Delhi District Court
State vs Pradeep Negi And Ors on 13 April, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. POOJA TALWAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC)WEST
TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI
In the matter of:
STATE
Vs.
Pradeep Negi & Ors.
FIR No.173/13
PS: Pashim Vihar East
JUDGMENT
1. Sl. no. of case Sessions Case No.608/18
2. CNR no. DLWT010000122013
3. Date of Institution 24.09.2013
4. Date of Commission of 13.06.2013 offence
5. Name of the accused 1. Pradeep Negi S/o Gajpal Singh R/o A-156, Shardha Puri, Kankar Khera, Merrut Cantt. U.P.
2. Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja S/o Suraj Bhan R/o J-Block, W-70, 220-221, Indra Camp no.2, Vikaspuri, Delhi
3. Rinku S/o Genda Lal R/o House no.226, H.M.P. Block, Raghuveer Nagar, New Delhi-110027 POOJA TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 1 of 39 TALWAR FIR no.173/13 Date: 2026.04.13 15:03:22 +0530
6. Offence Complained of Section 307/34 IPC Section 392/34 IPC Section 394/34 IPC Section 397 IPC
7. Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
8. Date of reserving the 11.04.2026, judgment
9. Final order Acquitted
10. Date of such judgment 13.04.2026 Case of the prosecution
1. Story of the prosecution is that on 13.06.2013 on receipt of DD no.47A SI Rajkumar alongwith Constable Sudhir went to Balaji Hospital where they met injured Naresh Aggarwal who was under treatment and was unfit for giving any statement. Thereafter SI Ganga Ram collected the MLC and exhibits from the hospital. As per the MLC victim sustained injuries by gun shot. After collecting exhibits and inspection of the place of incident FIR under Section 307 IPC and Section 25/27/59 Arms Act was registered.
2. On 15.06.2013 statement of injured Naresh Aggarwal was recorded wherein he stated that on 13.06.2013 at about 8-8:15 PM he went to pick his wife and children from his in-laws house through his Wagon R car. In traffic jam when he was waiting at BG 8 Market Theka Paschim Vihar, the AC of the car was not working so he rolled down the glass of the windows. Two boys came there. One boy peeped inside the glass of the driver side and gagged the victim. The boy took out the keys of the car and when the victim tried to scream for help the boy took POOJA TALWAR out the pistol and hit him on his head. Both the boys alongwith their one other associate fled. He came out from the car and Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 2 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:03:30 +0530 FIR no.173/13 screamed for help and called his relatives. He was taken to hospital by two boys.
3. During the investigation on 21.06.2013 an information was received regarding the arrest of one Pradeep Negi in some other case with illegal pistol and he disclosed about being involved in the present FIR as well.
4. On 11.07.2013 accused Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja was arrested in some other case alongwith one Desi pistol and disclosed his involvement in the present case.
5. Accused Rinku was arrested on 02.08.2013 in some other case. He disclosed that he alongwith his associates Vicky and Pradeep Negi were involved in the present case as well. All the three accused were accordingly arrested. Their TIP proceedings were conducted and accused were sent for trial.
6. Charge
(i) Charge was framed against accused Pradeep Negi, Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja and Rinku for commission of offence under Section 307/34 IPC, 392/34 IPC and Section 394/34 IPC.
(ii) Charge was framed against accused Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja for commission of offence under Section 397 IPC.
Prosecution evidence
7. In order to prove its case prosecution examined ten POOJA TALWAR witnesses as under :-
Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 3 of 39 15:03:37 +0530 FIR no.173/13 Material Witnesses:
(i) PWI: Gopal Aggarwal deposed that:
"I am driving the school van of Shah International Public School, Meera Bagh. Komal Aggarwal is my sister. She came to our house about 10-12 days prior to the incident dated 13.06.2013.
On 13.06.2013, at about 10-10.15 PM, I received a phone call of Sh. Naresh Aggarwal, my brother-in-law/ JIJA that some person had fired upon him. He also told me to reach at the spot i.e. BG-8 Market immediately for admitting him in the hospital. Thereafter, I again received another call from some person who told that my brother-in-law had been taken to Balaji Action Hospital, Paschim Vihar. Thereafter, I along with my sister Komal Aggarwal and some neighbours reached at Balaji Action Hospital and we found Sh. Naresh Aggarwal admitted there.
My brother-in-law Sh. Naresh Aggarwal told to us that some persons had tried to robbed his vehicle and when he resisted, they fired upon him. I made a call on 100 number. Police reached at Balaji Action Hospital and recorded my statement after making enquiry from me."
(ii) PW2: Komal Aggarwal deposed that:
"I am house-maker and sometimes, I used to sit on the STD/ General Store shop situated in my house. I had gone to my maternal home 8-10 days prior to 13.06.2013. On 13.06.2013 in the morning hours my husband Naresh Aggarwal told to me that he will come to take me and my children.
On 13.06.2013 at about 9.30-10.00 PM, I received a phone POOJA call from my husband and he informed that some persons had TALWAR fired upon him at BG-8 Market and he had received bullet Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 4 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:03:44 +0530 injuries on his chest. He also informed that those persons had snatched the key of his Wagon R Car. I made a call on the phone number of my husband and we came to know that my husband was taken to Balaji Action Hospital, Paschim Vihar. Thereafter I along with my brother Gopal Aggarwal and some neighbours of my brother reached at Balaji Action Hospital. Police met me in the hospital. Police recorded my statement on 14.06.2013.
I am the registered owner of the said Wagon R Car bearing registration No.DL2C AL 9507. I had taken the said car on Superdari vide Superdari Nama Ex. PW2/A which bears my signatures at point A. She produced the Wagon R car no.DL-@C-
AL-9507 which was released on Superdari. The Car is Ex.P-1."
(iii) PW3: Naresh Aggarwal (Injured) deposed that:
"I am running a STD & General Store shop from my home. I and my younger brother Dinesh Aggarwal used to sit in this shop. My wife Komal Aggarwal alongwith children had gone to her parental home 10-12 days prior to the date of incident i.e. 13.06.2013.
On 13.06.2013 in the morning I had informed my wife that I would reach to take them back. On the same day in the evening at about 08:00/08:15 PM, I proceeded from my house in Wagon-R car no.DL-2C AL-9507. At about 10:00/10:15 PM when I reached near BG-8 Market, Paschim Vihar, the traffic was slow. Both the front glasses of windows of my car were opened as the AC of car was not working properly. In the meantime, one person came on the window of my side and POOJA TALWAR put his hand on my mouth and one another person came on the other side of window of my car. One more boy was Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 5 of 39 15:03:50 +0530 FIR no.173/13 accompanying them. To save myself, somehow I pulled my hand out of the window and hit on the roof of the car. That boy hit the butt of the pistol on my head. He took away the keys of my car. When I raised alarm, that boy fired on my chest with pistol. After that, all three boys ran away from the spot.
