Delhi District Court
State vs . on 22 September, 2010
1
IN THE COURT OF SURINDER KUMAR SHARMA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - NORTH EAST
KARKARDOOMA COURTS:DELHI
State
Vs.
1.Dinesh Giri
S/o Mahavir Giri
R/o Gali No. 6, Rajiv Nagar,
Harsh Vihar, Delhi. (since expired)
2.Parmod Giri
S/o Mahavir Giri
R/o Gali No. 6, Rajiv Nagar,
Harsh Vihar, Delhi.
3.Ashok Giri
S/o Mahavir Giri
R/o Gali No. 6, Rajiv Nagar,
Harsh Vihar, Delhi.
4 Amit Sharma
S/o Satya Parkash
R/o C-722, Gali No. 22,
Harsh Vihar, Delhi (since expired)
5.Raju
S/o Rati Ram
R/o Village Salap Pur,
Kheda Bizwasan, Delhi.
6. Akhtar
S/o Babu
R/o 2, Inder puri, Loni,
Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page1/16
2
Ghaziabad, U.P. (since expired)
7.Anil Giri
S/o Prem Chand Giri
R/o Gali No. 6, Rajiv Nagar,
Harsh Vihar, Delhi.
8.Akshay Kumar
S/o Gurdass
R/o Vill. Mandoli, Delhi.
FIR NO: 134/06
P.S : Nand Nagri
U.Sec: 323/341/452/384/511/307/506/34 IPC
& 25/27 Arms Act.
Sessions Case No. : 31/08
Date of Institution of case : 06.07.2006
Date on which reserved for Judgment : 08.09.2010
Date of Judgment : 22.09.2010
JUDGMENT:
In brief the case of the prosecution is that on 25.2.2006 S.I. Ajay Singh Negi was posted at Police Station Nand Nagri and on receipt of D.D No.12 regarding a quarrel and firing in Village Mandoli, Badi Maszid, he along with Constable Manoj reached at the spot where ASI Jalbir Singh, HC Anil and Constable Arjun had also reached there. S.I. Ajay Singh Negi conducted inquires from the persons present on the spot and recorded the statement of Nadeem Khan wherein, he has stated that he was residing with his family and Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page2/16 3 was doing the work of agriculture. Their agriculture land was situated at 33 Foota Road near Ahuja Krishi Farm, Harsh Vihar. For the last few days, Dinesh Giri and his associates were insisting him and his family to sell their land to Dinesh Giri whereas they were earning their livelihood by doing farming on their agriculture land. On 25.2.2006 at about 11.00 a.m. he was going to his village Mandoli on his tractor after doing the work in his fields. Accused Parmod Giri and Amit had prevented him near Budh Bazar by overtaking their motor cycle in front of his tractor and they started abusing him and Parmod Giri slapped him by taking him down from the tractor. Both of them threatened him to the effect that they were requesting his father to sell his land to them but he was not paying heed to their request. After about ten minutes of this incident, accused Parmod Giri, Amit Sharma, Ashok Giri and Anil Giri entered his house forcibly armed with lathis and rods. They threatened him and his father and pressurized them to sell their land to them failing which they would kill his father and his entire family members. He has further stated in his complaint that when his father was persuading Parmod Giri and others, then accused Dinesh Giri and Akshay @ Toni along with their two other associates came there armed with lathis and danda. They entered his house forcibly. Dinesh Giri took out a pistol from his dub and pointed the same on his head and threatened his father that he should finalize the deal of land with him failing which they will shoot him. Many people collected outside the Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page3/16 4 house in the street. Dinesh Giri and his associates went out of his house and then Dinesh Giri fired a hot in the air and threatened the public persons gathered there that if anyone would resist him then he will also face the same consequences. He and his father also came there in the street and on seeing him, Dinesh Giri fired a shot aiming at him but he ducked down and saved himself. Thereafter, accused Dinesh Giri and his associates ran towards Sewa Dham Road while threatening them.
On this statement of complainant Nadeem Khan, FIR was registered and investigation was carried out. Accused were arrested. After completion of investigation, challan was filed against the accused persons for the offences punishable U/s 323/341/452/384/511/307/506/34 IPC & 25 of Arms Act.
