‘Common intention holds’: Man convicted of attempt to murder despite not wielding weapon | Delhi News


‘Common intention holds’: Man convicted of attempt to murder despite not wielding weapon

New Delhi: A city court recently convicted a man in an attempt to murder case after finding out that he was part of a group that robbed and stabbed a migrant labourer nearly seven years ago.Though the defence argued that Sona Lal, alias Sone Lal Baitha was not carrying any weapon and he did not use the knife to stab the labourer, additional sessions judge Sumedh Kumar Sethi said “no overt or covert act is required to be proved when common intention stands established”.

Delhi Headlines Today — The Biggest Updates You Need to Know.

Moreover, the fact that the knife or the articles that had been robbed from the victim could not be recovered did not “weaken the prosecution’s case”, the judge said, and convicted Sona of attempt to murder (Section 307 of Indian Penal Code) and voluntarily causing hurt during robbery (Section 394), both read with Section 34 (common intention). In June 2018, Sona, along with co-accused Rafiq Lal and Chandan Rai, lured Mohammad Afroj from Anand Vihar to a secluded spot in east Delhi’s GTB Enclave. There, he was robbed of cash, his mobile phone and other belongings before being stabbed in the abdomen and neck with a knife.After registering an FIR, police apprehended Sona, while his two accomplices absconded and were declared proclaimed offenders. Though the attack left the labourer with grievous injuries in the abdomen and neck, the court held on Jan 14 that IPC Section 397 (robbery or dacoity with the attempt to cause death) could not be applied in Sona’s case because he had not personally used a deadly weapon. The defence flagged discrepancies in Afroj’s account at various stages of examination, but the court rejected the argument, noting the “terror faced by the victim would naturally affect his memory”. The court held since he had categorically identified Sona at every stage, such minor imperfections in his recollection could not be used to discredit his testimony.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *