Delhi court convicts two for stabbing 'golgappa' vendor over payment row

The court rejected defence arguments on the accused not intending to cause the death of Jagram, as it noted the prosecution had proved that the stab injuries were caused by a sharp-edged weapon and the medicolegal case MLC corroborates the same to be dangerous to his life.

A Delhi court has convicted two men for attempting to murder a 'golgappa' vendor who was stabbed multiple times after he demanded payment for the snacks served by him in Chandni Chowk in 2018. Additional Sessions Judge Virender Kumar Kharta held accused Javed and Anuj guilty under Section 307 (attempt to murder) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Co-accused Arman had absconded and had been declared a proclaimed offender in the case. The accused along with two other men allegedly attacked vendor Jagram on February 28, 2018 near the Kodiya Pul traffic signal at Chandni Chowk after he asked them to pay for the snacks they had consumed. According to the prosecution, three of the assailants caught hold of the vendor while one of them stabbed him two to three times in the abdomen with a knife. The injured person was initially taken to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital and later treated at RML Hospital, where doctors opined that the injuries were ''dangerous'' in nature. In its judgment, the court relied on the consistent testimonies of the injured complainant and an eyewitness, both of whom identified the accused during the trial. From both of their testimonies, the judge deduced that the accused persons did not want to make payment for the snacks eaten by them and when Jagram asked for money, they got annoyed and agreed to beat him and stab him with a knife. ''This court is of the considered opinion that accused persons had sufficient motive to commit the offence and the prosecution has successfully established the motive for the commission of the offence by the accused persons in the present case,'' the court observed in its judgment dated February 7. The judge also held the two prosecution witnesses to be of ''sterling quality'' as ''their versions are natural and they have also withstood the test of cross-examination''. The court found their testimonies to be ''clear, cogent, credible, trustworthy and consistent'' and to be ''corroborated by the other prosecution witnesses, medical evidence and scientific evidence on record and the circumstances''. Further, the court noted ''accused persons have failed to put any dent on the investigation'' conducted by the investigating officer. The judge held that the manner of assault clearly attracted the offence of attempt to murder. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses, including the injured vendor, an eyewitness, police officials and doctors. The court also relied on the forensic science laboratory report, which found that the DNA profile generated from the knife and the victim's shirt matched the blood sample of the injured. The court rejected the defence arguments about procedural lapses in the recovery of the weapon as the prosecution was able to provide a detailed account with several witnesses that confirmed there had been no tampering of evidence. The court rejected defence arguments on the accused not intending to cause the death of Jagram, as it noted the prosecution had proved that the stab injuries were caused by a sharp-edged weapon and the medicolegal case (MLC) corroborates the same to be dangerous to his life. ''The case squarely falls within the purview of Sec. 307 IPC and intention as well as knowledge to commit murder of Jagram can be attributed to the accused persons as they voluntarily caused the said injuries on the person of Jagram by using a knife,'' said the court. The matter has been listed for hearing on the quantum of sentence on February 24.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)