NEW DELHI, Sept 18: Over four years after a man was booked for culpable homicide for pouring acid over another man, who later died during treatment, a court here has acquitted the accused, saying there were contradictory versions regarding the crime.
The court also underlined that according to the medical report, the victim did not die because of the burn injuries and the scalded area in his body was less than 9 per cent.
Additional Sessions Judge Subhash Kumar Mishra was hearing the case against Golu, who was charged under Section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Related Posts:
According to the prosecution, Golu had an altercation with the victim, following which he fished out a bottle of acid from his pocket and poured it over him, causing burn injuries on his lower body in October 2019.
Four-five days after the incident, the victim was admitted to a government hospital on October 22 where he died the next day, it said, adding the accused was apprehended on a tip-off.
In an order passed on September 10, the court said the victim had told the police and doctors that the offence was committed around four-five days back.
The victim also stated he was fearful of being caught and that some drivers had beaten him at Ghazipur roundabout and poured acid on him, it noted.
The court said, “He (the victim) did not mention as to why he was fearful of being caught when he had committed no offence.
“Aforesaid statement of the victim neither explains the reason behind not making the complaint immediately after the commission of the offence nor the reason behind telling a different fact to the doctor and the police.”
The court also noted that in yet another statement made to doctors, the victim said that he was set ablaze.
“This contradiction further deepens the cloud of doubt on the case of the prosecution,” it said.
The court noted the statement of the victim’s brother that he had confided in him that Golu had poured acid over him, but he could not lodge a complaint as he was ‘busy”.
It said, “Had he been busy with his duty, he could have at least telephonically informed the police about the incident but he chose not to do so. Therefore, considering the statements of the victim and his brother, the reason behind not making the complaint immediately after the commission of the offence and the true story behind the injury suffered by the victim remained elusive.”
The court also noted the doctor’s report which said the cause of death was “uncertain”, and while the wound region of the victim was “healthy”, the burnt area on the body was less than nine per cent.
“It stands established that due to the contradictory versions regarding the way of the commission of the offence and the actual offender, delay in the registration of the FIR and the medical reports, the prosecution has failed to prove its case.
“Accordingly, the accused Golu stands acquitted of the offence, he has been charged with,” said the court. (PTI)
