STATE vs RAM SWAROOP & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI IN THE MATTER OF: + CRL.A. 969/2002 STATE .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for State. versus RAM SWAROOP & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Anu Narula (DHCLSC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV JUDGMENT (ORAL) VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 01/02/2000 through which the respondents /accused were acquitted, the State came in appeal assailing the said judgment. 2. Concisely, the indispensable facts are that one Raju (PW-2) was taken to the Safdarjung hospital by H.C. Goverdhan Singh (PW-4) along with two other public persons in an injured condition. The statement given by injured Raju paved the way for registration of the FIR at Police Station R.K. Puram. All four respondents were specifically named in the FIR by the victim Raju PW-2, which led to their arrest. The investigating officer, on completion of investigation, Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEHA CRL.A. 969/2002 Page 1 of 20 Signing Date:31.10.2025 17:10:31 which included recording of statements, collection of MLC preparation of site plan etc., filed the charge sheet under Section 307/34 IPC. All the four accused persons were formally charged for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC on 30.11.1998. Nine witnesses were examined including three vital witnesses who can be termed as eye witnesses to the incident and thereafter the evidence so coming on record was put to the accused persons and their versions were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Since the respondents/accused did not opt to lead evidence, the matter was argued and on the conclusion of the arguments, the impugned judgment was passed acquitting all the four respondents herein i.e. Ram Sw