After supply of copies etc, Ld.M.M committed the case to the court of Sessions.
My Ld.Predecessor vide order dated 09.01.2007 framed a charge for the offences punishable U/s 452/387/307/506/34 IPC against all the accused persons. All the accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.
In support of its case, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses.
PW-4 Nadeem Khan is the complainant. He did not support the case of the prosecution. He has stated that nothing happened with him. On 25.2.2006 at about 11.00 a.m. Parmod Giri Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page4/16 5 and Amit had quarreled with him on the way near Budh Bazar. He complained this fact to his father, then his father scolded him and slapped him. The matter was pacified by his father. Thereafter, Pramod and Amit left the spot. He further stated that after about one hour of this incident, Dinesh had come to his home and had fired a shot which struck against the wall of his house. He was inside the house at that time. He further stated that no other person was present with Dinesh. He had lodged a report naming Dinesh Giri only. This witness has turned hostile and was cross examined by Ld. Addl. P.P. for State. Even in his cross examination by Ld. Addl. P.P. he has not supported the prosecution case. He stated that police had obtained his signatures on a blank paper.
PW-2 is Shaukat Ali, who is also an eye witness of the incident. He deposed that he has agriculture land in Harsh Vihar near Ahuja Farm. A quarrel had taken place between his son Nadeem on one side and the accused persons namely Amit and Parmod on the other side. He rebuked his son as well as accused Amit and Parmod and they had left. After 10/15 minutes accused Dinesh came and started abusing him as well as his son. He advised him not to abuse. Many public persons gathered there. He (Dinesh) fired air shots and left towards Sewa Dham. Thereafter, police came and he did not know as to what happened thereafter.
PW-2 further stated that quarrel had taken place as Dinesh was insisting for purchasing their land and pressuring him to sell his Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page5/16 6 land to him to which he refused. He threatened him that in case he shall not the land to him, the consequences would not be good. He cannot tell about the direction of the shot as he had not noticed about the same properly. He again stated that the gun shot had hit the wall. He further stated that when the shot was fired at that time, none of the accused persons were present there and only Dinesh was there,who fired a shot. He sustained minor injuries when a scuffle had taken place between him and the persons gathered there. None had assaulted him. This witness did not support the prosecution case and was cross- examined by the Ld.Addl.PP for the State.
PW-1 Iqbal Singh is an eye witness. He deposed that on 25.2.2006 he was present in his house and he heard noise of commotion coming from outside. He came out of his house and when he reached near house of Hazi Shaukat Ali, he saw 5-6 boys coming out of his house and they were abusing and extending threats to Hazi Shaukat Ali. Accused persons were saying to Hazi Shaukat Ali that he should sell his field to them otherwise they would kill his son. Dinesh Giri fired a shot in the air and another gunshot was fired on Nadeem Ali son of Hazi Shaukat Ali. However, Nadeem Ali escaped unhurt. He further stated that crowd had collected there and accused persons ran away from there. After about 10-15 minutes police reached at the spot. His statement was recorded by the police during evening hours. Accused persons other than accused Dinesh Giri were having lathies and dandas in their hands.
Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page6/16 7PW-3 Ibrar is also an eye witness of the incident, who has stated on the similar lines of PW-2 Hazi Shaukat Ali. This witness turned hostile and was cross examined by Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State wherein he denied that on 25.2.2006 when he reached the house of Hazi Shaukat Ali, after hearing the noise, he saw that Parmod Giri, Ashok Giri and their two associates who were armed with lathis and dandas were threatening Hazi Shaukat Ali and his son Nadeem Khan inside their house. He also denied that Akshay @ Tony was present and had entered the house of Hazi Shaukat Ali.
