and in the light of the cogent, credible and consistent
statement of witnesses and when the recovery of weapon i.e.
knife is proved this court is not in agreement with the submission
of defence. Further, recovery of weapon used in the offence is
more credible then the finger print as finger prints can be wiped
away but the weapon used in the offence and its recovery on the
instance of accused is more credible. It is prudent to rely on
Manoj Kumar Soni Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) 17
Supreme Court Cases 401:
“Section 27 of the Evidence Act made by the accused himself
seems to be well-established. The decision of the Privy Council
in Pulukuri Kotayya. King Emperor holds the field even today
wherein it was held that the provided information must be
directly relevant to the discovered fact, including details about
the physical object, its place of origin, and the accused person’sState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 66 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:51:53
+0530
67awareness of these aspects. The Privy Council observed: (SCC
OnLine PC)“… The difficulty, however great, of proving that a fact
discovered on information supplied by the accused is a relevant
fact can afford no justification for reading into Section 27
something which is not there, and admitting in evidence a
confession barred by Section 26. Except in cases in which the
possession, or concealment, of an object constitutes the gist of
the offence charged, it can seldom happen that information
relating to the discovery of a fact forms the foundation of the
prosecution case. It is only one link in the chain of proof, and the
other links must be forged in manner allowed by law.”
43. As far as the submission of Ld. defence counsel with
regard to case is of Section 325 IPC and not of Section 307 IPC
this court is not in agreement with him as in the light of the
testimonies of the witnesses the prosecution proved beyond
reasonable doubt that the injuries were inflicted by knife multiple
times on the vital part of PW2 Amit Kumar and looking to the
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 67 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:52:03
Warsi +0530
68part of body, nature of weapon as well as repeated blows on vital
part and nature of injuries being grievous this court is of the
opinion that the assault was committed with the intention and
knowledge that the act if will lead to death of PW2 Amit Kumar
it will amount to murder and as the death is not caused the
offence of attempt to murder punishable u/s 307 IPC is proved
beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution and the case laws
relied by Ld. Counsel for defence is not attracted to the present
case as the facts and circumstances of the present case is
different.
44. It is also relevant to consider the section 506 IPC
which is reproduced as follows:
“506. Punishment for criminal intimidation.–Whoever commits
the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death
or grievous hurt, etc.–and if the threat be to cause death or
grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire,
or to cause an offence punishable with death or 1 [imprisonmentState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 68 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally
signed by Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Zishan
Warsi
Ali
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:52:14
+0530
69for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.”
45. Thus looking to Section 506 IPC and applying the
same to the case at hand after attacking PW2 Amit and PW1 Raj
Pal Singh, accused Neeraj raised the knife in the air and ran away
and threatened them by stating that if they parked their vehicle in
the vacant plot he will kill them. As discussed in forgoing paras
of these judgment the testimony of PW1 and PW2 were found
cogent, consistent and credible. And the act of the accused is in
the form of aggravated criminal intimation as he has caused
threat to cause death by his willful communication to the victim
as sense of genuine fear that they will be killed. And by the said
act an offence u/s 506 IPC against the accused is proved beyond
reasonable doubt.
APPRECIATION AND FINDING QUA SECTION 324 IPC
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 69 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally
signed by
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:52:24
+0530
70
46. It is stated by PW1 Rajpal Singh in his testimony
that when he tried to hold the hand of accused Neeraj and
intervened into the matter accused Neeraj attacked him by the
knife and when raised his left hand in order to save himself from
the attack of the accused then accused Neeraj caused three-four
injuries on his left hand by the knife. He has also identified the
knife i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-3 and also identified his blood stained
baniyan and blood stained pajama i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-1 and
PW1/ME-2 respectively. His testimony has been further
corroborated by PW4 HC Mahender Singh, who has also
identified the knife i.e. Ex.PW1/ME-1. And also corroborated by
PW10 ASI Nand Kishore and the same is further corroborated by
PW11 Ms. Poonam Sharma who has identified and examined
Ex.PW1/ME-1 i.e. baniyan and Ex.PW1/ME-2 i.e. pajama of
injured Rajpal. However, the MLC of complainant Rajpal i.e.