I came out of the car and cried for help but no one helped me. I made telephonic call to my daughter and my brother Dinesh. Thereafter, two Doys came in car and took me to Balaji Action Hospital, Paschim Vihar. After committing the incident, those boys ran away from the spot.
At this stage, the witness has pointed out towards accused Rinku and Pradeep Negi by name present today in the court as those boys (correctly identified). The witness has also pointed out towards accused Vicky as the third boy(correctly identified). Police recorded my statement.
During the course of investigation, I visited Rohini Jail and Tihar Jail for TIP proceedings. In TIP proceedings, I had identified two accused persons namely Rinku and Vicky and I had also signed the documents regarding TIP. The TIP proceedings of accused Pradeep Negi is already Ex.PW9/A bearing my signature at point X. The TIP proceedings of accused Vicky @Vikas @Ganja is already Ex.PW9/B bearing my signature at point X. The TIP proceedings of accused Rinku is already Ex.PW9/G bearing my signature at point X. IO had recorded my statements regarding my visit for TIP in jails.
At this stage, Ld. Addl. PP for State seeks permission to ask leading question from the witness regarding the names of accused persons in TIP proceedings. Heard. Allowed. POOJA TALWAR Q:- Is it correct that you did not identify accused Rinku in judicial TIP? Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 6 of 39 15:03:56 +0530 FIR no.173/13 A:-It is correct that I did not identify accused Rinku in judicial TIP, I was confused in names of accused persons.
(iv) PW4: Sh. Dinesh Aggarwal deposed that:
"I am running a STD and General Store shop at my above said address along with my elder brother namely Naresh Aggarwal. On 13.06.2013 at about 10:15 PM, I received a telephonic call of my brother Naresh Aggarwal who told me that he had received bullet injuries in his chest. Naresh Aggarwal also told me that assailants had snatched the key of his Wagon R car. My brother asked me to reach in the Market of Paschim Vihar. I reached at the spot i.e. BG-8 Market Paschim Vihar with duplicate key of the Wagon R car. The said car was found there but I came to know that my brother Naresh Aggarwal was already shifted to Balaji Hospital.
Police officials were present at the spot. I handed over the duplicate key of the car to police officials and same was seized by them. Police recorded my statement."
(v) PW5: Naveen Deswal deposed that:
"I have been working as a property dealer in village Ranhola, Brahmpuri for the last about two and half years. On 13.06.2013 I had gone to BG-8 Market, Paschim Vihar with my friend Sh. Varun Chauhan at about 9.30 pm. We had eaten something in the market and at about 10.00-10.15 pm, when I was sitting in my car with my friend Sh. Varun Chauhan, I noticed that there was a chaos (bhagdad) in the market and POOJA people were running from here and there. I immediately came TALWAR out of the car and saw that in the market one man was shouting Digitally signed who had kept his hand on his stomach saying that 'Mujhe Goli by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:03 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 7 of 39 FIR no.173/13 lagi hai, mere tin bacche hain aur mujhe hospital le chalo' (I have been shot, I have three children and take me to the hospital). That man was bleeding from his abdomen. I immediately took that man to Balaji Hospital in my car and got him admitted there. My friend Sh. Varun Chauhan also accompanied us to the hospital. I do not remember the name of the injured. The injured had told us on the way that he had been shot by two-three persons who had first snatched the keys of the car from him and thereafter shot him. The mobile phone of the injured was ringing and I responded to the call. One Mr. Gopal had called on the mobile phone of the injured who told me that he was brother in law of the injured. I told him that we were taking the injured to the Balaji Hospital. The police met me in the hospital. My statement was recorded by the police."
Formal Witnesses:
(i) PW6: Dr. Sunil Kumar deposed that on 13.06.2013 at about 10:35 PM, he medically examined injured Naresh Aggarwal S/o Sh. Suraj Mal, aged 26 years male who was brought in the hospital with the alleged history of gun shot, as disclosed by the patient himself near BG-8, Paschim Vihar. He prepared the MLC Ex.PW6/A bearing his signatures at point A. The nature of injury was found dangerous and it was found as a gun shot injury. He referred the patient for Surgery department. The patient was reported unfit for statement.
(ii) PW7: Dr. Rajiv Bansal produced the complete medical record of patient Naresh Aggarwal who remained admitted in the POOJA TALWAR hospital on 13.06.2013 and discharged on 18.06.2013 in satisfactory condition. During that period the patient was given Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 8 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:09 +0530 FIR no.173/13 medical treatment in the hospital by him and Dr. Subhash Aggarwal and team.
Witnesses of Investigation:
(i) PW8: SI Ganga Ram deposed that:
"On 13.06.2013 I was posted at P.S. Paschim Vihar. On that day on receipt of DD No.47A regarding shooting at brother- in-law(JIJA) of caller at BG-8, Paschim Vihar, I along with Ct. Sudhir went to Shri Balaji Action Medical Institute where victim Naresh Aggarwal was found admitted. I obtained his MLC. The patient was unfit for statement and was found admitted in the hospital with alleged history of gun shot.
I received a sealed pullanda containing blood stained clothes of injured Naresh Aggarwal with sample seal from the Balaji Action Hospital. I seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/A bearing my signature at point A. One plastic box containing bullet recovered from the body of injured Naresh Aggarwal duly sealed with the seal of hospital was also handed over to me in the hospital along with the sample seal which I had seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/B bearing my signature at point A. The shoes of the injured were also handed over to me in the hospital which I had seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/C bearing my signature at point A. The articles of the injured i.e. a sum of Rs.1,460/-, driving licence, one matchbox and bidi bundle of 502 Pataka were also handed over to me in the hospital which I had seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/D bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, I along with Ct. Sudhir went to BG-8 Market POOJA where the car of the victim was found. I called the Crime Team TALWAR at the spot. Crime Team reached the spot and got the car Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 9 of 39 Date:
2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:04:17 +0530 inspected. During inspection, one empty cartridge of KF 7.65 was found lying near the driver seat in the car. The same was kept inside an empty matchbox and converted into cloth pullanda and sealed with the seal of GRM and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/E bearing my signature at point A. Crime Team took photographs of the spot. The Incharge, Crime Team handed over the Crime Team Report to me.
I seized the metallic car of injured bearing registration no.DL-2CL-9507 vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/F bearing my signature at point A. No eye witness was found at the spot, hence, I prepared the rukka on the copy of DD no.47A which is Ex.PW8/G bearing my signature at point A. I sent the rukka through Ct. Sudhir to P.S. Paschim Vihar for registration of the FIR.
