Delhi District Court
State vs . Nadeem Afroz on 30 August, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SHRI KULDEEP NARAYAN, ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE/EAST/KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
FIR No. 506/02
PS: Preet Vihar
U/s: 387/506 IPC
State Vs. Nadeem Afroz
JUDGMENT
a. Unique ID No. of the case : 02402R0192802003
b. Case No. : 506/02
c. Date of commission of offence : 18.12.2002
d. Date of institution : 06.03.2003
e. Name of the complainant : Sh. Kishore Vig.
S/o Sh. Bishamber Lal,
R/o 16/99, Geeta Colony,
Delhi.
f. Name of the accused. : Nadeem Afroz
S/o Sh. Azamtulla,
R/o 135, Khureji Khas,
Delhi.
g. The offence complained of : U/s 387/506 IPC
h. The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
i. Order reserved on : not reserved
j. Final order : Acquitted
k. Date of order : 30.08.2013
Brief statement of the reasons for the decision:
1. The brief facts of the prosecution are that in the evening of 18.12.2002 at about 7:00 p.m. at the shop of the complainant Kishore at 16/99, Geeta Colony, Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Preet Vihar, the accused had tried to commit the offence of extortion of the mobile phone and had threatened to hit the complainant with bullet and kill him for noncompliance. Thus, the accused had attempted to put the complainant Kishore in fear of death and grievous hurt. Thereby committing the offence of extortion punishable U/s. 387 IPC.
2. Subsequently, on the complaint of the complainant, an FIR No. 506/02 U/s. 387/506 IPC was registered and investigation was carried out.
3. After completion of the investigation, chargesheet was submitted u/s 175 Cr.P.C. and the accused was summoned to face trial.
4. A primafacie case U/s. 387 IPC was made out against the accused and charge was framed against him vide order dt. 24.03.2003, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter, the matter was listed for prosecution evidence.
5. The prosecution got examined Sh. Kishore Vig as PW1, HC Chander Pal as PW2, Sh. Jagdish Lal as PW3, Sh. Gopal Das as PW4, Ct. Ram Singh as PW5, Ct. Ratan as PW6, Ct. Devender as PW7 and HC Dev Dutt as PW8 in all.
6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused is recorded U/s. 281 Cr.P.C. r/w Sec. 313 Cr.P.C separately, wherein, he categorically denied all the allegations levelled against him when all the materials and evidences were put to him and stated that he had not tried to commit any extortion as alleged. He further stated that he had gone to the shop of the complainant to get his mobile phone repaired and on asking more money by the complainant, some altercation had taken place. He further stated that he was picked up by the police official from in front of Khuraji bus stop on the complaint of the complainant and was falsely implicated in the present case. Further, the accused has stated that he does not want to lead any other evidence in his defence.
7. I heard arguments from both sides and have perused the material available on record.
8. To bring home the aforesaid charge to the accused, the prosecution got examined Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) on whose complaint, the present FIR was registered. Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) has proved his complaint Ex.PW1/A made to the police. Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) had admitted in his complaint that on the day of the incident accused Nadeem came to his shop and asked for a mobile phone, which he refused saying that he had no mobile. On this, accused had threatened that if he does not get the mobile, he would disfigure the shop. Thereafter, the complainant made a call at 100 number and his statement was recorded by the police. In his cross examination, the complainant Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) has stated that the accused was not carrying any katta in his hand when he visited his shop. The complainant further stated that the accused had not threatened to kill him with a revolver, if he did not hand over the mobile phone. In his cross, Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) has further stated that the accused after the incident has apologized to him. He has further stated that he is not supporting the case of the prosecution.
9. Ct. Ratan (PW6) deposed that he had recorded the disclosure statement made by the accused which is Ex. PW6/C. Thereafter, the accused Nadeem Afroz had produced a country made pistol of .315 bore, one cartridge of .315 bore from the upper side of the bed in his house, when he reached there accompanied with him. The said pistol has been correctly by the accused present in the Court. In his cross, Ct. Ratan (PW6) has stated that the place of recovery is surrounded by residential area and a primary school.
10.The prosecution has further examined Ct. Devender (PW7). He has deposed that he was on patrolling duty on the said day of the incident. He had accompanied the IO to the house of the accused, where the recovery of the case property was made. He collaborates the statement of Ct. Ratan (PW6). However, in his cross examination, Ct. Devender (PW7) has stated that the place of recovery was surrounded by residential houses. Ct. Devender (PW7) has further stated that they had asked 45 public persons to join the investigation, but none agreed to join the investigation. No written notice was also given to the public persons, who had refused to join the investigation. It has been further admitted by Ct. Devender (PW7) that accused was previously involved in many cases and the same was within his knowledge.
11.HC Dev Dutt was examined by the prosecution as PW8, who has stated that on the said date of incident, he was posted at PS Preet Vihar and after receiving DD No. 25A, he reached at the spot but neither the complainant nor any eye witness was there and due to which DD No. 25A was kept pending. It has been further stated by HC Dev Dutt (PW8) that on the next day, the complainant Kishore Vig came to PS and recorded a statement vide Ex. PW1/A and got the FIR registered U/s. 387/506 IPC. It has been further stated by HC Dev Dutt (PW8) that on receiving the secret information that the accused was present at MCD School, Khureji, he was apprehended. It has been further stated by HC Dev Dutt (PW8), that he had asked 34 public persons to join the raiding party but none of them agreed to join the same and thereafter, he arrested the accused vide arrest Ex. PW6/A.
12.In his cross, HC Dev Dutt (PW8) admits that the place of recovery of the case property is surrounded by residential houses. It has been further admitted by HC Dev Dutt (PW8) that public persons were passing from the surrounding area but they refused to join the investigation. It has been further admitted by HC Dev Dutt (PW8), that he had not given any notice to them.
13.The prosecution has also examined HC Chander Kumar as PW2, Sh. Jagdish Lal as PW3, Sh. Gopal Das as PW4, all of whom had turned hostile and denied to say anything.
14.No other evidence has been led by the prosecution. In view of the evidence of Ct. Ratan (PW6), Ct. Devender (PW7) & HC Dev Dutt (PW8), no proper explanation has been led, as to why, the said recovery of the case property could not be done in the presence of the public persons. It is further an admitted fact by all these prosecution witnesses that the place of recovery was surrounded by the residential houses and that few public persons were also present there. Further, in view of the fact that the rest of prosecution witnesses had turned hostile, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts. The main witness who also is the complainant himself i.e Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) has himself contradicted his testimony by stating that the accused was not carrying any katta when he came to his shop. Further, Sh. Kishore Vig (PW1) also appears to have condoned the act of the accused by stating that after the said incident, the accused has apologized to him.
15.It is a settled law that in a criminal case the prosecution is duty bound to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts and if there is any doubt in the prosecution version, the accused is entitled to be given the benefit of doubt.
16.In my considered opinion, the prosecution has miserably failed to make out a case of extortion U/s. 387 IPC. Therefore, the accused deserves acquittal and is accordingly acquitted.
17.Hence, the accused Nadeem Afroz is acquitted qua commission of offence punishable U/s 387 IPC.
Announced in the open court on 30.08.2013.
(KULDEEP NARAYAN) ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EAST/KARKARDOOMA CORTS DELHI.