PW-7 Hazi Hafij is also an eye witness of the incident. He stated that a quarrel had taken place between Nadeem and at that juncture Dinesh had come and had fired a shot. After the hearing of sound of fire, he went to the spot. None had sustained injuries due to fire. Several persons had gathered there. Accused persons were not present there. This witness has turned hostile and was cross examined by Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State wherein he denied that on the day of incident accused Dinesh Giri along with his associates Aakashy @ Toni and his other two associates entered the house of Hazi Shaukat Ali and Dinesh Giri pointed his country made pistol on the temporal region of Nadeem. He also denied the suggestion that Dinesh and his associates threatened Shaukat and Nadeem to kill.
PW-5 Surjeet Singh is the Photographer, who took the photographs of the spot at the instance of the IO. The developed photographs are Ex.PW-5/A1 to A-6 and the negatives thereof are Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page7/16 8 Ex.PW-5/B-1 to B-6.
PW-6 Constable Raj Yadav recorded DD No. 12 in the Daily Diary Register on receipt of a PCR call regarding a quarrel and firing at Village Mandoli near Badi Masjid and proved the copy of the same as Ex.PW-6/A. PW-9 Constable Vinesh Kumar has taken the exhibits of the present case in a sealed condition sealed with the seal of ASN to FSL Rohini and deposited the same at FSL Rohini in intact condition. After depositing the case property, he handed over the copy of the road certificate to MHC(M).
PW-8 Head Constable Azad Khan was the Duty Officer, who stated that on 25.2.2006 on receipt of rukka from ASI Jalbir Singh which was sent by SI Ajay Singh Negi, he recorded formal FIR in the instant case and proved the copy thereof as Ex-PW 8/A. PW-9 ASI Harpal Singh was the MHC(M) with whom IO SI Ajay Singh Negi deposited the case property in a sealed condition. He proved the copy of the entry in the Register No. 19 as Ex. PW-9/A. PW-10 is Dr. Davendra Kumar, who has proved the MLC of injured Nadeem as Ex. PW-10/A. He deposed that MLC was prepared by Dr. Mohit Kumar, who had left the hospital and his present whereabouts are not known. He identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr.Mohit Kumar as he had had seen him writing and signing during the course of his duties. As per the MLC nature of Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page8/16 9 injuries is simple in nature.
PW-11 is Head Constable Anil Kumar. He stated that on 25.2.2006, he was posted at Police Post Harsh Vihar, Police Station Nand Nagri. On that day at about 1.00 p.m D.D writer informed him that he had to reach at the spot at near Bari Masjid. He along with ASI Jalbir and Ct.Arjun reached at the spot, there SI Ajay Singh Negi met him along with Ct. Manoj. S.I Ajay Singh produced injured Nadeem and Shaukat along with request for medical examination. He along with Ct.Manoj took them to GTB Hospital for medical examination. Both the injured were medically examined. After their medical examination, they collected their MLCs and returned back at the spot and handed over MLCs to the I.O SI Ajay Singh along with the injured.
PW-11 further stated that S.I Ajay Singh inspected the spot and prepared site plan. Ct. Arjun was directed to call the photographer and then scene of crime was got photographed. The bullet lead lying at the spot was taken into police possession by converting the same into pullanda after sealing the same with seal of ASN and seized the same vide memo Ex. PW 4/B. Thereafter, they reached at Budh Vihar Chowk near Kabristan where complainant Nadeem pointed out the spot. The Investigating Officer prepared site plan. S.I Ajay Singh Negi received secret information that some boys were sitting in vacant plot in Rajiv Nagar who were involved in the present case. Thereafter they reached at Gali No.6, where six boys Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page9/16 10 were found sitting. They apprehended all the six boys, who told their names as Ashok Giri, Dinesh Giri, Pramod Giri, Anil Giri, Amit Sharma and Askhay Kumar.