I had recorded the statements of Incharge and Ct. Jagat Singh, the Photographer of Crime Team. Ct. Sudhir returned to the spot with copy of the FIR No.173/13 and original rukka. I mentioned the particulars of the case on seizure memos Ex.PW8/A to Ex.PW8/F. I also recorded the statement of Dinesh, the brother of victim. I went to the hospital where the wife of injured was found present. I enquired her and recorded her statement. I recorded the statement of Ct. Sudhir. The case property was deposited in the malkhana. I handed over the case file to MHCR on the direction of the SHO.
I can identify the car bearing registration number DL2CAL-9507 if shown to me. At this stage, attention of witness is drawn towards the photographs of the car placed in judicial file. Witness has correctly identified the car in the photographs POOJA TALWAR already Ex.PW13/B1 to B5. The car had also been produced during the examination of PW2 and had been exhibited as Ex.P1. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 10 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:23 +0530 FIR no.173/13 At this stage, MHCM has produced one sealed envelope sealed with the seal of BG, CFSL New Delhi. Seal is now broken, envelope is opened and it is found containing one match box. Match box is taken out which is found containing one fired cartridge case. Same is shown to the witness who correctly identifies the same as was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/E. I can also identify cash amount of Rs.1460/-, one DL bearing No.DL-0719940066513, one match box and one biri bandal of 502 Pataka, one pair of black colour shoe if shown to me.
At this stage it is submitted by learned counsels Sh.B.C.Jain for accused Rinku, Sh. Nikhil Yadav for accused Pradeep and Vicky that they do not dispute the identity of case property as the same has already been released by the order of court."
(ii) PW9: Sh. Naresh Kumar Laka Ld. Senior Civil Judge, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Court conducted the TIP proceedings of accused pradeep Negi vide application Ex.PW9/X and proceedings Ex.PW9/A. He also conducted TIP proceedings of accused Vicky @ Vikas vide application Ex.PW9/Y and proceedings Ex.PW9/D. TIP Proceedings of accused Rinku also conducted vide application Ex.PW9/Z and proceedings are Ex.PW9/G.
(iii) PW10: ASI Madan Lal deposed that on the intervening night of 13/14.06.2013 at about 3.50 AM he received a rukka prepared POOJA and sent by SI Ganga Ram through Ct. Sudhir. On the basis of TALWAR said rukka he got registered the present FIR on computer through Digitally signed by POOJA SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 11 of 39 TALWAR FIR no.173/13 Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:29 +0530 computer operator. He produced the original FIR as Ex.PW10/A. He made endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW10/B. Certificate under Section 65B of Evidence Act is Ex.PW10/C.
(iv) PW11: HC Chhote Lal deposed that on 11.07.2013 he was working as duty officer from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. At about 2.30 PM SI Sukhram Pal from Special staff North West District had informed him on telephone regarding arrest of accused Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja in the case FIR no.297/13 PS Subhash Place. He recorded this message in daily diary vide DD no.23A. Copy of same is Ex.PW11/A. The copy of DD no.23 A was handed over to MHCM for necessary action.
(v) PW12: WHC Sunita deposed that on 21.06.2013 at about 12:55 PM she receied an information on telephone from ASI Surender Singh from PS Khyala regarding arrest of accused Pradeep Negi in case FIR no.231/13 under Section 25 Arms Act. PS Khyala also informed that accused Pradeep Negi had disclosure statement about his involvement in the FIR no.173/13. ASI Surender Singh also informed him that on that day accused pradeep Negi was to be produced in other court. He recorded this information into writing vide DD no.48B in daily diary register. The certified copy of same is Ex.PW12/A. He informed about the same to the IO by telephone.
(vi) PW13: Ct. Jagat Singh deposed that on 14.06.2013 he was posted as photographer in the mobile crime team west. On that day after receiving information from District Control Room, POOJA West, he alongwith SI Aminder Singh and another members of TALWAR his team reached at PS Paschim Vihar where they inspected a Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 12 of 39 Date:
2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:04:36 +0530 Wagon-R car bearing registration no.DL-DCL-9507 was parked there. He took five photographs of the car from different angles and also took from inside and outside of the car. During inspection they found one fired cartridge under the driver seat of the car. He produced the negatives of the said photographs as Ex.PW13/A-1 to Ex.PW13/A-5 and the photographs are Ex.PW13/B-1 to Ex.PW13/B-5.
(vii) PW14: Inspector Amrinder Kumar deposed that on 14.06.2013 on receipt of information qua firing at BG-8, Paschim Vihar, he alongwith his team reached the spot. There they found one Wagon-R car bearing no.DL-2CAL-9507 parked on the road which was inspected by them. One empty cartridge was found near driver seat. Ct. Jagat took photographs of the said car and spot. He prepared crime team report SOC no.612/13 Ex.PW14/A bearing his signatures at point A. The proficient tried to lift chance print but in vain. He handed over his report to SI Ganga Ram.
(viii) PW15: HC Sudhir deposed that on13.6.2013 an information regarding DD No.47A in respect of admission of injured in Action Balaji Hospital was given by Duty Officer to IO SI Ganga Ram. On receipt of said information, he alongwith IO went to Action Balaji Hospital. From there MLC of injured Naresh Aggarwal was collected. Injured was UNFIT FOR STATEMENT. Doctor concerned gave to IO a sealed pullanda of clothes of injured, one plastic jar in sealed condition containing bullet which was removed from the wound of injured, pair of POOJA TALWAR shoes of injured, some cash, one match box and one bundle of bidi and one driving license. These articles alongwith sample seal Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:42 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 13 of 39 FIR no.173/13 of hospital were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/A, PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D respectively which bear his signatures at point B on each.
Thereafter they went to the spot i.e. BG-8 Market, Paschim Vihar, Delhi. There they found Wagon R car of injured bearing registration number DL-2CAL-9507. Crime Team was called on the spot for inspecting the above-mentioned car and spot. The car was inspected by crime team and one bullet lead/empty cartridge was recovered from near driver seat of the car. The Incharge of Crime Team handed over his report to IO. A pullanda of the above mentioned bullet lead/empty cartridge was prepared and same was sealed with the seal of GRM vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/E bearing his signatures at point B. Above mentioned car was also taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/F bearing his signatures at point B. Ruqqa was prepared by IO by endorsing above mentioned DD No.47A and same was handed over to him for getting the case FIR registered.
Car Ex.P1 is not disputed by the defence counsel. One match box containing one cartridge case recovered from above mentioned car is Ex.P2 identified by the witness.
