Delhi District Court
State vs . Isha Ahmad on 10 December, 2015
IN THE COURT OF Ms. SHEETAL CHAUDHARY PRADHAN:
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE10 (SOUTHEAST), SAKET
COURTS:NEW DELHI
State Vs. Isha Ahmad
FIR No. 730/95
U/s 411/174A IPC
P.S. Sriniwaspuri
J U D G M E N T
Serial No. of the Case : 82/2/14
Unique Identification No. : 02403R0018871997
Date of Institution : 19.09.1997
Date on which case reserved for
judgment : 08.12.2015
Date of judgment : 10.12.2015
Name of the complainant : Firoz Alam
S/o Lt. Sh. Nizamuddin
R/o G14A, Abul Fazal
Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New
Delhi.
FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.1 of 10
Date of the commission of offence : 13.09.1995
Name of accused : (i) Isha Ahmed
S/o Sh. Zamer Ahmed.
R/o F27, Batla House,
Okhla, New Delhi. (already
acquitted vide judgment
dated 06.06.2008)
(ii) Banwari Lal
S/o Lt. Sh. Horam,
R/o Village Jasola,
Badarpur, New Delhi.
Offence complained of : U/s 379/411 IPC
Offence charged of : U/s 411/174A IPC
Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
Final order : Acquitted u/s 411 IPC
Convicted u/s 174A IPC
Date of Institution : 19.09.1997
Date on which case reserved
for judgment : 08.12.2015
Date of judgment : 10.12.2015
FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.2 of 10
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR
THE DECISION OF THE CASE
BRIEF FACTS:
Briefly the case of the prosecution is that the present FIR was registered on a complaint of complainant Firoz Alam wherein he stated that on 13.09.1995 while he was at the house, he parked his motor cycle bearing registration No.BR401907 of black colour model 1991 having chasis no.ILI255834 and engine No. ILI255834 outside his house and when he saw at 10:25 pm he found that his motor cycle was missing.
2. On the basis of the above mentioned complaint, the present FIR was registered. Investigation was carried out and on the conclusion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed. Copy of the charge sheet was supplied to the accused persons in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C.
3. On the basis of material placed on record, charge was framed against both the accused Banwari Lal and Isha Ahmad under Section 411 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter, accused Isha Ahmad was acquitted vide judgment dated 06.06.2008 as accused Banwari Lal was declared proclaimed offender. Thereafter, accused Banwari Lal was apprehended on 26.10.2013 and subsequently charged for the FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.3 of 10 offence punishable u/s 174A IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The matter was fixed for prosecution evidence. To prove its case the prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses. PE was closed on 13.10.2015 and subsequently statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 05.12.2015.
4. It is evident to discuss the testimonies of all the prosecution witnesses in the present matter.
PW 1 Ct. Ram Karan who deposed that while he was posted at PS Sriniwaspuri, he received the complaint of Firoz Alam and IO recorded the statement of complainant and prepared rukka which was handed over to him for registration of FIR and thereafter he got the FIR registered in the present matter.
Opportunity to crossexamine PW1 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW1.
PW 2 IO Mahkar Singh deposed that on 13.09.95 while he was posted as ASI, he received a complaint from PP Okhla and thereafter he recorded the statement of complainant who had reported theft of his motor cycle make Yamaha bearing registration No.BR401907 of black colour and the same was recorded by him vide Ex.PW2/A and therefore he endorsed rukka Ex.PW2/B. He endorsed the rukka and gave to Ct. Ram Karan for FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.4 of 10 registration of FIR and thereafter PW1 Ct. Ram Karan got the FIR registered and came back with copy of FIR and original rukka and handed over to him. He prepared the site plan Ex.PW2/C at the instance of complainant and search for the accused. He got the wireless message flashed and recorded the statement of witnesses u/s 161 CrPC. On 17.09.1995, he received information from PS sriniwaspuri that the aforesaid stolen motor cycle had been recovered from two accused and upon receiving the same information, he applied for production warrants on 26.09.95 and formally arrested accused Isha Ahmed (since acquitted) and accused Banwari Lal in the matter and completed the investigation and prepared the challan.
Opportunity to crossexamine PW2 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW2.
PW 3 Ct. Mukesh deposed that on 17.09.95 while he was posted at PP Sriniwaspuri, PS Badarpur, he joined the investigation with IO/ASI Siya Ram and reached at the spot at DEblock, Sarita Vihar alongwith accused Banwari Lal and Isha Ahmad and on the pointing out of the accused persons recovered a motor cycle bearing registration No.BR401907 and recorded the disclosure statement of accused Banwari Lal vide memo Ex. Mark A and IO also recorded the disclosure statement of accused Isha Ahmad vide Mark D. IO prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW3/A at the instance of accused Banwari Lal and the motor cycle was seized vide FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.5 of 10 Ex.PW3/D. Thereafter, they came back to PP Sriniwaspuri.