PW-11 further stated that S.I Ajay Singh Negi conducted formal search of accused Dinesh Giri and one country made pistol from right dub and one live cartridge was recovered from left pocket of his pant. The country made pistol was checked which was found containing one fired bullet in chamber. I.O prepared sketch Ex.PW 11/A of the country made pistol, live cartridge and fired cartridge. The same were converted into cloth parcel and sealed with the seal of ASN. After completing Form FSL, same was taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PW 11/B. Accused Pramod Giri produced a lathi which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW4/E. Accused Amit Sharma produced a hockey which was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW4/D. PW-11 further stated that all the accused namely Pramod Giri, Dinesh Giri, Anil Giri, Amit Sharma, Akshay were interrogated and they made disclosure statements Ex.PW11/C, PW11/D, PW 11/E, PW11/F and PWE11/G. All the six accused were arrested vide their arrest memos Ex.PW4/C-1, P 4/C-2, PW 4/C-3, PW 4/C-4, PW 4/C-5 and PW 4/C-6 and their personal search were conducted vide memo Ex. PW 11/H-1, PW 11/H-2, PW 11/H-3, PW11/H-4, PW 11/H-5 and PW 11/H-6.
PW-11 further stated that accused Dinesh Giri was joined Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page10/16 11 in investigation and taken to Loni Bus Stand No.2 and he pointed out the house of their associate Akhtar. Akhtar and Raju were apprehended. They were also got joined in investigation, who made disclosure statements Ex.PW11./J and PW11./K. Both the accused were arrested vide memo Ex.PW4/C-7 and PW 4/-C-8 and their personal search were also conducted vide memo Ex.PW11/L-1 and PW 11/L-2. He identified the case property which was recovered from the possession of the accused Dinesh. The pistol is Ex.P-1 and the used cartridge are collectively Ex.P-2. He also identified the lead as Ex.P-3 which was seized from the spot. He identified the lathi which was produced by Pramod Giri. as Ex.P-4. He identified the hockey as Ex. P-5 which was produced by accused Amit Sharma.
PW-12 S.I Ajay Singh Negi is the Investigating Officer of the case. He stated that on 25/02/06, he was posted as an Incharge of Police Post, Harsh Vihar, P.S Nand Nagari, Delhi. On that day on receipt of DD No. 12 regarding some firing near Badi Maszid, Village Mandoli, Delhi. He instructed the duty Munshi to send the police force to the above said place. He along with Ct. Manoj rushed to that place. On the spot, ASI Jalbir Singh, HC Anil and Ct. Arjun had also reached there. He conducted inquiries from the persons present on the spot and he recorded the statement of Nadeem which is Ex. PW-4/A, on which he made an endorsement and prepared Rukka Ex.PW-12/A and got the the case registered through ASI Jaibir Singh in the PS Nand Nagari. In the meantime, Nadeem Khan and his father Shaukat Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page11/16 12 Ali expressed their willingness to get themselves medically examined as they had been injured in the incident. He sent both the injured persons with Ct. Manoj and HC Anil to GTB Hospital for their medical examination. Thereafter, he conducted local inquiry on the spot. In the meantime, ASI Jalbir Singh came back to the spot with Rukka and the copy of FIR and handed over the same to him. During inquiry, he recorded the statement of one Hazi Hafiz U/s 161 Cr.P.C. He also recorded the statement of independent PWs namely Ibrar and Iqbal Singh U/s 161 Cr.P.C. HC Anil along with Ct. Manoj came back to the spot with both the injured persons and handed over their MLCs to him. He called the private photographer on the spot through Ct. Arjun. He inspected the site at the instance of Nadeem Khan and prepared the site plan Ex. PW12/B. The place of occurrence was photographed by the private photographer Sujeet.
PW-12 further stated that on the spot one bullet lead was lying, same was seized vide Ex. PW-4/B. He prepared the site plan Ex. PW-12/C of the said place at the instance of Nadeem. On that day, he received a secret information that accused Dinesh Giri and his associates wanted in the present case were hiding in a Chappar in Rajiv Nagar. Accordingly, He along with other staff reached there and conducted raid and apprehended six persons and all of them were identified by Nadeem being the same, who were involved in the incident of the present case. The names of those six persons were revealed as Pramod Giri, Dinesh Giri, Ashok Giri, Anil Giri, Akshay Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page12/16 13 and Amit Sharma. From the possession of the accused Dinesh Giri, one country made pistol .315 bore along with one fired cartridge case inside and one live cartridge of .315 bore were recovered. He prepared the sketch of the the same as Ex. PW-11/A and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW-11/B. During investigation, he arrested all the accused persons and recorded their disclosure statements. Accused Amit Sharma produced a hockey before him and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/D. Accused Pramod Giri produced one lathi and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW- 4/E. The recovered katta, cartridges and bullet lead were sent to FSL for their examination. The result of FSL is Ex. PW-12/D. After completing the investigation, the challan was prepared and filed in the court.