(ix) PW16: Ct. Sajjan Kumar deposed that on 20.06.2013 he along with Ct. Harish was on patrolling duty on government motorcycle. At about 07:50 pm, when they reached first gate of RGB Flats, Raghubir Nagar, a secret informer met him and informed him that the culprits wanted in case PS Mianwali Nagar, who committed robbery last night, were sitting in a park and their motorcycles was also parked near the park. It was also POOJA informed that the culprits were distributing robbed money TALWAR amongst them. On this, he asked 3-4 public persons to join us but Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 14 of 39 Date:
2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:04:53 +0530 they refused to join us and left the place. In the meantime, two motorcycles came from a gali/street towards gate of RGB flats and secret informer told us that the culprits were coming on those motorcycles. At that time, he was driving government motorcycle. He immediately moved towards those motorcycles and signaled them to stop but one motorcyclist fled away from there. He tried to stop another motorcycle make Passion Pro on which two persons were sitting and struck his motorcycle against that motorcycle due to which both riders fell on the ground. Thereafter, pillion rider tried to run away. He chased him at some distance but due to dark, he vanished. Thereafter, he came back to the spot. In the meantime, Ct.Harish apprehended the driver of said motorcycle. He took search of that person. The name of that person was revealed as Pradeep Negi. From his search, one loaded pistol was found. He informed in the police station that a person with loaded pistol was apprehended with a motorcycle bearing registration No.DL-8S-AF-8943 and requested to send the IO. Thereafter, IO/ASI Surender came there and they handed over accused Pradeep Negi along with loaded pistol and motorcycle to him. Before proceeding further, IO also requested 4-5 public persons to join the proceeding but none agreed and left the spot without disclosing their particulars. Thereafter, IO unloaded the pistol from which 5 rounds were found and prepared sketch of pistol and rounds vide memo Mark- A which bears my signature at point A. The said pistol and rounds were kept in a pullanda and sealed with the seal of SS. FSL form was also filled up by the IO. The pistol and rounds were taken into POOJA possession vide copy of seizure memo Mark-B bearing his TALWAR signatures at point A. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:04:59 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 15 of 39 FIR no.173/13 The information regarding the above-mentioned motorcycle make Passion Pro was collected from Control Room and came to know that said motorcycle was stolen property from the area of PS Loni, Ghaziabad and real registration number of the said motor-cycle was as DL-9S-AH-5903. The said motorcycle was taken into possession u/s 102 Cr.P.C. A ruqqa was prepared by ASI Surender and same was handed over to me for getting the case registered at PS Khayla. He went to PS Khyala and on the basis of above mentioned ruqqa, case FIR No.231/13 was got registered. Thereafter, he returned at the spot and handed over rukka and copy of FIR to ASI Surender. A site plan of the spot was prepared by ASI Surender at the instance of me and Ct.Harish vide copy of site plan Mark-C. During interrogation, accused Pradeep Negi confessed his involvement in the present case also vide copy of disclosure statement Mark-D which bears my signature at point A. Accused Pradeep Negi was also arrested in case FIR No.231/13, PS Khyala vide copy of arrest memo Mark-E which bears my signature at point A. The personal search of accused was also conducted. The case property was deposited in the malkhana. His statement was recorded by the IO of the present case.
(x) PW17: HC Pappu Lal deposed that on 09.07.2013 SI Rajiv Ranjan received a secret information to the effect that Vikas @ Vicky @ Ganja would come at Shakurpur to meet his known person. On this information, raiding party was prepared by the IO consisting of myself and other staff.
POOJA Thereafter on the basis of secret information, accused TALWAR Vikas @Vicky @Ganja and Ravi were apprehended. From the Digitally signed possession of accused Vikas one loaded pistol was recovered. In by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:05:06 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 16 of 39 FIR no.173/13 this regard relevant documents were prepared and the case FIR No.297/13 was got registered at PS Saraswati Vihar. During interrogation, accused Vikas confessed his involvement in the present case. Copy of sketches of above mentioned pistol and cartridges Mark F bearing my signatures at point A. Copy of seizure memo Mark G bearing his signatures at point A. Copy of disclosure statement Mark H bearing his signatures at point A. Copy of arrest memo Mark I bearing his signatures at point A. The information regarding the arrest of accused Vikas was sent to the concerned IO of the present case. He identified the case property.
(xi) PW18: Inspector Rajiv Ranjan deposed that:
"On 09.07.2013, I was posted as Sl with Special Staff North West at AU-block, Haiderpur. On that day at about 10.45 PM, I was present in my officer and one secret informer came in my office and informed that one person namely Vicky @Ganja, who is wanted in many cases of robbery in Delhi, would visit his known in F-Block, Sakarpur in his white Honda City Car bearing no. 1907. I shared this information with Inspector, Special Staff and ACP/OPS, North West, who directed to verify the said secret information. The said secret information was recorded in rojnamcha vide DD No.20 dated 09.07.2013. Thereafter, a raiding team was constituted comprising of me, HC Shahir, HC Rajesh Rana, HC Pappu Lal Meena, HC Chanderveer and Ct. Sripal and departure entry was made vide DD No.21 dated 09.07.2013 at about 11.10 PM. The raiding team along with secret informer reached near Ram Mandir, Road No.43 near POOJA TALWAR Britania Chowk at about 11.30 PM. The secret informer took his position separately and I put barricades opposite Ram Mandir on Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 17 of 39 15:05:12 +0530 FIR no.173/13 the road coming from Rani Bagh towards Britania Chowk. At about 12.30 AM, the secret informer pointed out towards one Honda City Car and left the spot. The said car was got stopped by using barricades, but the driver started driving in reverse direction. I challenged the car driver to stop, but the person sitting next to the car driver on front seat, took out a pistol and fired upon the raiding team. When I along HC Rajesh Rana tried to overpower him, the person alighted from the car and started running towards Rani Bagh i.e. in opposite direction. I along with HC Rajesh Rana overpowered him and pistol was taken from his possession. The name of the said person was revealed as Vicky @ Ganja, who is present in the Court today (correctly identified). The other team members apprehended the driver of the said car, whose name was revealed as Ravi. On search of right side pocket of wearing pant of Ravi, one pistol was found. The pistol recovered from accused Vicky @ Ganja was checked and one live cartridge was found in its barrel, two life cartridges were also found in its magazine and on search of place of scene of crime, one empty cartridge was also found lying on the ground. Accordingly, the sketch of the said recovered pistol was prepared along with live cartridges and empty cartridge. At this stage, the Court clerk Sh. Ravinder Malik of Rohini Court has produce case file of FIR No.297/13, PS Subhash Place u/s 186/353/307/34 IPC.
He has shown the rough sketch of the Country made pistol, 3 live cartridges and 1 empty cartridge and same is compared with the photocopy tagged with the present case file. Same is already Mark 'F' which is now Ex.PW-18/A bearing my POOJA signature at point 'B'. I seized the Country made pistol along with TALWAR the 4 cartridges after preparing a pullinda and sealing it with the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 18 of 39 15:05:19 +0530 FIR no.173/13 seal of 'RS'.
