A fast-track court in Noida delivered a significant verdict on Monday, sentencing two men from Dadri to ten years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 22,500 each. This judgment comes fourteen years after they attacked a villager with the intent to murder him, marking a long-awaited conclusion to a protracted legal battle.
Court's Verdict and Legal Charges
The court of Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Dwivedi found the accused guilty under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Specifically, they were convicted under IPC section 323 for causing hurt, section 325 for inflicting grievous hurt, and most critically, section 307 for attempted murder. However, in a partial acquittal, the court cleared them of charges under sections 504 (insult) and 507 (criminal intimidation), highlighting the nuanced nature of the legal proceedings.
Background of the Case
The roots of this case trace back to April 7, 2012, when an FIR was lodged based on a complaint filed by Tejram. He alleged that Binder, also known as Bijendra, and Ashok, both residents of Chithara village and related to each other, had attacked his brother-in-law, Teji, while he was working on his farmland. Initially, the FIR was registered under IPC sections 147 (rioting) and 148 (rioting armed with deadly weapon), along with section 323.
Following a preliminary investigation, the chargesheet was expanded to include additional sections: 323, 325, 307, 504, and 506 (criminal intimidation). In November 2013, the case was transferred from the ACJM court for sessions trial, indicating its seriousness. The sessions court formally framed charges on October 31, 2015, and the matter was subsequently handed over to the fast-track court in March 2017, underscoring the judicial system's effort to expedite justice.
Prosecution's Case and Witness Testimonies
The prosecution presented a robust case with seven witnesses to substantiate the charges. The victim, Teji, provided crucial testimony, informing the court that the conflict originated from a land dispute. He had purchased a plot from a woman in the village, a transaction that did not sit well with her brother-in-law, Bindar. On the day of the attack, Bijendra, one of the accused, demanded that Teji vacate the plot. Upon Teji's refusal, the accused launched a violent assault in the evening, leading to severe injuries.
Teji's account was corroborated by key eyewitnesses, strengthening the prosecution's stance. His wife, Tejwati, who witnessed the incident, testified as a witness, providing firsthand details of the attack. Additionally, Tejram, the complainant and brother-in-law of the victim, testified as PW1 and PW3, respectively, offering consistent narratives that supported the allegations of attempted murder.
Defense Arguments and Case Complexities
The defense counsel highlighted certain complexities in the case, noting that while six individuals were initially named in the FIR, only two were ultimately charged and summoned by the court. The other four were neither charged nor summoned due to unclear facts emerging during the investigation, pointing to potential gaps or ambiguities in the initial reporting and evidence collection process.
This aspect of the case underscores the challenges often faced in criminal investigations, where initial allegations may not always translate into convictions for all involved parties. It also reflects the judiciary's careful scrutiny in ensuring that charges are based on clear and substantiated evidence, adhering to legal standards.
The sentencing of the two accused to ten years of rigorous imprisonment serves as a stern reminder of the legal consequences for violent crimes, particularly those involving intent to murder. The fine imposed further adds to the punitive measures, aiming to deter similar offenses in the future.
This verdict from the Noida fast-track court not only brings closure to a long-standing case but also reinforces the importance of timely justice delivery in the Indian legal system. It highlights the role of fast-track courts in addressing serious crimes efficiently, ensuring that victims and their families see justice served after years of legal proceedings.