Ex.PW10/D was exhibited via PW10 ASI Nand Kishore but no
doctor / concerned authority person has proved the same and for
the purpose of section 324 IPC as it provides punishment for
voluntarily causing hurt using dangerous weapon for means such
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 70 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Digitally signed
Syed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
Zishan Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Warsi 2026.02.16
19:52:34 +0530
71as cutting, stabbing etc. It is essential to reproduce section 324
IPC which is reproduced as follows:-
“324. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
–Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334,
voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting,
stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of
offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any
heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive
substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means
of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to
inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of
any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years, or with
fine, or with both.”
47. It is also relevant to mention here that, an accused
could only be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC
if he had caused injuries by using certain specified weapons, in
the instant case, in case of non proving of medical report as per
law, the nature of injuries suffered by the complainant, this court
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 71 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:52:43
Warsi +0530
72is of the view that the accused cannot be convicted for the
offence punishable u/s 324 IPC.
48. It can also not be ignored that when the evidence is
cogent, consistent and credible as the defence has failed to
impeach the credibility of the witness then the evidence can be
relied on. The prosecution has successfully proved beyond
reasonable doubt that the accused had indeed beaten the PW2 Sh.
Rajpal Singh complainant due to which the complainant had
sustained injuries/hurt as made out out from the ocular testimony
of the PW2 Sh. Rajpal Singh. It would be trite here to mention
that production of an injury report for the offence under Section
323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing the case for the
offence under Section 323 IPC.
49. Even though the accused is not charged with the
offence punishable us 323 IPC, section 222(2) Cr.P.C lays down
that when a person is charged with an offence but the facts
proved constitute a minor offence then he can be convicted of the
minor offence despite the fact that he may not have been charged
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 72 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali 2026.02.16
19:52:53
Warsi +0530
73with that offence. It is also settled proposition of law that mere
omission to frame charge or error or irregularly in framing
charge would not vitiate the entire trial provided no prejudice
was caused to the accused, as the accused was aware about the
nature of accusations against him and was afforded opportunity
to defend him. In the present case, accused was initially charged
with the offence for causing voluntary hurt by using dangerous
weapon. However, while the prosecution failed to establish the
necessary ingredients of section 324 IPC, it however, succeeded
in proving his guilt for voluntary causing hurt which is
punishable u/s 323 IPC. It is settled law that s. 323 IPC is the
minor offence as compared to s. 324 IPC within the ambit of s.
222 CrP.C. Accordingly, prosecution has proved beyond
reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused for voluntarily causing
hurt to PW2 Sh. Rajpal Singh punishable u/s 323 IPC.
50. For accused Neeraj as discussed in forgoing paras of this
judgment, the essential ingredients to make out a case of an
attempt to commit murder of PW2 Amit punishable u/s 307 IPC
and hurt to PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh punishable u/s 323 IPC is
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 73 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Date:
Ali 2026.02.16
19:53:03
Warsi +0530
74
proved beyond reasonable doubt as well as offence u/s 506 IPC
for threatening to cause death to PW1 Sh. Rajpal Singh and PW2
Sh. Amit is also proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable
doubt. The accused namely Neeraj is convicted for the offence
u/s 307/323/506 IPC. Digitally
Syed signed by
Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
2026.02.16
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT Warsi 19:53:14
+0530
on 16th February 2026
(SYED ZISHAN ALI WARSI)
Addl. Sessions Judge-04
Patiala House Courts
New Delhi/16.02.2026State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 74 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
75
(i) Chart for witnesses examined
Prosecution Name of witness Description
witness No.
1. Sh. Rajpal Singh Complainant / injured eye witness
2. Sh. Amit Injured eye witness
3. Rakesh Kumar Inspector, participated in investigation
4. Mahender Singh Head Constable, participated in
investigation
5. Amit Head Constable, participated in
investigation
6. Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai Proved MLC of Amit Kumar,
Authority Letter.