At this stage the record clerk has also shown the original seizure memo of the Country made pistol, 3 live cartridges and 1 empty cartridge and same is compared with the photocopy tagged with the present case file. Same is already Mark 'G' which is now Ex.PW-18/B bearing my signature at point 'A'. Thereafter, I prepared a Tehrir and handed over the same to Const. Sripal for registration of FIR. After registration of FIR, Const. Sripal came to the spot with second IO SI Sukram Pal. I handed over the seizure memo along with the pullinda and accused to the SI Sukram Pal. Site plan was prepared at my instance and then I left the spot. I perused the case property.
At this stage MHC(M) has produced the case property i.e. green colour envelope duly sealed. With the permission of the court the seal is broken and the envelope is opened. On opening the same it is found containing one white colour sealed pullanda is found duly sealed with the seal of RS and bearing the details of the case i.e. FIR no.297/13 PS Subhash Palace(Saraswati Vihar). The said pullanda is opened by breaking the seals and after opening the same it is found containing one fire arm. The said fire arm/pistol is shown to the witness and after seeing the same witness states that it is the same fire arm/pistol which was recovered from accused Vicky. One white colour envelope was also found containing two used and two unused cartridges. The said cartridges are shown to the witness and after seeing the same witness states that these are the same cartridges which were recovered from accused Vicky. The fire arm/pistol is now POOJA Ex.PW18/P1 and the cartridges are collectively Ex.PW18/P2." TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:05:27 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 19 of 39 FIR no.173/13
(xii) PW19: SI Surender Singh deposed that on 20.06.2013 accused Pradeep Negi was arrested by him in FIR no.231/13 PS Khyala. At the time of arrest of accused Pradeep Negi, one pistol containing 5 live cartridges were recovered from his possession, one motorcycle make Hero Honda Passion was also recovered from his possession. He took the same into police possession and prepared seizure memo regarding the same. He recorded his disclosure statement and in which he disclosed about his involvement in the present case along with his two other associates. He recorded his disclosure statement. He told about the arrest of accused Pradeep to IO of present case and handed over to IO of present case the copy of the seizure memo, copy of the sketch of the said pistol and live cartridge, site plan of the place from where accused Pradeep was arrested by him and disclosure statement, arrest memo. The copy of the said documents are on the file and according to the original record of case FIR no.231/13 PS Khyala brought by Sh. Anirudh Maan, Ahlamd in the c/o Ms. Shivali Sharma, Ld. ASJ, THC. The said documents were exhibited as Ex.PW19/A and he stated that said documents bears his signature at Pt. C.
(xiii) PW20: Insp. Sukram Pal deposed that on 10.07.2013 he was present in the office of Special Staff an information was received from Insp. Rajeev Ranjan regarding apprehension of accused persons in the area of Rani Bagh, opposite Sakurpur Village. He went to the said place alone in his own private vehicle. Upon reaching there he met SI Rajeev Ranjan alongwith his team. SI Rajeev Ranjan also produced the accused persons POOJA who were apprehended by him. SI Rajeev Ranjan handed over to TALWAR him the documents and the sealed seized case property. SI Rajeev Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 20 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:05:33 +0530 FIR no.173/13 Ranjan also handed over both the accused persons to him.
He prepared site plan at the instance of SI Rajeev Ranjan. He arrested both the accused persons. The photocopy of arrest memo of accused Vicky @ Vikas is Mark-I bearing his signatures at point B. He also conducted the personal search of accused Vicky @ Vikas alongwith co-accused of that case. He recorded disclosure statement of accused Vicky @ Vikas alongwith co-accused. Disclosure statement of accused Vicky @ Vikas of that case is Mark H bearing his signature at point B. Thereafter the accused persons produced before the concerned court and necessary intimation was given to PS Paschim Vihar about the apprehension of accused Vicky @ Vikas. He handed over the copy of documents of case FIR no.297/13 PS Subhash Palace to the IO of present case. Thereafter, upon completion of investigation of that case, he filed the chargesheet in that case.
(xiv) PW21: Insp. Rajkumar deposed that:
"On 15.06.2013 I was posted at PS Paschim Vihar East as SI. On that day further investigation of the present case was marked to me. I came to know that the injured of the present case was admitted in Balaji Action Hospital. I visited the said injured in the hospital. I enquired about the facts of the present case and recorded his statement u/s 161 CrP.C. Thereafter, I went to the place of occurrence of the offence i.e. BG-8 Market, Paschim Vihar. Upon reaching there I made enquires from the local persons of the market. On 17.06.2013 I again visited Balaji Action hospital. I met brother in law of the injured. The name of brother in law was Gopal Dass, I enquired about the facts of the POOJA TALWAR present case from him. Thereafter, I made to join the investigation the person who had got admitted the injured in the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date:
SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 21 of 39 2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:05:39 +0530 hospital. The name of the said person was Naveen Deswal. On 19.06.2013 the injured got discharged from the hospital. I took him to the spot and at his pointing out I prepared the site plan. The site plan is Ex.PW21/A bearing my signature at point A. On 21.06.2013 I received information from PS Khayala that accused Pradeep Negi of the present case has been got arrested in case FIR no.231/13 PS Khayala. I collected documents pertaining to the present case and thereafter I moved the application for production warrants of the accused. On 27.06.2013 the accused was produced before the concerned court. I also appeared before the concerned court and I also moved an application for interrogation and formal arrest of accused Pradeep Negi. The said application was allowed by the Ld. Court. I formally arrested accused Pradeep Negi, the arrest memo is Ex.PW21/B bearing my signature at point A. I also recorded the disclosure statement of accused Pradeep Negi, same is Ex.PW21/C bearing my signature at point A. I moved the application for TIP of accused Pradeep Negi and day of 02nd July, 2013 was given for the TIP of the accused. The TIP was partially successful. The TIP proceedings are Ex.PW21/D. I also recorded supplementary statement of the injured.
On 08.07.2013 I moved an application for PC remand of accused Pradeep Negi, one day PC remand of accused was granted by the Ld. Court. Thereafter, we took the accused alongwith us for search of co-accused persons, however, the co- accused persons could not be found. Thereafter, accused Pradeep Negi was got remanded to JC. POOJA On 11.07.2013 I received information from PS Subhash TALWAR Place that accused Vikas @ Vicky was arrested in a case of PS Digitally signed by POOJA Subhash Place vide FIR no.297/13 PS Subhash Place and that the TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:05:48 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 22 of 39 FIR no.173/13 said accused had disclosed about his involvement in the present case as well. I collected the relevant documents on 01.08.2013 I moved the application for production warrants of accused Vikas @ Vicky. On 06.08.2013 accused Vikas @ Vicky was produced before the court upon my production warrants, I also went to the concerned court. I also moved an application for interrogation and formal arrest of accused Vicky @ Vikas. The said application was allowed by the Ld. Court. I formally arrested accused Vicky @ Vikas, the arrest memo is Ex.PW21/E bearing my signature at point A. I also recorded the disclosure statement of accused Vicky @ Vikas, same is Ex.PW21/F bearing my signature at point A. I moved the application for TIP of accused Vicky @ Vikas and day of 13.08.2013 was given for the TIP of the accused.