PW4 Retired SI Siya Ram deposed that in the intervening night of 16/17.09.1995 while he was posted at PP Sriniwaspuri, he alongwith Ct. Suresh and Ct. Mukesh went for patrolling duty in the area of Madanpur Khadar. Their duty hours were from 12:00 (midnight) to 04:00am and during patrolling they found one motor cycle which was coming from the side of Madanpur Khadar and going towards Sarita Vihar and on suspicion they signalled the same to stop but the motor cyclist alongwith pillion rider did not stop and tried to run away. Thereafter, he alongwith other police officials chased the motor cycle and apprehended them at Eblock of Sarita Vihar and upon enquiry, the name of the persons were revealed to be Banwari Lal and Isha Ahmad. He interrogated both the accused and recorded their disclosure statement vide Mark A and Mark B. The first number of registration number of the motor cycle was found to be erased and upon inquiry he found that the motor cycle was reported to be stolen from the area of Sriniwaspuri. The aforesaid motor cycle was seized vide Ex.PW3/B and the case FIR No.439/95 at PS Badarpur was registered. Both the accused took him to the place of theft and upon the pointing out, a memo was prepared vide Ex.PW3/A and registration number of the motor cycle was found to be BR401907. The photographs of the motor cycle were Ex.PX.
FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.6 of 10 PW5 ASI Parminder Kumar deposed that on 13.09.1995 he was posted at PS Sriniwaspuri and he registered the FIR of the present matter vide Ex.PW5/B on rukka Ex.PW5/A. Opportunity to crossexamine PW5 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW5.
PW6 HC Suresh Kumar deposed on the lines of PW4 and therefore the same is not being repeated for the sake of brevity.
Opportunity to crossexamine PW6 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW6.
PW7 HC Narender Kumar deposed that on 26.10.2013 he was posted at PS sriniwaspuri and he alongwith HC Virender Singh, Ct. Sunil went to village Mampur, PS Inchauli, District Meerut, U.P. in search of accused Banwari Lal who was declared Proclaimed Offender on 06.06.2008 and at the instance of secret informer, accused was arrested vide memo Mark X and his personal search was conducted. Information regarding his arrest was given to his brother and thereafter information regarding his arrest was also given to PS Sriniwaspuri vide DD No.19A dated 26.10.2013 and kalandra vide DD No.17A was prepared and the same was mark A. Opportunity to crossexamine PW7 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW7.
PW8 ASI Ranpal Singh deposed that on 25.06.2015 while he FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.7 of 10 was posted at PS Jamia Nagar, he had received information regarding arrest of accused Banwari Lal who was declared Proclaimed Offender on 06.06.1998 and was apprehended later vide DD No.17A on 26.10.2013. He collected DD No.17A and copy of kalandra, arrest memo and personal search memo and prepared the supplementary charge sheet against the accused Banwari Lal and the same was Ex.PW8/A. Opportunity to crossexamine PW8 was granted to the accused but he did not question anything to PW8.
5. After completion of the prosecution evidence, prosecution evidence was closed and statement of the accused as mandated by Section 313 r/w 281 CrPC was recorded and all the incriminating circumstances came in evidence put to the accused for explanation.
6. No witness was examined by accused in his defence.
7. Learned APP for the State had argued that all the prosecution witnesses had supported the case of the prosecution and all the witnesses in their testimonies have very clearly deposed that supported the case of the prosecution and that the accused was apprehended with a stolen property and also accused failed to appear before the Court during trial and therefore FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.8 of 10 is liable to be convicted for the offences alleged.
8. The Ld. Counsel for the accused has argued that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt and no incriminating evidence has come on record against the accused as the complainant in the present matter could not be summoned and was dropped by the prosecution and other witnesses were formal in nature and no other public witness was examined by the prosecution. It is further argued by ld. Counsel for the accused that in the present matter no recovery witness has substantiated the story of the prosecution and despite the fact that the place of recovery was a public place and no person was joined by the IO during investigation. He has further argued that accused was unaware about the proceedings of the present matter and therefore could not appear before the Court and therefore the accused is liable to be acquitted.
9. I have heard Learned Counsel for accused and Learned APP for the State and gone through the material available on record and has considered the testimony of various witnesses and gone through the evidence on record. I am of the considered view that in the present matter the prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses and all the witnesses are formal in nature and the complainant who was the star witness of FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.9 of 10 prosecution could not be examined and was untraceable. Therefore, in my considered view offence u/s 411 IPC does not stand proved and therefore accused is liable to be acquitted for the offence punishable u/s 411 IPC. If we carefully peruse the testimony of witnesses cited by the prosecution for the offence punishable u/s 174A IPC, it is proved that the accused willfully neglected to appear before the Court during trial and therefore he is convicted for the offence punishable u/s 174A IPC. PW7 and PW8 had deposed against the accused that he was apprehended after he was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 06.06.2008 and therefore accused is convicted for the offence punishable u/s 174A IPC.
10. On the basis of facts and circumstances, the charge against the accused does not stands proved for the offence punishable u/s 411 IPC and therefore accused is acquitted for offence punishable u/s 411 IPC and accused Banwari Lal is convicted for the offence punishable u/s 174A IPC.
Pronounced in open court (SHEETAL CHAUDHARY PRADHAN)
on 10.12.2015 MM10 (SouthEast): Saket Courts:
New Delhi:10.12.2015
FIR No. 730/1995 P.S. Sriniwaspuri State Vs. Isha Ahmad Page No.10 of 10