Statements of accused persons were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C wherein they denied allegations against them and alleged that they have been falsely implicated in this case.
None of the accused has led any evidence in defence. I have heard Sh. Mukul Kumar Addl.P.P for the State and Sh. Ravinder Kumar Ld. Counsel for the accused persons. I have also gone through the case file.
The perusal of the file shows that present case was registered on the statement complainant/injured Nadeem Khan. He has been examined by the prosecution as PW-4. This witness did not support the prosecution case and turned hostile. He has deposed only Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page13/16 14 against the accused Dinesh (since expired) by stating that Dinesh had come to his home and had fired a shot which was stuck against the wall of his house and he was inside the house at that time. He further stated that he lodged a report in the name of Dinesh Giri only, who has since expired. This witness was cross examined by Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State but even then, he did not support the support the prosecution case. The perusal of testimony of this witness shows that no incriminating evidence has come on record against the accused persons to connect them with the commission of offence.
As per the prosecution case, PW-I Iqbal Singh, PW-2 Shaukat Ali, PW-3 Ibrar and PW-7 Hazi Hafij were the eye witnesses of the incident. The perusal of the statement of PW-I Iqbal Singh shows that this witness has stated that accused persons were saying to PW-2 Hazi Shaukat Ali that he should sell his field to them otherwise they would kill his son. He has further stated that Dinesh Giri filed a shot in the air and he fired another shot on Nadeem Ali whereas PW-2 Shaukat Ali has stated that quarrel had taken place as Dinesh was insisting for purchasing their land. He further stated that none had assaulted him. It is also important to note that PW-2 Shaukat Ali was cross examined by Ld. Addl. P.P and he denied the suggestion put by Ld. Addl. P.P. that Parmod Giri, Ashok Giri,Amit Sharma, Anail Giri who had already threatened him came there armed with lathi and rod and forcibly entered his house and started threatening him and his son with a view to sell his land to them failing which they would kill him Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page14/16 15 and his family members. He has voluntarily stated that only accused Parmod Giri and Amit Sharma came to him but they were not armed with any weapon. PW-1 Iqbal has stated in his cross examination that when he reached at the spot the assailants were leaving the spot after incident. He had seen accused Dinesh Giri while going away from the spot but he could not see the faces of other accused persons. Therefore, the testimony of PW-1 Iqbal Singh and PW-2 Shaukat Ali, it is clear that they have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have deposed only against the accused Dinesh Giri who has since expired.
Now, I come to the testimonies of PW-3 Ibrar and PW-7 Hazi Hafij. The perusal of their statements reveal that they did not support the case of the prosecution. Both of them have also deposed against the accused Dinesh Giri regarding the threats and firing of shot in the air. They did not depose against the other accused persons.
Therefore, from the perusal of the statements of prosecution witnesses, there is not even an iota of evidence against the accused persons which could prove that it were the accused persons who on 25.2.2006, in furtherance of their common intention, committed criminal house tress-pass and attempted to induce Nadeem Khan and Shaukat Ali to execute sale deed of their land in their favour and put them in the fear of death and wrongfully restrained Nadeem and fired a gun shot him and criminally intimidated Nadeem Khan and Shaukat Ali.
Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page15/16 16Remaining witnesses examined by the prosecution are either the police officials who came into action after the registration of the FIR and the doctor who examined injured Nadeem Khan. Their testimony cannot give any benefit to the prosecution in any way.
Accordingly, all accused persons are acquitted of the charges against them. Their bail bond stands cancelled and surety are discharged.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open Court on this 22.09.2010 (Surinder Kumar Sharma) Additional Sessions Judge (North East) Karkardooma Courts, Delhi Sessions Case No.31/2008 Page16/16