On 02.08.2013 I also received information from PS Punjabi Bagh that third accused of the present case namely Rinku @ Ganja was arrested in case FIR no.230/13 PS Punjabi Bagh. I collected the relevant documents on 02.08.2013 I moved the application for production warrants of accused Rinku @ Ganja. On 12.08.2013 accused Rinku @ Ganja was produced before the court upon my production warrants, I also went to the concerned court. I also moved an application for interrogation and formal arrest of accused Rinku @ Ganja. The said application was allowed by the Ld. Court.
I formally arrested accused Rinku @ Ganja, the arrest memo is Ex.PW21/G bearing my signature at point A. I also recorded the disclosure statement of accused Rinku @ Ganja, POOJA TALWAR same is Ex.PW21/H bearing my signature at point A. I moved the application for TIP of accused Rinku @ Ganja and day of Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR 13.08.2013 was given for the TIP of the accused. Date: 2026.04.13 15:05:56 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 23 of 39 FIR no.173/13 On 13.08.2013 TIP of the accused Vicky was successful. However, the TIP of accused Rinku @ Ganja was failed. TIP proceedings of accused Vicky @ Vikas is Ex.PW21/I. TIP proceedings of accused Rinku @ Ganja is Ex.PW21/J. I recorded supplementary statement of the injured of the present case.
On 16.08.2013 I moved an application for one day PC remand of both accused Vicky and Rinku. The said application was allowed. Thereafter, we searched for the items/articles used for the commission of the offence, however, the same could not be recovered. We got prepared pointing out memo of the place of occurrence of offence. It is stated by the witness during the PC remand of accused Pradeep Negi, he had also got prepared pointing out memo. Pointing out memo of accused Pradeep Negi is Ex.PW21/K bearing my signature at point A. Pointing out memo of accused Rinku is Ex.PW21/L bearing my signature at point A. Pointing out memo of accused Vicky is Ex.PW21/M bearing my signature at point A. During the course of investigation, an application for release of vehicle on superdari was moved by Komal Aggarwal wife of injured.
The same was allowed and the vehicle concerned was released to Komal Aggarwal. I got sent the exhibits of the present case to the FSL. I prepared the charge-sheet and filed the same before the concerned court.
Accused Rinku is appearing in the court through VC, witness has seen the face of accused on the video conferencing platform of the court and correctly identified him. Accused POOJA TALWAR Pradeep Negi and accused Vicky @ Vikas are present in the court today and correctly identified by the witness." Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:06:13 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 24 of 39 FIR no.173/13 Statement of accused persons under Section 313 CrPC.
8. Statement of the accused persons was recorded under Section 313 CrP.C:
(i) Accused Pradeep Negi stated that witnesses have deposed falsely. The police officials in order to bring closure to their pending investigation of the present case falsely implicated him with connivance of other police officials and complainant. The complainant and victim stated against him at behest of the police officials.
(ii) Accused Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja stated that it is a false case.
He had been falsely implicated in the said case as well as in the present case. The alleged weapon had been planted upon him. His photograph was already shown to the witnesses in the police station. The police officials of the present case in order to bring closure to their investigation of the present case have falsely implicated him in connivance with complainant and injured.
(iii) Accused Rinku stated that this is a false case and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
9. In statement under Section 294 CrPC accused persons admitted the documents relied upon by the prosecution and as such evidence of following witness(s) was dispensed with:
1. Ct. Shashi Kapoor No.1735/W, PS PS Punjabi Bagh.
2. Ct. Puneet Kauf No.1745/W PS Punjabi Bagh.
3. ASI Bhagwati Prasad No.2529/W PS Punjabi Bagh.
4. Ahlmad along with case file of FIR No.320/13, PS Punjabi POOJA TALWAR Bagh.
5. Ms. Babita Gulia, Sr. Scientific Officer, CFSL, CBI. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 25 of 39 Date:
2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:06:37 +0530
6. Dr. B.K.Mohapatra, Sr.SO-I (BIO), CFSL, CBI
7. Dr. Suresh Kr. Singla, SSO-I (Sero) CFSL, CВІ Arguments on behalf of the State
10. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that the complainant/injured identified the accused persons in the court. All the prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. There is sufficient evidence on record against the accused persons. They deserve to be convicted.
11. Arguments on behalf of accused
(i) Ld. counsel for accused Rinku, per contra argued that the victim failed to identify him during the TIP proceedings. He identified him in court at the instance of the IO. Accused Rinku was not present at the place of incident. He was arrested in some other case and was later falsely implicated in this case to solve it. No recovery has been affected at his instance. Accused Rinku deserves to be acquitted.
(ii) It is argued on behalf of accused Pradeep Negi that the victim failed to identify him during TIP proceedings. Even in the court during cross-examination he stated that accused Pradeep Negi was not one of the assailants who caused injury to him or robbed him. No recovery has been affected at his instance. He deserves to be acquitted.
(iii) It is argued on behalf of accused Vicky that he has POOJA been falsely implicated. In his cross-examination it is stated by TALWAR the victim that accused Vicky was not the one who caused injury Digitally signed to him. The victim identified him during TIP proceedings as he by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 26 of 39 15:06:44 +0530 FIR no.173/13 was shown to the victim in the police station prior to TIP proceedings. The alleged pistol recovered from accused Vicky is not the one used by the assailants which is evident from the ballistic opinion. Accused deserves to be acquitted.
12. I have heard the arguments advanced by all concerned and have perused the records including documents relied upon by the prosecution carefully.
13. Analysis of Law:
307. Attempt to murder.--Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine;
and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
14. The essential ingredients to prove offence under Section 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder) are: (1) An act done with intention or knowledge to cause death and (2) This act must be performed under such circumstances that if it resulted in death, it would constitute murder.
15. The prosecution must prove the mens rea (guilty mind) and the actus reus (guilty act). Proof of injury is not POOJA TALWAR mandatory, but the act itself must be of a nature that shows the Digitally signed intention or knowledge to cause death. by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:06:51 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 27 of 39 FIR no.173/13
16. Now in order to prove Intention or Knowledge to cause death, prosecution must prove that the Act must be performed with the specific intent to cause death, or with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death.