7. Dr. Prem Arora
8. Dr. Anurag Dadu Discharge summary of patient Amit
Kumar
9. Dr. D.P. Dhami MLC of injured Amit Kumar
10. Nand Kishore ASI, investigating officer
11. Ms. Poonam Detailed report of FSL (Biology)
Defence witness Name of witness Description
No.
1. Sh. Basant Kumar Tanwar Eye witness, friend of accused Neeraj
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 75 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined
Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents by Syed Zishan
Zishan Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali
Date:
2026.02.16
19:53:28
Warsi +0530
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents
Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by
No.
1. Ex.PW1/A, statement of complainant PW1, Sh. Rajpal Singh
2. Ex.PW2/D1, statement of Amit Kumar PW2, Amit Kumar
3. Ex.PW3/A, SOC report bearing No. 1100/2018 PW3, Inspector Rakesh Kumar
4. Ex.PW4/A, seizure memo, PW4, HC Mahender Singh
Ex.PW4/B, seizure memo,
Ex.PW4/C, seizure memo,
Ex.PW4/D, seizure memo,
Ex.PW4/E, arrest memo,
Ex.PW4/F, personal search memo,
Ex.PW4/G, disclosure statement,
Ex.PW4/H, sketch of buttondar knife,
Ex.PW4/I, seizure memo of pullanda,
5. Ex.PW5/A-1 to Ex.PW5/A-14, photographs, PW5, HC Amit
Ex.PW5/A-15, CD,
6. Ex.PW6/A, MLC of Amit, PW6, Sh. Ashwini Kumar Rai
Ex.PW6/B, Authority Letter,
7. —- PW7, Dr. Prem Arora
8. Ex.PW8/A, Discharge summary of patient Amit PW8, Dr. Anurag Dadu
Kumar
9. Ex.PW9/A, MLC of injured Amit Kumar, PW9, Dr. D.P. Dhami
10. Ex.PW10/A, endorsement, PW10, ASI Nand Kishore
Ex.PW10/B, site plan,
Ex.PW10/C, statement of injured Amit Kumar,
Ex.PW10/D, MLC of complainant Rajpal,
Ex.PW10/E, attested copy of DD No. 44A and 45A,
11. Ex.PW11/A, detailed report of FSL (Biology), PW11,
Ex.PW11/B, Allelic report, Ms. Poonam Sharma
Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by
No.
1. — DW1, Sh. Basant Kumar
TanwarState Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 76 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
by Syed Zishan
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan Ali Warsi
Ali Date:
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Warsi
2026.02.16
19:53:39 +0530
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals
Exhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by
No.
1. Ex.PW1/ME-1, baniyan, PW1, Sh. Rajpal Singh
Ex.PW1/ME-2, pajama,
Ex.PW1/ME-3, knife
2. Ex.PW2/ME-1, T-shirt, PW2, Amit Kumar
Ex.PW2/ME-2, short/half pant,
3. —- PW3, Inspector Rakesh
Kumar
4. Ex.PW4/P1, parcel S1, PW4, HC Mahender Singh
Ex.PW4/P2, parcel S2,
Ex.PW4/P3, parcel S3,
5. Ex.PW5/A-1 to Ex.PW5/A-14, photographs, PW5, HC Amit
Ex.PW5/A-15, CD,
6. —- PW6, Sh. Ashwini Kumar
Rai
7. —- PW7, Dr. Prem Arora
8. —- PW8, Dr. Anurag Dadu
9. —- PW9, Dr. D.P. Dhami
10. —- PW10, ASI Nand Kishore
11. Ex.PW11/1, liquid blood sample of injured PW11,
Amit, Ms. Poonam Sharma
Ex.PW11/2, liquid blood sample of injured
RajpalExhibit Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by
No.
1. — DW1, Sh. Basant Kumar
Tanwar
State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Page no. 77 of 77
ANNEXED : (i) Chart for witnesses examined Syed Digitally signed
(ii) Chart for Exhibited Documents Zishan
by Syed Zishan
Ali Warsi
(iii) Chart of Material objects / muddamals Ali Date:
2026.02.16
Warsi 19:53:57 +0530
