Delhi District Court
Metropolitan Magistrate 07 vs Rehan @ Gaonwala on 20 August, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH. PAWAN SINGH RAJAWAT
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE 07, ROOM NO. 137,
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
STATE
VERSUS
REHAN @ GAONWALA
FIR No. : 67/11
P.S. : Subzi Mandi
U/S : 224 IPC
1.Serial No. of the case : 0240R0182432011
2. Date of commission of offence : 21.03.2011
3. Name of the Complainant : Constable LAL SINGH, No. 7205/DAP, Delhi Police.
4. Name of the accused and : REHAN his parentage and residence S/o Sh Safiquiddin R/o 1214, Rakab Gunj, Chandni Mehal, Delite Cinema, Delhi
5. Date when judgment : 20.08.2014 was reserved
6. Date when Judgment : 20.08.2014 was pronounced
7. Offence Complained of : Sec 224 IPC
8. Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
9. Final Judgment : Convicted for offence U/s 224 IPC State Vs Rehan FIR NO 67/11 PS Subzi Mandi Page 1/5 Brief Statement of reasons for the decision of the case
1. Briefly stated facts of the case are on 21.03.2011 while accused Rehan @ Gaonwala was taken back to Lock Up he escaped from the custody of complainant Ct Lal Singh and was subsequently arrested on 25.03.2011. Challan was filed on 23.04.2011.
2. After hearing arguments notice U/s 251 Cr.P.C was framed against the accused for offense U/s 224 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. During trial prosecution has examined nine witnesses namely PW1 CT Sushil Kr, PW 2 HC Ranvir Singh, PW3 SI Ram Pal Singh, PW4 Ct Lal Singh, PW5 ASI Bachan Prakash, PW6 ASI Sheel Kumar, PW7 Ct Jagannathan, PW8 SI Satya Prakash, PW9 ASI Shambhu Dayal to prove the case of the prosecution. Thereafter, statement of accused was recorded on 16.08.2014 wherein he denied the allegations and stated that he was apprehended by special cell staff from canteen, third floor, Tis Hazari Courts.
4. No defence evidence was led. Therefore, final arguments were heard. Ld APP for State argued that offense is proved against the accused. On the other hand accused pleaded false implications .
5. PROSECUTION EVIDENCE 5.1 PW1 proved the DD entry no 19 B dated 21.03.2011 as Ex PW1/A .
5.2 PW2 proved the departure entry no. 6C as Ex PW2/A State Vs Rehan FIR NO 67/11 PS Subzi Mandi Page 2/5 vide which accused was sent through the court no 2 under the custody of Constable. During cross examination he stated Ct Lal Singh was sent along with accused Rehan. He denied suggestion that entry Ex PW2/A is not regarding the accused 5.3 PW3 proved the registration of FIR vide Ex PW3/A . 5.4 PW4 stated that on 21.03.2011 he was posted in IIIrd Battalion as Constable and having duty at Tis Hazari Lock up. He further stated on that day custody of Rehan was given to him for his production before court no 2 . He also stated at about 11:05 am he took Rehan to court no 2 where he came to know that said court has been shifted to court no 120 and accordingly he reached with the accused in court no 120 where Ld Presiding Officer was on leave and the custody warrant was given back with the next date of hearing as 18.04.2011. He also stated when he along with accused reached near toilets , little before Central Hall, First Floor, Court no 131 accused suddenly pushed him and managed to get his hands freed from him and started running towards staircase and he escaped. He further stated he narrated the incident to Incharge, Lock up and PCR call was made and IO recorded his statement as Ex PW4/A. He further stated IO prepared at his instance. Despite opportunities accused choose not to cross examine the witness.
5.5 PW5 stated on 25.03.2011 he received telephonic information regard apprehension of accused Rehan @ Gaonwala in FIR no 18/11 PS Special Cell who was wanted in State Vs Rehan FIR NO 67/11 PS Subzi Mandi Page 3/5 the present case. He further stated he reduced the information into writing vide DD no 32A which is Ex PW5/A . Despite opportunities accused choose not to cross examine the witness. 5.6 PW6 stated on 25.03.2011 he recorded FIR no 18/11 PS Special Cell and same is Ex PW6/A. Despite opportunities accused choose not to cross examine the witness. 5.7 PW7 stated that on 21.03.2011 he along with SI Satya Prakash reached OD Lock up Tis Hazari where statement of complainant Ct Lal Singh was recorded by IO and he was sent for registration of FIR . HE also stated his presence at the time of preparation of site plan as Ex PW 4/A .Despite opportunities accused choose not to cross examine the witness. 5.8 PW 8 is the IO . He stated on 21.03.2011, he received DD no 20 PP, Tis Hazari. He stated that he recorded statement of complainant and prepared site plan at his instance. He further stated on 25.03.2011, he received DD no 32A regarding apprehension of accused in FIR no 18/11, PS Special Cell and therefore he arrested the accused vide Ex PW8/B. He also stated that he recorded statement of witnesses and collected DD entry regarding arrival and departure of complainant from OD Lock up, Tis Hazari which are Mark 8A and 8B. 5.9 PW9 stated on 21.03.2011 duty officer handed over DD no 20 PP regarding absconding of UTP from court.
6. APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE 6.1 In the present case accused is charged for escaping from lawful detention. PW2 proved the handing over of custody vide State Vs Rehan FIR NO 67/11 PS Subzi Mandi Page 4/5 Ex PW2/A and same was collaborated vide Mark 8A and 8B. Accused has not denied that he was not in the custody of Ct Lal Singh . His only defence was that he has been apprehended by special cell staff from canteen where he was having lunch . But failed to state while being in custody how he was taking lunch in public canteen. PW4 has identified the accused as the person who has absconding from his custody. PW8 identified him as the person arrested in the present case. There is no material contradiction in the testimony of witnesses. The chain of events is complete. The accused had failed to put probable defence. Despite opportunities he failed to cross examine the witnesses. I am satisfied that all the ingredients of offense are proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused .
7. In view of the above discussion and on the basis of evidence on record, I am satisfied that accused Rehan @ Gaonwala has failed in putting any probable defence and case of the prosecution is proved beyond reasonable doubt . Accordingly, accused Rehan @ Gaonwala is convicted for the offence U/s 224 IPC . Copies of order be given free of cost to convict.
Put up for arguments on sentencing at 2 pm today.
Announced in the Open Pawan Singh Rajawat Court on 20.08.2014 Metropolitan Magistrate07 Central/Tis Hazari Courts Delhi State Vs Rehan FIR NO 67/11 PS Subzi Mandi Page 5/5