17. In the five prime point to complete the offence are enumerated below:
1. The Act: The accused must have performed an act that shows a clear intention or knowledge to commit murder.
2. Circumstances: The circumstances surrounding the act must be such that if the act had resulted in death, it would have been considered murder.
3. Risk of Death: The act must be so dangerous and imminently threatening that it carries a high probability of causing death or severe bodily injury, and the accused has no excuse for incurring this risk.
Important Considerations- Proof of Injury is Not Required:
Unlike murder, causing an actual injury is not a necessary element to prove an attempt to murder under Section 307. The focus is on the act and the intention or knowledge behind it.
4. Failed Attempt: A Section 307 offense is, by definition, a failed attempt to commit murder, where the death is not ultimately caused.
5. Severity of the Act: The severity of the offense is determined by the potential risk involved and the circumstances, not merely the eventual outcome.
POOJA TALWAR
18. Robbery is defined under Section 390 punishment for which is defined under Section 392 IPC. Section 390 IPC is Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR reproduced herein under: Date:
2026.04.13 15:06:58 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 28 of 39 FIR no.173/13
390. Robbery.--In all robbery there is either theft or extortion. 1.
Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, s. 117 and the Sch., for "transportation for life" (w.e.f. 1-1-1956). 98 When theft is robbery.--Theft is "robbery" if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
394. Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery.--If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person, and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
397. Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt.--If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any
1. Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, s. 117 and the Sch., for "transportation for life" (w.e.f. 1-1-1956). 99 person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.
Section 34 IPC provides exception to the general rule that no POOJA TALWAR man can be held responsible for an independent act and wrong committed by another. It lays down the principle of joint liability Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 29 of 39 Date:
2026.04.13 FIR no.173/13 15:07:06 +0530 in the doing of a criminal act. The essence of that liability is to be found in the existence of common intention, emanating from the accused leading to the doing of a criminal act in furtherance of such intention. It deals with doing of separate acts, similar or adverse by several persons, if all are done in furtherance of common intention, each person is liable for the result thereof as if he had done the act himself. The soul of Section 34 IPC is the joint liability of doing a criminal act. This section only provides a rule of evidence and does not create a substantive offence. Two elements are necessary to fulfill the requirement of Section 34 IPC. One is that the person must be present on the scene of occurrence and the second is that there must be a prior concert or a pre- arranged plan. Unless these two conditions are fulfilled, a person cannot be held guilty of an offence by operation of Section 34 IPC.
Common intention implies a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuance to that plan. Common intention comes into being prior to the commission of act in point of time which need not be a long gap.
Observation of the Court
19. Proceedings in the present case were initiated on receipt of DD no.47A pursuant to which IO recorded the statement of the victim who alleged that on 13.06.2013 he was going to pick his wife and children from his in-laws house at Paschim Vihar in his wagon R car. Since the AC of the car was not working he rolled down the glass of the window. Two boys came there. One boy peeped inside the glass of the driver side POOJA and gagged the victim. The boy took out the keys of the car and TALWAR when the victim tried to scream for help the boy took out the Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 30 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:07:13 +0530 FIR no.173/13 pistol and hit him on his head. The victim was then hit under his chest. When the victim did not stop screaming the boys fled. One boy stood in front of his car and was the associate of the two boys who had hit him also fled with them.
20. On the aforesaid complaint, accused persons, namely, Pradeep Negi, Vicky and Rinku were charged for commission of offence under Section 307/392/394//34 IPC and Vicky was also charged under Section 397 IPC.
21. Prosecution in order to prove the offence under Section 307/34 IPC examined PW6 Dr. Sunil Aggarwal who proved the MLC of victim Ex.PW6/A and Dr. Rajiv Bansal PW7 proved on record that the victim was admitted in the hospital on 13.06.2013 and was discharged on 18.06.2013. As per the MLC Ex.PW6/A the nature of injuries opined as dangerous. The victim had received a gun shot injury. After being hospitalized for 5 days he was discharged in satisfactory condition.
22. Further the case of the prosecution is based on the ocular testimony of the injured eye witness who deposed that he was shot with a pistol on his chest and was hit with the butt of the pistol on his head and fled with his car keys. He mentioned about presence of three boys at the time of incident.
23. While testifying in court he pointed out towards the three accused persons i.e. Rinku, Pradeep Negi and Vicky and POOJA identified them as the assailants. TALWAR Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 31 of 39 15:07:19 +0530 FIR no.173/13
24. Through the testimony of victim as well as the doctors prosecution succeeded in bringing on record that the victim was assaulted by three boys and sustained injuries in the said incident.
25. In his cross-examination it is admitted by the victim that there was no sufficient light at the place of incident and due to which it was not possible to see the faces of persons. He stated that he saw accused Pradeep Negi and Vikas for the first time in police station. He admitted the suggestion given by the accused persons that accused Pradeep Negi and Vikas were falsely implicated in the case.
26. In his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP he admitted that he deposed in court without fear or coercion. He also admitted that he had seen the accused persons in Tihar Jail after the incident but volunteered that he could not see the accused persons on the spot due to darkness.
27. On being cross-examined by defence counsel he conceded to the suggestion that the accused persons were shown to him in the police station and that he identified them in judicial TIP as he was forced by the IO.
28. In order to prove the offence with which the accused persons have been charged the prosecution first and foremost was POOJA required to prove the identity of the accused persons to connect TALWAR them with the crime. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:07:26 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 32 of 39 FIR no.173/13
29. In the instant case admittedly there is only one eye witness i.e. the injured himself. The other independent witnesses are witnesses to the fact that the victim was going to Paschim Vihar to pick his wife but none of the said witnesses are eye witnesses.
30. Even PW5 Naveen Deswal who took the victim to the hospital depose that he did not witness the incident and only took the victim to hospital.
31. Hence the star witness of the prosecution is the victim/injured himself. At this stage, testimony of victim needs to be scrutinized as some part of his testimony is found to be reliable and the other cannot be relied upon. This position is no more res-integra. The testimony of witness has been broadly put under three categories by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Lallu Manjhi & Anr. vs. State of Jharkhand" Appeal (Crl.) No. 15 of 2022 wherein it was held that :
"The Law of Evidence does not require any particular number of witnesses to be examined in proof of a given fact. However, faced with the testimony of a single witness, the Court may classify the oral testimony into three categories, namely (i) wholly reliable, (ii) wholly unreliable, and (iii) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. In the first two categories there may be no difficulty in accepting or discarding the testimony of the single witness. The difficulty arises in the third category of cases. The court has to be circumspect and has to look for POOJA TALWAR corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct Digitally signed or circumstantial, before acting upon testimony of a single by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 33 of 39 15:07:33 +0530 FIR no.173/13 witness."
32. Applying the aforesaid legal principles, testimony of PW3 when discerned individually it is found that the same falls under third category i.e. neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. His part of the testimony with respect to the occurrence of incident i.e. robbery stands proved however the part of the testimony with respect to identification of accused persons and their presence at the place of incident needs to be discerned.
33. It is the case of the prosecution that the offence with the injured/complainant occurred in the night by unknown assailants. None of the accused was apprehended at the spot. All the three accused persons were apprehended in some other case and in their disclosure statement they revealed their involvement in the present case as well. Except for their disclosure statement and the disclosure statement of co-accused there is no other evidence connecting them with the offence.
34. In the circumstances as stated above ocular testimony of the complainant is crucial. Complainant PW3 identified all the three accused correctly in court as the assailants.
35. However it would be pertinent to discuss here the POOJA Test Identification Proceedings when as per the prosecution story TALWAR the accused persons were firstly produced before the complainant and he identified them. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:07:40 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 34 of 39 FIR no.173/13
36. PW3 Complainant in his deposition before the court testified that "During the course of investigation I visited the Rohini Jail and Tihar Jail for TIP proceedings. In TIP proceedings I had identified two accused persons namely Rinku and Vicky and I had also signed the documents regarding TIP. The TIP proceeding of accused Pradeep Negi is already Ex.PW9/A bearing my signatures at point X."
37. As per the aforesaid testimony the complainant identified all the accused persons correctly in the TIP Proceedings however the record speaks contrary. As per the TIP proceedings the complainant could not identify accused Rinku and TIP proceedings of accused Pradeep were partly successful. He only identified Vicky correctly in the TIP proceedings.
38. This witness when again entered the witness box for his cross-examination by counsel for accused Pradeep and Vicky stated that there was no sufficient light at the place of incident hence could not see the faces of the assailants. He further went on to say that he had seen accused Pradeep Negi and Vikas for the first time in police station. He also conceded to the suggestion of defence counsel that accused Pradeep Negi and Vikas were falsely implicated. Even in his re-examination by Ld. Addl. PP he clarified that he could not see the accused persons at the spot due to darkness.
39. Besides the testimony of the complainant there is no other ocular or documentary evidence to prove the presence of POOJA TALWAR the accused persons on the spot. From the testimony of Digitally signed complainant as discussed above, the same cannot be said to be by POOJA TALWAR Date: SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 35 of 39 2026.04.13 15:08:10 +0530 FIR no.173/13 wholly reliable with respect to the identity of the accused persons.
40. It would also be pertinent to discuss here that it is alleged against accused Vicky that he used pistol in committing robbery. One empty cartridge was found inside the car which was being driven by the complainant at the time of incident. One pistol was recovered from accused Vicky at the time of his arrest and the same was sent to the Ballistic Division CFSL. In the Fire Arm Examination report dated 21.04.2014 it is mentioned:
Results of Examinations: On the basis of Examination, carried out in the laboratory with the scientific aids, the result of examination are as under:-
(i) The 7.65mm fired bullet (marked BC/1) contained in Ex.2 & the 7.65mm fired cartridge case (marked C/1) contained in Ex.3 are 'Ammunition' as defined in Arms Act 1959.
(ii) No opinion could be formed regarding the linkage of 7.65mm fired cartridge case (marked C/1) contained in Ex.3 in respect to the country made pistol (marked W/2) contained in Parcel No.2 of CFSL Case No.CFSL/13/F-857 received vide RC No.118/21/13 dated- 18-07-2013 P.S-Subhash Place, New Delhi due to lack of sufficient individual comparable characteristic marks as the 7.65mm cartridge case (marked C/1) was without percussion cap.
(iii) The 7.65 fired bullet (marked BC/1) contained in Ex.2 had not been fired from the country made pistol (marked W/2) POOJA TALWAR contained in Parcel No.2 of CFSL Case No.CFSL/13/F-857 received vide RC No.118/21/13 dated. 18-07-2013. P.S Subhash Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 36 of 39 15:08:18 +0530 FIR no.173/13 Place.
NOTE:-
(i) This report shall not be reproduced without the written approval of Director, CFSL,New Delhi except by the judicial courts and Investigating authorities related to the case.
(ii) THIS REPORT IS ADMISSIBLE UNDER SECTION 293 Cr.P.C.
(iii) Ex.1 & 2 were first sent to Biology Division for Examination & later Ex.2 was examined in Ballistics Division.
(iv) After examination, the above mentioned two parcels were resealed with the seals of "BG SSO-II CFSL CBI, NEW DELHI." and returned to the forwarding authority.
41. Hence prosecution failed to prove that the pistol recovered from Vicky was used to shoot the complainant in the incident in question.
42. On scrutinizing the entire evidence brought on record prosecution failed to prove presence of accused persons at the time of incident as the victim's statement is not wholly reliable as he has given different contrary version with respect to identity of accused persons.
43. Accused persons have been charged with the offence under Section 392/34 IPC for robbing the complainant of his key of Maruti Wagon R car.
44. Prosecution not only failed to prove presence of the POOJA accused persons at the place of incident but no recovery of car TALWAR keys also could be affected. Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 37 of 39 Date: 2026.04.13 15:08:28 +0530 FIR no.173/13
45. In so far as offence under Section 394/34 IPC is concerned, it has already been discussed above prosecution failed to prove that the empty cartridge found in the car of the complainant was shot from the pistol recovered from accused Vicky. Moreover, once the presence of the accused persons at the place of incident or being the assailants is not proved they cannot be held liable for committing the offence under Section 394/34 IPC.
46. Once the offence under Section 392/394 IPC is not proved against accused Vicky he cannot be held liable under Section 397 IPC.
47. It is a settled proposition of law that in case two views are possible, then the one which weighs in favour of accused is to be taken and accused be given benefit of doubt. In the instant case, prosecution failed to prove the identity of accused persons.
48. In Bhagwan Singh & Ors. V. State of M.P. (2002) 4 SCC 85, the court repeated one of the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. The Court observed as under:-
7... "The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal case is that if two views POOJA TALWAR are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 38 of 39 15:08:35 +0530 FIR no.173/13 which is favourable to accused should be adopted."
Conclusion:
49. In view of aforesaid findings, prosecution failed to prove identity of accused persons. Accordingly accused Pradeep Negi, Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja and Rinku are acquitted for commission of offence under Section 307/34 IPC, 392/34 IPC and Section 394/34 IPC. Accused Vicky @ Vikas @ Ganja is acquitted for commission of offence under Section 397 IPC.
Announced in the open court (POOJA TALWAR) POOJA on 13.04.2026 ASJ-01(FTC) West District, TALWAR Tis Hazari Court, Delhi Digitally signed by POOJA TALWAR Date: 2026.04.13 15:08:42 +0530 SC No.608/18 State. Vs. Pradeep Negi & Ors. Page : 39 of 39 FIR no.173/13